Political Chatter

Non-fashion, non-skirt, non-gender discussions. If your post is related to fashion, skirts or gender, please choose one of the forums above for it.
Post Reply
dillon
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2719
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:12 pm
Location: southeast NC coast

Re: Political Chatter

Post by dillon »

Franinskirts wrote:
Orange Apple wrote:
Uncle Al wrote:Socialism, in any form, doesn't work :!:
Do you have a Social Security card? That makes you a card-carrying socialist.
Social Security is paid for by the working people AS AN INSURANCE policy towards retirement. When it was started only those who paid into it were the ones to draw from it. It was not a government give away program. It was solvent when all other programs the government had were broke. The money could not be used for anything but retirement of the individuals who paid into it..
Then congress got tired of seeing all of this money they could not touch and moved it in to the general fund at the same time telling the people it will not be used for anything other than it's intended purpose. It did not take long for them to start "borrowing" from the funds. Now after all of the phony baloney from the government everyone gets a social security check wither they paid into it or not, even illegal aliens. Just another pile of government Bullsh*t.

Fred :kiltdance:
That's a bit of misinterpretation of the system, spawned by political rhetoric, to which, it appears, many are susceptible. Social Security surpluses have always been counted against budget deficits; its is "cash on hand" for the treasury. It didn't become a political football until the 1990s when the projection of the eventual crossing of money coming in with money going out became apparent. The use of Social Security positive balances to offset the Federal deficit, however, is not new. Remember, however, it is an assured entitlement, so that sleight of hand with math, however fuzzy and obscured, does not mean the system is being somehow robbed any more than any other part of the Federal budget. If you had an overdraft in your own checking account, but had some funds in a savings account, would you not transfer funds to correct that matter? The government does the same, but the overdrafting never ends for Uncle Sam.

The real thing to keep in mind, and this is a fact that self-proclaimed Fiscal Conservatives rarely voluntarily admit, is that the size of their darling programs, the so-called Political Untouchables - Social Security, Medicare, and Defense - dwarf everything else. Even if you eliminate ALL OTHER FEDERAL SPENDING except those three Untouchables, the Federal budget is STILL NOT BALANCED! That's how big those programs are! Yet the Republican politicians still run a smoke screen, claiming they will protect all of them, but somehow cut Federal spending. Where? And what? Certainly nothing that benefits their donors, and clearly not nearly enough to fix the deficits. But the worst aspect of the rhetoric is the continued con-game they pull on that willfully-ignorant portion of the electorate that believes, in a state of voluntary self-delusion, there are some huge welfare and spending programs where all the tax revenue goes, and if we only ended those everything will be hunky-dorry. Well, guess what...these are the huge spending programs, and you are part of them.

So, you can keep drawing those SS deposits, keep giving that Medicare card to your doctor, and keep demanding we march the US Military all over Earth to clean up Muslim Terrorists (neglecting to note that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter) until the bills bring down the system like a house of cards. Or you can demand a reasonable course of action from your politicians and call them out on their ********. I am not anti-Social Security or anti-Medicare; I will be on both soon enough. And I'm happy we keep a viable National Defense. But we have to pull our heads out of the sand and stop pointing fingers of blame at imaginary offenders, our propaganda-driven Quixotic jousting at windmills, when our leaders don't have the guts to confront us with the harsh realities the country faces, but rather keep pretending that they can cut their way out of the fiscal mess. They can't.
As a matter of fact, the sun DOES shine out of my ...
Disaffected.citizen
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:16 am
Location: UK

Re: Political Chatter

Post by Disaffected.citizen »

