Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Government payouts—including Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance—make up more than a third of total wages and salaries of the U.S. population, a record figure that will only increase if action isn’t taken before the majority of Baby Boomers enter retirement.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/41969508

Not surprising. I had to chuckle at the "compared to Europe, the U.S. looks good" throwaway at the end. I wonder if the percentage counts the salaries and bennies of public employees. You know where this is headed, don't you? At this rate, at some point in the not-too-distant future, all of us will be public employees, subsisting on the tax dollars of everyone else.

time for means testing.

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:time for means testing.

Somebody has to tackle entitlements somehow,and soon. Nobody's required to apply for Social Security benefits, as I understand the current law. If my finances stay in decent shape, I'd be willing to forgo my SS payments so somebody else could get them.

Ivytalk wrote:

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:time for means testing.

Somebody has to tackle entitlements somehow,and soon. Nobody's required to apply for Social Security benefits, as I understand the current law. If my finances stay in decent shape, I'd be willing to forgo my SS payments so somebody else could get them.

If they would simply give me what I put in...they could keep my employers contribution ...

I'd call it square...

Ivytalk wrote:Not surprising. I had to chuckle at the "compared to Europe, the U.S. looks good" throwaway at the end. I wonder if the percentage counts the salaries and bennies of public employees. You know where this is headed, don't you? At this rate, at some point in the not-too-distant future, all of us will be public employees, subsisting on the tax dollars of everyone else.

Should public employees work for free? I assume you'd still want some folks running your defense department, no? How would you suggest we feed our families while we keep the wars going that your Republican president started?

Privatize SS and we essentially nationalize all businesses - we can all be our own bosses! A win win all the way around...

93henfan wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:Not surprising. I had to chuckle at the "compared to Europe, the U.S. looks good" throwaway at the end. I wonder if the percentage counts the salaries and bennies of public employees. You know where this is headed, don't you? At this rate, at some point in the not-too-distant future, all of us will be public employees, subsisting on the tax dollars of everyone else.

Should public employees work for free? I assume you'd still want some folks running your defense department, no? How would you suggest we feed our families while we keep the wars going that your Republican president started?

Of course government employees should be paid a fair wage. That is not the point. Someone in this country needs to do something that produces wealth, not just redistribute it. That's the point.

Col Hogan wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:
Somebody has to tackle entitlements somehow,and soon. Nobody's required to apply for Social Security benefits, as I understand the current law. If my finances stay in decent shape, I'd be willing to forgo my SS payments so somebody else could get them.

If they would simply give me what I put in...they could keep my employers contribution ...

I'd call it square...

this actually seems like a plausible solution... (that is to suggest that touching the third rail is ever "plausible") it would ameliorate the "hey!" reaction of those with means... and would continue to serve the original intent of the SSA (ensuring we don't have senior citizens in dire poverty)

the other thing that needs to be examined is the retirement age... when the SSA went in to place they set "retirement" age at the average lifespan of an American worker... not suggesting it should be 77 years old - but 70 might be appropriate.

LeadBolt wrote:

93henfan wrote:
Should public employees work for free? I assume you'd still want some folks running your defense department, no? How would you suggest we feed our families while we keep the wars going that your Republican president started?

Of course government employees should be paid a fair wage. That is not the point. Someone in this country needs to do something that produces wealth, not just redistribute it. That's the point.

That's exactly the point, 93. Don't be so thin-skinned about your employer.

LeadBolt wrote: Of course government employees should be paid a fair wage. That is not the point. Someone in this country needs to do something that produces wealth, not just redistribute it. That's the point.

A lack of wealth isn't the problem. We're the richest country in the world... by far. We have over 400 billionaires in the country. The number of millionaires and billionaires has GROWN during in the worst recession in 70 years.

The problem is the decline of the middle class and wealth inequality that puts us with a lot of developing nations.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

LeadBolt wrote: Of course government employees should be paid a fair wage. That is not the point. Someone in this country needs to do something that produces wealth, not just redistribute it. That's the point.

