Do limits on EBT of where and what "humiliate the poor"?

[Jumpstart]

They can keep Social Security. Just give me back the money I contributed and what my employers put in while I worked for someone else and I'll invest it myself. The last time I looked at the numbers I'd have to live to be 113 just to break even.

And socialism, yeah, I see it working all over the world in the past Russia and of course I see what happens when governments like Greece and the other PIGS spend more money than they take in taxes. Of course Venezuela and Cuba are wonderful examples where socialism is working real well today.

[bbq]

What We Can Learn from Cuba:

http://renegadehealth.com/blog/2012/07/20/what-we-can-learn-from-cuba

• Eco-Friendly, but Often Underweight
• Healthcare is Free, but Disease is Rampant
• Food is Organic, but Quality is Questionable
• Lots of Alternative Care Clinics, but with Minimal Budgets

[eXtremE]

They can keep Social Security. Just give me back the money I contributed and what my employers put in while I worked for someone else and I'll invest it myself. The last time I looked at the numbers I'd have to live to be 113 just to break even.

And socialism, yeah, I see it working all over the world in the past Russia and of course I see what happens when governments like Greece and the other PIGS spend more money than they take in taxes. Of course Venezuela and Cuba are wonderful examples where socialism is working real well today.

Why not the money only you contributed? Give your employer back their money that they put in on your behalf. I hear ppl say this all the time in America but it is just talk. Good luck in your investing. You had better have a lot more in 401K and savings and you had be a pretty savvy investor or know someone who is if you expect to live way past SSNRA. Unless you are a high income wage earner, the break even point is about early 80's for most Americans who take SSR at FRA. Actually, if you read the SSA website, ppl who take early SSR at age 62 with the reduced benefit reduction vs ppl who wait to take it at FRA or even delayed retirement currently at age 70 do not actually do any better (collect anymore money overall) bc the many ppl die bf they actually break even and the ones who live long enough to get past the break even point don't actually live that long past so it is really about even overall. Also, remember FICA tax contributions have a cap. $117,000 currently. So even if you make a billion dollars a year, you only pay 6.2% on the $117,000 and 1.45% in medicare takes excluding what your employer puts in.

I personally think they should do away with with FICA tax cap and you should pay taxes on all your income. Yeah, I suppose Ronald Reagan had it right. Cut taxes on the rich and Give it all to the greedy capitalistic pigs at the top of the economic food chain it will trickle down to the rest of us. LMAO!

[Jumpstart]

Not true that the average person breaks even in their 80's. Those figures are based on earning NO return on your money. The market has returned an average of 11% historically and you need to add that return compounded yearly over your lifetime. We've earned an average of 14% simply spreading our money over four mutual funds since 2009. And yes, since I've had my own business for 26 years my retirement accounts including non-taxable are fat. I plan on "retiring" to 2 days a weeks at fifty-five in three years. My DH will do the same in seven when he reaches fifty-five. We computed his contributions and what he will get back if he worked until retirement age and it worked out breaking even at 113 years of age using just a 6% annual compounded return on his money and what his employer would have put in to match. If you have no discipline Social Security has benefit, but we should be given an option to opt out and put our money where it can earn the most.

This country was built into the greatest country in the world by all those fat capitalists and I guess since I'm retiring on the money from the market and my own business I must be one of them. The jobs created in this country past and present were and are created by the vision and money risked by those fat cats and current fat cats that are creating companies today. Of course few of them started out fat or rich. You don't actually think that we were made great by those on government assistance do you?

[zumacraig]

Not true that the average person breaks even in their 80's. Those figures are based on earning NO return on your money. The market has returned an average of 11% historically and you need to add that return compounded yearly over your lifetime. We've earned an average of 14% simply spreading our money over four mutual funds since 2009. And yes, since I've had my own business for 26 years my retirement accounts including non-taxable are fat. I plan on "retiring" to 2 days a weeks at fifty-five in three years. My DH will do the same in seven when he reaches fifty-five. We computed his contributions and what he will get back if he worked until retirement age and it worked out breaking even at 113 years of age using just a 6% annual compounded return on his money and what his employer would have put in to match. If you have no discipline Social Security has benefit, but we should be given an option to opt out and put our money where it can earn the most.