Judah14 wrote:
crfriend wrote: It's also fairly easy to get onto SSI. My ex successfully gamed the system and convinced enough folks that she was disabled and was able to retire quite comfortably on it. She spent the better part of a decade jetting about the country going to cat shows whilst "disabled" and all the while I stayed behind, worked for a living, and took care of the house and the other cats.
Isn't it required to show a medical certificate to prove that the applicant has a disability? Filipino SSS requires a medical certificate for application for disability benefit, and also specifies what is considered disability. I am pretty sure the people at SSS here know how others might game the system and closed the loopholes.
In the UK, you must apply for what is now called "Personal Independence Payment" which is not means tested and can be claimed if you are working or with "Employment Support Allowance"; however, you do not necessarily need a medical professional's assessment to apply. In fact, even if your application is supported by a medical assessment, it is no guarantee that the benefit will be awarded; the government department (Department for Work and Pensions) tasked with assessing needs may make its own judgement, and their assessors are not necessarily qualified medical professionals!
dillon
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2719
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:12 pm
Location: southeast NC coast

Re: Political Chatter

Post by dillon »

Judah14 wrote:
Jim wrote:I saw a good definition for political correctness lately. It was "speaking about everyone with respect."
Actually, it depends. When political correctness is taken to the extreme, it becomes a form of censorship as you could only say good things, not criticism, even if its constructive.
I'm too old to keep up with what is and isn't PC, and certainly can't keep up with the jargon and terminology which seems to change weekly, so I am not worried about labels. But I have a pretty good sense of right and wrong, and what seems reasonable and ethical.
As a matter of fact, the sun DOES shine out of my ...
Orange Apple
Distinguished Member
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 4:59 pm
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: Political Chatter

Post by Orange Apple »

Judah14 wrote:
crfriend wrote: It's also fairly easy to get onto SSI. My ex successfully gamed the system and convinced enough folks that she was disabled and was able to retire quite comfortably on it. She spent the better part of a decade jetting about the country going to cat shows whilst "disabled" and all the while I stayed behind, worked for a living, and took care of the house and the other cats.
Isn't it required to show a medical certificate to prove that the applicant has a disability? Filipino SSS requires a medical certificate for application for disability benefit, and also specifies what is considered disability. I am pretty sure the people at SSS here know how others might game the system and closed the loopholes.
The problem is that "disabled" and "has a medical condition" are not synonymous. Sometimes it's easy . . . someone is a paraplegic and is under a doctor's care, the doctor can attest to the health condition and that's a pretty obvious disability.

But there's a lot of grey area. Degenerative conditions, for example . . . how bad does the arthritis have to be before someone can no longer work and thus "needs" assistance?

My experience has been that the first application for assistance is pretty much automatically declined unless there was some traumatic event that changed a person's health, like an accident. And yes, there are folks who persevere (often with the help of attorneys who specialize in this field) and get assistance when they really are not entitled to it. But there are also people who really should be receiving it but don't have the resources to continue the fight.
User avatar
Jim
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1745
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:39 am
Location: Northern Illinois, USA

Re: Political Chatter

Post by Jim »

dillon wrote: The real thing to keep in mind, and this is a fact that self-proclaimed Fiscal Conservatives rarely voluntarily admit, is that the size of their darling programs, the so-called Political Untouchables - Social Security, Medicare, and Defense - dwarf everything else. Even if you eliminate ALL OTHER FEDERAL SPENDING except those three Untouchables, the Federal budget is STILL NOT BALANCED!
Yes. And Social Security is still running a surplus. Medicare is projected to have a 0.68% shortfall over 75 years, if income is not increased or costs decreased. That leaves "defense" which is rarely about defending us. Does that suggest to anyone where we should cut?
dillon
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2719
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:12 pm
Location: southeast NC coast

Re: Political Chatter

Post by dillon »