A lack of wealth isn't the problem. We're the richest country in the world... by far. We have over 400 billionaires in the country. The number of millionaires and billionaires has GROWN during in the worst recession in 70 years.

The problem is the decline of the middle class and wealth inequality that puts us with a lot of developing nations.

bit of a stretch jelly...

our "poor" are generally not "poor" like Somali's are poor - that said, the gap between the top and middle in this country IS getting bigger, and alarmingly so, imo.

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
bit of a stretch jelly...

our "poor" are generally not "poor" like Somali's are poor - that said, the gap between the top and middle in this country IS getting bigger, and alarmingly so, imo.

I didn't say anything about the poor.

My point was about the shrinking middle class and a disparity in income that is that is out of whack. Doesn't matter how our poor compare to Somalia's poor.

re-reading, you did not - fair enough

The average CEO makes 400x what their rank-and-files employees make. As recently as the late 70s it was 40x.

Grizalltheway wrote:The average CEO makes 400x what their rank-and-files employees make. As recently as the late 70s it was 40x.

Rich, crotchety, old white men wouldn't have it any other way.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

LeadBolt wrote: Of course government employees should be paid a fair wage. That is not the point. Someone in this country needs to do something that produces wealth, not just redistribute it. That's the point.

A lack of wealth isn't the problem. We're the richest country in the world... by far. We have over 400 billionaires in the country. The number of millionaires and billionaires has GROWN during in the worst recession in 70 years.

The problem is the decline of the middle class and wealth inequality that puts us with a lot of developing nations.

This. The problem is wages haven't grown with the cost of living or at least with the cost of higher education, healthcare, mcmansions, and keeping up with the Jones's. We are overbuilt and the middle class isn't paid enough to support it.

93henfan wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:Not surprising. I had to chuckle at the "compared to Europe, the U.S. looks good" throwaway at the end. I wonder if the percentage counts the salaries and bennies of public employees. You know where this is headed, don't you? At this rate, at some point in the not-too-distant future, all of us will be public employees, subsisting on the tax dollars of everyone else.

Should public employees work for free? I assume you'd still want some folks running your defense department, no? How would you suggest we feed our families while we keep the wars going that your Republican president started?

Privatize the DOD, put you on a private contractors payroll, and let their profits trickle down to ya, homey.

kalm wrote:

93henfan wrote:
Should public employees work for free? I assume you'd still want some folks running your defense department, no? How would you suggest we feed our families while we keep the wars going that your Republican president started?

Privatize the DOD, put you on a private contractors payroll, and let their profits trickle down to ya, homey.

Um, do you think public employees are building all the missiles, planes, ships, tanks...

Private contractors are already getting most of the DoD dime. My position is deemed "inherently governmental", so it couldn't be performed by a contractor.

93henfan wrote:

kalm wrote:
Privatize the DOD, put you on a private contractors payroll, and let their profits trickle down to ya, homey.

Um, do you think public employees are building all the missiles, planes, ships, tanks...

Private contractors are already getting most of the DoD dime. My position is deemed "inherently governmental", so it couldn't be performed by a contractor.

The only thing "inherently governmental" is defending our borders which obviously you are not a part of.


(If my Avatar and one are not enough my sarcasm is seriously lacking )

Same old same old on the wealth and income distribution thing. The median income now is higher than it was in the 1970s. The "middle" is better off in terms of buying power. I hear people talk all the time about how the "middle class" is going away but when I've taken the time to research income figures over time I've never seen anything to indicate that it's true.

CEOs making 400 x what rank and file workers do now vs. 40 x decades ago does not mean rank and file workers are worse off. Again: If person A makes $10 and person B makes $100 today then person A makes $15 and person B makes $100,000 tomorrow it doesn't mean person A is worse off tomorrow or that person B "took" anything from person A. It just means person B is "more" better off than person A is.

