Forum Thread

Lake Martin Topics

(Lake Martin Specific)

111,144 messages

Updated 4/30/2024 5:16:38 PM

Off-Topic

Lakes Online Forum

83,606 messages

Updated 4/30/2024 9:09:31 AM

Boat Maintenance

Lakes Online Forum

5,193 messages

Updated 4/3/2024 3:47:36 AM

Lake Martin Fishing

(Lake Martin Specific)

4,169 messages

Updated 4/16/2024 3:16:57 AM

Jokes

Lakes Online Forum

4,169 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM

Sports

Lakes Online Forum

4,260 messages

Updated 3/24/2024 9:24:45 AM

Grilling & Recipes

Lakes Online Forum

2,976 messages

Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM

Lake Martin SCUBA

(Lake Martin Specific)

169 messages

Updated 5/31/2023 1:39:35 PM

Tallapoosa River Topics

Lakes Online Forum

98 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM

Forum Usage Rules

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	Debt Ceiling
Date:	1/15/2013 7:16:03 AM (updated 1/15/2013 7:19:51 AM)

Obama just announced that he will not consider spending cuts as a part of raising the debt ceiling. He said bluntly that if the the debt ceiling is not raised that payments to veterans and social security recipients may be delayed. In 2008 as a Senator he voted against raising the debt ceiling and called President Bush irresponsible and unpatriotic if he raised the debt ceiling. At that time he went on to say that the national debt would equate to $70,000 for every man, woman, and child and talked about the effect it would have on the future of our children and grandchildren. Now as President he has flipflopped and says that if the national debt is not raised the blame will rest with the Republicans. How can a President who has spent more in four years than was spent by "all" previous Presidents have the gall to tell the American people that we must increase the debt ceiling "now" and consider negotiating spending cuts at a "later " date as a separate measure. Since polls show that only 14% of the American people approve of the job that Congress is doing, maybe the President should consider delaying payments to the members of Congress rather than spelling out "veterans and social security" recipients as his "ploy" to further blame Republicans for whatever happens regarding the debt ceiling. I thought we elected a President as a leader whose responsibility is to the "best" interest of our country, but from all appearances we elected a "KING"!!

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Hey Archie, where are the calls for compromise now
Date:	1/15/2013 9:42:14 AM

Gee, I thought your number one gripe against the GOP was their unwillingness to compromise. Well they compromised on raising taxes. Now they want to work in a bipartisan fashion to compromise on spending cuts and the debt ceiling and are being told no by Obama and Harry Reid. Can you criticize your messiah or does he have an entirely different set of standards?

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Hey Archie, where are the calls for compromise now
Date:	1/15/2013 1:59:03 PM (updated 1/15/2013 2:14:10 PM)

Grow up. Your President is taking a lesson from your tea Party....... NO compromise. You seem to suddenly have a problem with that. Compromise to the right is like gay marriage and abortion. Go Barack H(ardball) Obama. Kings don't compromise.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Tea Party and compromise
Date:	1/15/2013 3:43:31 PM

GF, I know that Dancing with the Stars and X- Factor don't usually cover this but in reality quite a few GOP members that are favorites of the Tea Party adherents voted for the tax bill. They probably also didn't cover the fact that Grover Norquist also approved of the compromise.

You might think this is funny but I am specifically responding to the left's so-called love of compromise and bipartisanship and I am pointing out their blatant hypocrisy. As I have long maintained, their concept of the terms is for conservatives to abandon their principals in favor of a deal. But for the leftists on this forum, all I can say when they raise that issue is that they need to remove the plank from their own eye before pointing out the sliver in ours.

Double standards and hypocrisy are the hallmarks of the left and I enjoy pointing them out. Yet another valid reason for my derision of the left......

Name:	Scottie -	Reply
Subject:	Tea Party and compromise
Date:	1/15/2013 4:17:57 PM

For Obama the definition of compromise is: Do what I want, when I want it and how I want it. Your ideas hold no merit!
Can any of you liberals tell me where Obama has exhibited any bipartinship? I do need to qualify that question a bit.Can any of you liberals tell me where Obama has exhibited any bipartinship outside of inviting republicans to agree with him?

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	The time for compromise
Date:	1/15/2013 10:23:12 PM (updated 1/15/2013 10:25:57 PM)

will be in the sequester debate, not on the debt extension. Obama should absolutely refuse to negotiate on the debt because the failure to make the payments on money already borrowed and spent is the height of irresponsibility and should never be sanctioned. There is no such thing as compromise on fulfilling our national commitments.

When it comes to the sequester debate I hope the president and the congress will finally act like adults and negotiate a compromise which includes tax reform, across the board spending cuts (including defense) and entitlement reform (gradually raising the medicare age to 67, altering the inflation index for SS and perhaps some means testing of both).