Jim wrote:
dillon wrote: The real thing to keep in mind, and this is a fact that self-proclaimed Fiscal Conservatives rarely voluntarily admit, is that the size of their darling programs, the so-called Political Untouchables - Social Security, Medicare, and Defense - dwarf everything else. Even if you eliminate ALL OTHER FEDERAL SPENDING except those three Untouchables, the Federal budget is STILL NOT BALANCED!
Yes. And Social Security is still running a surplus. Medicare is projected to have a 0.68% shortfall over 75 years, if income is not increased or costs decreased. That leaves "defense" which is rarely about defending us. Does that suggest to anyone where we should cut?
Yes, we need to extricate ourselves gracefully from the Middle East. We are bogged down in this mess because we elected Oil Men as President and VP. Sadly, it doesn't look like that will happen until we have some effort by the rest of the world. Maybe when Europe is totally swamped with refugees, they will act. I think SS and Medicare are the best programs we have ever enacted. I only wish the ACA included a public option. Without one, there is no incentive for corporate insurers to actually compete. Like so much else, Obamacare has turned into corporate welfare. Medicare operates at 1.5% overhead...private insurance has 15 to 20% overhead...for their profit margin. The main issue with Medicare is the extent of fraud in the system from providers and hospitals. The government could do better at catching that, and revoke medical licenses when they do, but that means a mandate on states.

The VA system could be fixed if the VA partnered with troubled hospitals to create new centers. That would kill two birds with one stone; keeping rural hospitals in operation and getting essential services to veterans expeditiously.
As a matter of fact, the sun DOES shine out of my ...
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 15283
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Political Chatter

Post by crfriend »

"Romneycare", please. Let's call it what it is. A bill enacted by a republican governor of Massachusetts as a gift to his elite buddies who helm "insurance" companies and which confers unto private for-profit entities the power to tax. Pure and simple. The ACA is that only under a different name. The cost of health care skyrocketed, insurance-company profits went through the roof, and the overall quality of care declined. "Follow the money."

Germany has something similar, but prohibits for-profit insurers from competing in the arena. I could, grudgingly, have supported that idea; what we have now, frankly, is an abomination. Single-payer, really, is the only sensible option. If folks want something more on top of that, so be it, but the best interests of the majority of the population would be single-payer -- the "public option".
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
Gregg1100
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 547
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 9:47 pm
Location: Wales

Re: Political Chatter

Post by Gregg1100 »

We in UK used to have the National Health Service. I say used to, because it is on it's last legs. Due to Governments, especially the bloody tories diverting money desperately needed,- selling off parts to American for profit insurers- not charging foreigners for NHS work done and so on. All gone to hell on a hand cart.

The people here who won't fight for NHS, don't seem to realise that with insurance based medical care- ANY pre insurance condition/ailments will NOT be covered, or at an even higher premium if cover can be obtained. If the NHS folded tomorrow, and I applied for medical insurance- with a known history of prostate cancer and angina- there would be no way of getting treatment later if needed. What will I do then ? Flop off this world early, because thats what governments want. We have had your money, now sod off.
User avatar
Gregg1100
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 547
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 9:47 pm
Location: Wales

Re: Political Chatter

Post by Gregg1100 »

I rarely comment on political stuff, and never on religion- don't believe in it at all. I don't comment on looks portrayed in the gallery unless I like them- especially carpets, lol
User avatar
Pdxfashionpioneer
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1650
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 6:39 am
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: Political Chatter

Post by Pdxfashionpioneer »

Having never lived in either Massachusetts or the United Kingdom I cannot address either Carl's or Gregg's points directly but I can speak to the overall effect of the ACA on the national level: more Americans are covered, they have better coverage (for one thing preexisting conditions are covered as are kids up to age 26) and while the price of coverage is up, the rate of increase is less than what it has been.

Barrack Obama has done such a "lousy" job as President that his landmark legislation has created a triple win for the average individual and the economy is in better shape than it has been since ... the Clinton Administration. We should be so "unlucky" on a regular basis. :wink: :wink:
David, the PDX Fashion Pioneer

Social norms aren't changed by Congress or Parliament; they're changed by a sufficient number of people ignoring the existing ones and publicly practicing new ones.
dillon
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2719
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:12 pm
Location: southeast NC coast

Re: Political Chatter

Post by dillon »

Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:Barrack Obama has done such a "lousy" job as President that his landmark legislation has created a triple win for the average individual and the economy is in better shape than it has been since ... the Clinton Administration. We should be so "unlucky" on a regular basis. :wink: :wink:
He has been amazingly successful, especially when you consider the racial vitriol and congressional stonewalling with which he has been confronted.
As a matter of fact, the sun DOES shine out of my ...
skirted_in_SF
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1081
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:56 am
Location: San Francisco, CA USA

Re: Political Chatter

Post by skirted_in_SF »

crfriend wrote:Then you've got guys like me who have been paying into it for decades as well, and who will never see a dime in benefit from it because the "eligibility age" is now beyond our life expectancies.
You're not planning on living beyond 67? I just checked the SSA website and that is the oldest normal retirement age currently in force. It is for people born in 1960 and later.
Stuart Gallion
No reason to hide my full name 8)
Back in my skirts in San Francisco
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 5804
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: Political Chatter

Post by Sinned »

67/68 is the norm for retirement here now. I can retire at 65 but most probably won't. MOH, born a year later can retire at 68.

As for the NHS -my grandson broke his wrist a week ago and it wasn't setting right so he went into hospital yesterday morning at 7am for an operation on it. Now they apparently have done a good job on resetting it but whether due to inefficiency, incompetence or just lack of communication they arrived back at about 10:30pm after waiting around for hours for a prescription for painkillers for him. That's over 15 hours. Don't know if it's due to changes in procedure - one person didn't know how to fill out a prescription request, there was a disagreement between a senior nurse and a doctor as to whether my grandson could go home, or whether it's die to pressure from the influx of migrants. I do know that getting a same-day n appointment for the doctor or dentist is now a thing of the past but was common 5 years ago.
I believe in offering every assistance short of actual help but then mainly just want to be left to be myself in all my difference and uniqueness.
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 7294
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Lake Goodwin, Washington
Contact:

Re: Political Chatter

Post by moonshadow »

Unless my health fails in the mean time, I actually don't plan on retiring. And it's not for some reason like "oh it's not going to be there for me anyway... blah blah blah...". Sure I'd like for social security to be around when I hit my upper 60's. I'll be 67 years old in 2047. But the real reason is I just like working. I know I complain about it a lot, but really, my work is a big part of my life. And I'm not just talking about my current occupation. No. I can work anywhere, I just like working. I enjoy getting out and being among people, making things, making money, making friends. Even if at 2050 I'm standing in a walmart greeting people, I still would enjoy the atmosphere of working.

I have a lot of fun at work. I cut up, carry on, I like fixing things, and I see some cool stuff in the field. My present occupation allows me lots of drive time, I enjoy looking out over the stars through my windshield on a lonesome highway, still hours from home, while the radio plays music I enjoy.

This might sound crazy, but I actually prefer working over vacations. And when I do vacation, I tend to just travel about, I don't really enjoy visiting major tourist destinations. I just like riding on country roads.

I'm not particularly crazy about being on call. That I do NOT enjoy. But sometimes you gotta take the bad with the good.

Anyway... just thought I'd pinch that in there... from the one man amongst us who probably will never see a social security check anyway... :roll:

Back to your "solving of the worlds problems".... (will probably unsub again if no bites after a few replies... kinda getting burned out with politics at the moment...)

:hide:
Stevie D
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 479
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 9:56 pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Re: Political Chatter

Post by Stevie D »

dillon wrote:
Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:Barrack Obama has done such a "lousy" job as President that his landmark legislation has created a triple win for the average individual and the economy is in better shape than it has been since ... the Clinton Administration. We should be so "unlucky" on a regular basis. :wink: :wink:
He has been amazingly successful, especially when you consider the racial vitriol and congressional stonewalling with which he has been confronted.
This is also the view of so many of my friends and family here in the UK. We cannot understand why anyone would want to replace him with such a dangerous xenophobic buffoon like Trump. We are truly scared of the outcome for the world should he become your President.
Stevie D
(Sheffield, South Yorkshire)
Post Reply