This country was built into the greatest country in the world by all those fat capitalists and I guess since I'm retiring on the money from the market and my own business I must be one of them. The jobs created in this country past and present were and are created by the vision and money risked by those fat cats and current fat cats that are creating companies today. Of course few of them started out fat or rich. You don't actually think that we were made great by those on government assistance do you?

This country is not great with 25% poverty among children. I could go on, but this cogent argumentation and discussion seem to be an anomaly here. For the record, there has never been successful socialism precisely because there has never been socialism. All the examples you give are state run economies or dictatorships. The closest thing we have is the highly regulated capitalism and large social safety net in Iceland, Sweden etc. Where, in point of fact, sense of well being and happiness are quite a bit higher than the USA and other countries you mentioned.

[eXtremE]

Not true that the average person breaks even in their 80's.

No, you are absolutely wrong when it comes to the "avergae" working class middle "American". What I said is absolutely true. You do not sound average to me. I am happy you made it and will get to retire early but many other hard working Americans will not be as fortunate. You are very fortunate to own your own business and have it prosper. Hopefully, the ppl that worked for you, you paid them a decent wage and did not hoard all the money like many wealthy ppl do like the crummy Walton family. I am a middle ground guy. We need something in between socialism and capitalism. We can not all be millionaires or rich and retire early. Think about it. You need working middle class ppl. If we were all rich and could retire early, who would you then get to restore your electricity when the power is out, who will pump your septic tank when things start to back up, who will fix your car when it breaks. Here is the thing. You are very selfish and all about you. I made it so to hell with all the other worthless hard working Americans who could not make as I have have done. We do not live in a vacuum. We are all interconnected and interdependent on each other. The rich and wealthy do not get this tho. They think, I have the money so I can buy whatever I want. Some still buy ppl literally. Slavery is very much still alive and well in America. The problem is soon if this trend in America continues, it will not matter how much money you earn or how quickly you can retire or how money smart you are. Your money will be absolutely useless bc you will not be able to buy good and services from others who have absolutely no money. Rather than working for you, these same ppl will start stealing from you.

[Jumpstart]

There is nothing hard about living well in retirement for the average person that works. Saving three or four hundred dollars a month for 40 years will get you to a million by retirement getting anywhere from 8 to 11 percent on your money in the market. In fact the bond market has returned 14.3% annually since 1983 simple because interest rates have been ratcheting down since that time of 21% prime. I hear people tell me they can barely make it from paycheck to paycheck and can't save a dime. I look and see them paying 180 a month for cable and 80 to 120 a month for cell service and eating out a couple of times a week. Just like this WOE all you need for success is a little discipline.

Oh, no employees. It's just me. Yes, the first few years we rough until I established a reputation. But of course that's the difference between those that make it and those who don't....the willingness to sacrifice and risk for the future. Which is exactly what most people aren't willing to do whether it comes to their health or money.

As to real socialism, you're right it doesn't exist, nor will it ever exist unless every human in that population becomes a saint, and that ain't about to happen. Of course there is no such thing a real capitalism either for the same reason. But, there's enough of it in this country that any person willing to take a little risk and live cheap until things get going will do very well indeed.

Of course there are millions of children in poverty. Don't you think it's the parent that are causing the problem? Why do we see women with 3 children all fathered by different men. What is the responsibility of the men who fathered those children? In this country for most adults poverty is a choice not the result of the "system."