There is no fixed pie of wealth that dropped fromt he sky. Wealth is something that is created and is (hopefully) an ever-expanding quantity. The fact that the "rich" have a greater proportion of the wealth now than they did in 1970 does not mean anything is "wrong" or that anything has been "redistributed" to them.

JohnStOnge wrote:Same old same old on the wealth and income distribution thing. The median income now is higher than it was in the 1970s. The "middle" is better off in terms of buying power. I hear people talk all the time about how the "middle class" is going away but when I've taken the time to research income figures over time I've never seen anything to indicate that it's true.

CEOs making 400 x what rank and file workers do now vs. 40 x decades ago does not mean rank and file workers are worse off. Again: If person A makes $10 and person B makes $100 today then person A makes $15 and person B makes $100,000 tomorrow it doesn't mean person A is worse off tomorrow or that person B "took" anything from person A. It just means person B is "more" better off than person A is.

There is no fixed pie of wealth that dropped fromt he sky. Wealth is something that is created and is (hopefully) an ever-expanding quantity. The fact that the "rich" have a greater proportion of the wealth now than they did in 1970 does not mean anything is "wrong" or that anything has been "redistributed" to them. I

There is no such thing as perpetual growth. Not in our economy, not in anyone's economy. Not now, not before. You, plain and simply, are not dealing in reality.

Where I honestly feel the middle class is suffering is in the amount of debt the average middle class family owes. When the economy boomed in the 90s, the middle class were living well and living beyond their means. It started catching them during the Bush recession, excuse me, the 1st Busch recession, in 2001 and a lot of them haven't recovered.

This is why you've seen payday lenders, pawn shops, title loan places, etc, etc THRIVE the last 10 years or so. People didn't expect it, or didn't PREPARE for it and it has affected credit ratings all across the board.

We should've followed the Joseph method. During the years of plenty, prepare for the years of famine to come.

Every entitlement within the government needs to be reexamined. Even as a libertarian, I believe some programs are necessary for the basic survival of some people, but the amount of abusers is enough to make one vomit. A large percent of the populace treats medicare and medicaid as if it is some get out of jail free card and the large amount of folks who default on their medical bills is what is driving medical care costs THROUGH THE ROOF.

There is no such thing as perpetual growth. Not in our economy, not in anyone's economy. Not now, not before. You, plain and simply, are not dealing in reality.

I think in the final analysis you are correct: Nothing can grow infinitely. But our system...the world's system and not just the United States...is based on the idea of a continually growing economy.

In any case, wealth is not a fixed quantity. There is no great pie of wealth dropped from heaven that is then distributed among the people. Wealth is created through the generation of goods and services. Money, nowadays, is just a medium of exchange.

The reality IS that the "middle" of the income distribution is better off now in terms of inflation adjusted value of its income than it was in the 1950s. I'm not going to look it up now but I recently did for another thread. And the reality IS that the top 1% (or whatever percent) controlling a greater percentage of the wealth now than it did X years ago does not mean that the other 99% of the people have less wealth than they did X years ago.

The whole deal with the "wealth inequality" thing is simply the politics of envy. That's all it is.

catamount man wrote:Where I honestly feel the middle class is suffering is in the amount of debt the average middle class family owes. When the economy boomed in the 90s, the middle class were living well and living beyond their means. It started catching them during the Bush recession, excuse me, the 1st Busch recession, in 2001 and a lot of them haven't recovered.

This is why you've seen payday lenders, pawn shops, title loan places, etc, etc THRIVE the last 10 years or so. People didn't expect it, or didn't PREPARE for it and it has affected credit ratings all across the board.

We should've followed the Joseph method. During the years of plenty, prepare for the years of famine to come.

Every entitlement within the government needs to be reexamined. Even as a libertarian, I believe some programs are necessary for the basic survival of some people, but the amount of abusers is enough to make one vomit. A large percent of the populace treats medicare and medicaid as if it is some get out of jail free card and the large amount of folks who default on their medical bills is what is driving medical care costs THROUGH THE ROOF.

One of your better posts.