[f1jim]

I have problems with every economic system out there. They all are a rats nest of problems. I am probably 10 years or so from retirement and have also diligently worked at retirement with no huge sacrifice in lifestyle and am going to be comfortable when I do retire. It does require making retirement a priority and it means forgoing some of the daily niceties my neighbors enjoy.
I have seen many in my family succeed starting at near zero by practicing good fiscal management. We need to do more to teach those things at an early age. But if one can avoid several life traps being comfortable is not out of reach for most anyone.
It means getting a solid basic education, not getting trapped in pregnancy situations as a teen, having a decent work ethic, etc. All are not impossible for most anyone here. Yes, it's tougher for some than others. Just like this eating program, the desire has to be there and for many it's not.
The economy does have it's cycles, everyones economy does regardless of the system. Learning how to make a system work for you is part of lifes challenges.
I've seen to many people make it work to say it's broken beyond repair. But the left and the right both have important things to contribute and discuss. Those at both ends of the spectrum will see this as nonsense but that's ok too. Just don't let your ideology get in the way of having a good life.
f1jim

[zumacraig]

I have problems with every economic system out there. They all are a rats nest of problems. I am probably 10 years or so from retirement and have also diligently worked at retirement with no huge sacrifice in lifestyle and am going to be comfortable when I do retire. It does require making retirement a priority and it means forgoing some of the daily niceties my neighbors enjoy.
I have seen many in my family succeed starting at near zero by practicing good fiscal management. We need to do more to teach those things at an early age. But if one can avoid several life traps being comfortable is not out of reach for most anyone.
It means getting a solid basic education, not getting trapped in pregnancy situations as a teen, having a decent work ethic, etc. All are not impossible for most anyone here. Yes, it's tougher for some than others. Just like this eating program, the desire has to be there and for many it's not.
The economy does have it's cycles, everyones economy does regardless of the system. Learning how to make a system work for you is part of lifes challenges.
I've seen to many people make it work to say it's broken beyond repair. But the left and the right both have important things to contribute and discuss. Those at both ends of the spectrum will see this as nonsense but that's ok too. Just don't let your ideology get in the way of having a good life.
f1jim

It is good to be aware of one's ideology. I'm well aware of mine...I'm all about ending human suffering: really looking at the causes and changing them. This requires going beyond sound bites and simple explanations. To be sure, many folks can't get on with having a good life because they are wondering where the next meal is coming from. That has to end or humanity is on the outs. I do think people can all become saints, as jumpstart mentioned. It will come when we end this ideological and reified belief in the free market and exchange value and adopt an ideology of compassion. Where the first thing on our minds in the morning is, 'how are we doing in ending suffering in this world?' Also asking, 'does everyone have enough good food, shelter, healthcare meaningful work?' When we start working towards that...that will be when we can focus on having a good life. Alas, I can't have a good life while others are suffering needlessly under an oppressive system like ours and others are delusional to it's reality.

[Jumpstart]

In other words Zumacraig you're expecting all of the people who we put in power and for that matter those in the general population to put the other guy first before themselves.....ain't going to happen at least not in this life. I wish it were otherwise, but it isn't. We need solutions that will work the way people are today, not how they should be if we all followed the examples of Jesus and Buddha. I blame leadership in poor communities. In order to keep themselves in power they've convinced their members that there is no way of making it in this country because of the system. Thankfully more and more of the minority community has laid that kind of thinking aside and have joined the solid middleclass.

And Extreme if you're working for the Power company I wouldn't worry about them being in poverty or being able to retire well. You want to see average salaries for various jobs at Commonwealth Edison power company?

http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Commonwealth-Edison-Salaries-E16959.htm

How many of us would give our eye teeth to know a good mechanic, plumber, electrician, HVAC, handyman or contractor. I'm talking about really good. I know they are hard to come by, but worth every premium dollar they charge. There is very good money to be made in those fields. The error too many people make is thinking that a degree in general education, history or art is going to get them beyond working at Walmart...ain't going to happen. Be good at a trade and you'll have more customers, money and respect than most people could imagine.

[bbq]

Just in case we aren't THAT familiar with the "Federal" Reserve, please take our time to read this book or watch the talk on YouTube:

http://archive.org/stream/CreatureFromJekyllIslandByG.Edward-G.EdwardGriffin/CreatureFromJekyllIslandByG.Edward-G.EdwardGriffin_djvu.txt
http://www.amazon.com/The-Creature-Jekyll-Island-Federal/dp/0912986212
http://youtu.be/lu_VqX6J93k

It ain't exactly Federal to boot simply because "Federal" Reserve is just like "Federal" Express:

http://www.federalbudget.com/fed.html
http://www.globalresearch.ca/who-owns-the-federal-reserve/10489

Encyclopedia Britannica articles aren't free and the cached versions are linked below:

http://web.archive.org/web/20150426190242/http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/203437/Federal-Reserve-System
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/203437/Federal-Reserve-System

Another noteworthy article that was written by John Robbins:

Who's Done More Damage, Bernard Madoff or Alan Greenspan?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-robbins/whos-done-more-damage-ber_b_795250.html

Madoff lived high and mighty as a billionaire as long as he kept his Ponzi scheme afloat. Greenspan was revered as long as he kept the party going for the ultra-rich, as long as he kept one bubble after another inflated. But with every party, there's always the morning after. The collapse of Madoff's Ponzi scheme bankrupted not just tens of thousands of families, but many charitable foundations, nonprofit organizations, and hospital and school endowments. The bursting of Greenspan's bubbles, on the other hand, decimated the entire U.S. economy, bankrupting tens of millions of families.

In his biography of Greenspan, appropriately titled Greenspan's Bubbles, MSN Money columnist William Fleckenstein recounts the devastating series of bubbles and crashes that directly ensued from Greenspan's policies. The Savings and Loan scandal was the first tip-off. As a paid consultant for Lincoln Savings and Loan, Greenspan was an ardent advocate of Savings and Loan deregulation. When Lincoln's parent corporation went bankrupt in 1989, more than 21,000 mostly elderly investors lost their life savings.

This was, however, peanuts compared to what was to follow. With Greenspan as the head of the Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006, and with his policies running the show, the tech bubble was inflated only to burst in 2000, closely followed by the real estate bubble that began to burst in 2007, and the credit bubble that burst in 2008.

Greenspan's policies contributed massively to each of these bubbles, and thus to their inevitable collapse. Like Madoff's Ponzi scheme, they provided illusory returns, not based on any real goods, services or value provided, but rather on the attraction soaring returns have for new entrants into the game.

The costs of each of these market collapses are measured not in the billions but in the trillions of dollars, and they've come so quickly on the heels of one another that we may think of them as business as usual. That's why it's important to grasp that, prior to Greenspan's arrival, the U.S. had been nearly bubble-free for more than 50 years. The only exception? A brief mania for gold and other precious metals in late 1979 and early 1980.

Prior to running the Federal Reserve, Greenspan headed the National Commission on Social Security Reform. The original intent behind Social Security was generous and benevolent. At the height of the Great Depression, our society resolved to create a safety net that would pay modest benefits to retirees, the disabled, and the survivors of deceased workers. It was the formalizing of the long-respected tradition of supporting elders and others who are less able to fend for themselves. The idea was to create less fear and more economic security.

But once Greenspan got involved, things immediately began to change. His policies triggered a staggering transfer of wealth from the lower and middle classes into the hands of the richest members of society. It is not an exaggeration to say that the resulting concentration of money and power in the hands of the few is undermining the economy, corrupting democracy, deepening the racial wealth divide, and tearing communities and families apart.

It was primarily due to Greenspan's proposals that the Social Security tax rate went from 9.35 percent in 1981 to 15.3 percent in 1990. Social Security taxes are borne primarily by the lower and middle economic classes. They only apply to wage income, not to investment income, so people who work for a living pay through the nose while those who invest for a living pay not at all. Fair, right?

[openmind]

I did midunderstand you, but the social movements you seem to be deriding are part of the reason that it was, is, and, hopefully, always will be, wrong. People found a way to transcend their circumstances by enlisting and accepting the good will of people who were earnestly trying to improve the world around them. They made a lot of mistakes, but they were more than just random bits of protoplasm responding to their basest drives.

Mark

If you ask 100 people, "Do you think we should try to improve our circumstances and try to improve our society?" You will likely receive 100 answers of "Yes!"

If you ask 100 people, "What sort of ideas do you have that would lead to an improvement in our circumstances, an improvement in our society?" You will likely receive at least 100 answers.

Some ideas sound good in theory but don't work well in practice.

If someone criticizes ideas that have performed poorly in practice even though they appeared to be unobjectionable in theory, this does not mean that this someone is opposed to progress. It only means that one should be willing to review the history of ideas with sobriety.

I am sure that the followers of Hugo Chavez thought that Chavez's ideas for Venezuela sounded pretty good when they listened to his speeches. Some people might have found speeches made by the Greek politicians currently running Greece inspiring. But the question people should ask is whether the ideas being offered have potential pitfalls.

If I tell people that everyone can have all of the health care they want for free, the instinctive reaction people have, given the greedy, grasping, selfish nature that human beings possess, is to say, "Sounds great." But a sober person will say, "What's the catch? The cost of health care isn't being eliminated under your proposal. The cost of health care is simply being transferred to someone else?" And then a whole host of questions and criticisms would flow from there. But that's if this skeptic isn't worried about being accused of being a naysayer.

I think the problems we see in evaluating nutritional science are similar even more pronounced in politics/economics.

As in nutritional science, we have groups of 'scientists' (in this case, social scientists and economists) looking at the same data and coming to vastly different conclusions. This is because we can't run a true controlled experiment on different economic systems and see which ones work. In politics and economics, we have to look at the data out there (what other countries and our own country have done in the past) and do our best to create regression models to try and determine the best policy.

Further complicating matters is that the whole process is highly subjective and contaminated by undue influence of interest groups. Where the meat, dairy and vegetable industry influence nutritional recommendations, billionaires, corporations and labor unions unduly influence economic policy.

I have no problem with people having a different viewpoint on these matters than myself. What kind of bothers me, though, is listening to talk show hosts on the Left and the Right speaking with absolute certainty about matters where, in truth, certainty is very hard to find. One thing that's important to remember is that economists are still debating the New Deal.

[bbq]

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/06/01/is-the-us-at-risk-of-bankruptcy--you-decide.aspx

And remember, the Federal Reserve can make virtually any amount of credit available, but as Ron Paul explains, it’s done in a way that is akin to theft, because the money created gets its “value” by diluting the value of the money already held by others.

As a result, the people who are saving money in this system are essentially being robbed. Paul is fond of referring to inflation as a sort of hidden tax. As more and more money is created that is not backed by anything of real value, inflation goes up.

You’re paying for all this money being created when the money you have loses its value.

The people who benefit the most in this system are the ones who get the money first, generally the rich people, while the middle-class and the poor are destroyed and overtaxed. If hyperinflation occurs, it can quickly devastate a country.

We got into this mess, as Paul says, by spending too much, running up debt and printing too much money, and the trend is showing no sign of stopping.

Does the name of the the game really matter? We could call it crony capitalism, communism, Marxism, socialism, or whatever it is.

Maybe it's more about how they're gaming the monetary system by diluting the "soup" as quoted above. It's like playing Tic-Tac-Toe on 3-by-3 boards while winning with the 10th/11th/12th blocks on the side. Or playing a single deck of cards while hiding the 53rd/54th/55th cards just in case someone might need them. How about flipping over the chessboard when someone is about to lose the game? How are we supposed to react when they're constantly acting like that while it's perfectly OK to do so?

It's kinda like how cops could keep doing the same thing over and over like standard operating procedure, in the end they weren't exactly facing the consequence they deserved:

2015
http://www.nj.com/bergen/index.ssf/2015/04/wyckoff_cop_shoots_dog_after_going_to_wrong_house.html
Wyckoff cop shoots, kills dog after going to wrong house on burglary call

2013
http://youtu.be/WIf6o_7pMTw
http://www.9news.com/news/article/310633/164/Adams-County-deputy-accused-of-wrongfully-shooting-killing-dog
Police Shoot, Kill Man's Dog After Going To Wrong Home, Told "You Can Get a New Dog"

2013
http://www.9news.com/video/2198403854001/50183015001/No-charges-for-cop-who-shot-killed-dog
http://www.9news.com/assetpool/documents/130301043346_DA%20letter%20to%20Sheriff%20Darr.pdf
No charges for cop who shot, killed dog

2012
http://gawker.com/5902729/police-officer-shows-up-at-wrong-house-kills-homeowners-dog
An Austin man is fuming over what he says was the unjust killing of his dog by a police officer who arrived at his house by mistake.

2012
http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/07/18/48482.htm
http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/07/18/DogStory.pdf
After breaking down doors and shooting the family dog, a drug task force forced handcuffed children "to sit next to the carcass of their dead and bloody pet for more than an hour," and kept searching even after they knew they were raiding the wrong house, the family claims in Federal Court.

2000
http://www.salon.com/2000/10/19/shooting_3/
In a outrageous example of police incompetence, cops burst into the wrong home during a drug raid and kill an elderly African-American man.

[Thrasymachus]

...

This country was built into the greatest country in the world by all those fat capitalists and I guess since I'm retiring on the money from the market and my own business I must be one of them. The jobs created in this country past and present were and are created by the vision and money risked by those fat cats and current fat cats that are creating companies today. Of course few of them started out fat or rich. You don't actually think that we were made great by those on government assistance do you?

...

There is nothing hard about living well in retirement for the average person that works. Saving three or four hundred dollars a month for 40 years will get you to a million by retirement getting anywhere from 8 to 11 percent on your money in the market. In fact the bond market has returned 14.3% annually since 1983 simple because interest rates have been ratcheting down since that time of 21% prime. I hear people tell me they can barely make it from paycheck to paycheck and can't save a dime. I look and see them paying 180 a month for cable and 80 to 120 a month for cell service and eating out a couple of times a week. Just like this WOE all you need for success is a little discipline.

That is just a Dungeons and Dragon level fantasy from someone that follows to much neoliberal fiction, and sadly reflects well the white upper middle class mentality in the USA, that ignores structural analysis to prefer gloating about how they succeeded due to their superior character and how others fail due to their personal inferiority. You have no clue about how most people really live if you really think retiring early is so easy to achieve through some mythical discipline -- and you don't seem to want to judging by the fact you only get your info from pro-corporate think-tanks like the Cato Institute and Brookings Institution(the sources you gave in this thread for your fantasies).

Here is an excellent podcast by sociologist James Russell on how the rise of 401k retirement plans has destroyed the chances of most people being able to retire:
http://www.againstthegrain.org/program/ ... retirement
According to Russell with a 401k you would need to put in 25-30% of your paycheck to match 4-6% with the managed pension plans that the 401k system supplanted. 401k's are an instrument of Wall Street to enrich their industry and themselves and since their invention and widespread adoption in the 1980's most Americans find they cannot retire at a reasonable age.

His website:
http://www.jameswrussell.com/
His book on the subject:
http://www.amazon.com/Social-Insecurity ... 0807012564

Each generation of workers since the nineteenth century has had more retirement security than the previous generation. That is, until 1981, when shaky 401(k) plans began replacing traditional pensions. For the last thirty years, we’ve been advised that the best way to build one’s nest egg is to heavily invest in 401(k)-type programs, even though such plans were originally designed to be a supplement to rather than the basis for retirement.

This financial experiment, promoted by neoliberals and aggressively peddled by Wall Street, has now come full circle, with tens of millions of Americans discovering that they would have been better off under traditional pension plans long since replaced. As James W. Russell explains, this do-it-yourself retirement system—in which individuals with modest incomes are expected to invest large sums of capital in order to reap the same rewards as high-end money managers—isn’t working.

[f1jim]

Who's perspective is disgusting? Yours or mine?
We can disagree and leave the adjectives out of the discussion. There are going to be many perspectives on economics, politics, etc. Let's respect them all as they all have their seeds in truth and their stems in experience.
I encourage editing of over the top comments rather than doing it myself. (hint)
f1jim