Name:	buzzbuster -	Reply
Subject:	The time for compromise
Date:	1/16/2013 1:21:11 AM

I think it's time to stop sending our money to other countries that hate us, just to use our money to do all they can to hurt us. While our country is suffering from a debt our so called leader just wants to raise as much and as fast as he can before he leaves with the worst economy of my life time. These sorry no-good waste of space baby making money grabbing losers need to be cut off the federal tit and start producing something besides babies and drugs. There are many pork projects that need to cut but our military needs to be paid and their insurance kept in full as promised. Congress just voted themselves a raise. They should give it back and not receive one at the very least until they pass a budget and they need to limit their terms in office. Congress should also have to adhere to any and all bills passed that the rest of America has to live by, such as Obama care. I want to thank all our Military Men and Women for your service and hope and pray that you get what you should before anyone else. It's time to stop talking about who won the election and start putting the finger on the problems and do some serious reasonable problem solving and get this Country back where it should be. I feel so bad for my children and grandchildren as to what they will have to endure. I feel that have done all I could but now I'm not so sure. Watching all these idiots that voted for Oblamer and this bunch will get what they deserve while the others are going to have to suffer along with them. My rant is over but I still have plenty to say that only makes me feel slightly better and falls to the way side for the dreamers.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Of course you have a double standard
Date:	1/16/2013 8:52:47 AM

What a typical hypocrite liberal. When have you ever said the GOP should not compromise? Ever, at any time? The answer is never! Of course you want him to hold firm on the debt ceiling because once it is raised the GOP has zero leverage to control spending. That is absolutely disgusting....but why do you care? You'll be long dead and gone when the bill comes due so screw your children and grandchildren, right? Let them eat cake, right?

But I am going to educate you on something Archie so pay attention. The government only needs about half a trillion to pay its debt. It does not have to raise the debt ceiling in order to do so assuming it reduces other spending to keep within the debt ceiling. That is something that could be easily done by reforming entitlements. The GOP has already proposed numerous budgets that would do so but Obama and the Dems refuse to even engage in negotiations and they and the President continue to violate federal law by not passing a budget. But you only apply federal laws to the GOP, right? I can only imagine your howling and outrage if the shoe is on the other foot.

Well it will be Archie and I plan to throw your hypocrisy right back in your face when that happens so be prepared.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Its a drop in the bucket
Date:	1/16/2013 9:00:56 AM

You do realize the U.S. government provides about $50 billion in foreign aid right? That represents less than 2% of the entire budget and is significantly less than the hundreds of billions that Americans provide in foreign aid through private charities. If you eliminated all foreign aid it would give you enough money to run the federal government for less than 6 days!

I understand the appeal of eliminating this and frankly I am OK doing it with some exceptions for humanitarian aid but this is not where we should focus our efforts. We have $15 trillion in debt (of which Obama has added $5 trillion in just 4 short years) and hundreds of trillions in unfunded and underfunded mandates as a result of out of control entitlement programs like Medicare, SS, Medicaid, etc. We have to focus there or we will end up like Greece only worse.

Name:	Scottie -	Reply
Subject:	Its a drop in the bucket
Date:	1/16/2013 10:18:18 AM

MartiniMan, If you called SS an unfunded entitlement program because that is what you've been told by the media and some of your elected officials I can understand your confusion. So let me enlighten you just a little.
SS is unfunded because republicans and democrats alike have raided the SS funds time and again to fund various real entitlement programs for their own purposes.
I have worked since I was 15 years old and I'm now 66, thats 51 years that SS deductions have been taken out of my paycheck and matched by my employers as well. My life expectancy is age 80 give or take a few years. In that time I will draw about $1600 a month with $104 a month deducted for medicare. That leaves me with less than $1500 a month. I will never get back more money than has been paid into my SS account on my behalf.
Now, if you can, please answer these two questions.
1. How can you call SS and entitlement program when I have paid for it all of my life?
2. How can you call SS and unfunded program when I have paid in far more than I will ever get back?

It is insulting to me and everyone who draws SS to call it an entitlement program when in fact it is not. The cowards in Washington have begun to call it that so they can deceive you into thinking that this is a freeby that comes from the goodness of the government's heart. Something like earned income credit, food stamps, housing subsidies, federal education aid to poor families. Fact is they have even started printing "entitlement program" on the SS checks. I think that is so they can make retired people feel like they don't deserve what they have paid for.
(Rant over)

Name:	buzzbuster -	Reply
Subject:	Its a drop in the bucket
Date:	1/16/2013 1:19:23 PM

MM I'm sure that may be a drop in the bucket but that is a good place to start in my opinion. How many drops feel a bucket? Lets start with some more drops by cutting as much waste as possible, maybe Congress would be a good place to start. If Congress would have and leave now the SS program alone we would have plenty of money to pay for it. I don't want to start pointing fingers but correct me if I'm wrong, Wasn't it during the Clinton administration that Congress put SS into the general fund and everyone had the opportunity to start getting their grubby little hands on our money for the pork barrel projects for their distracts so many could be reelected. When they put money into a program, Only use it for that program period.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Its a drop in the bucket
Date:	1/16/2013 2:55:29 PM

First of all, I lumped all these programs together and used the terms unfunded or underfunded. As I discussed in another post about some proposed solutions to our entitlement programs I borrowed the term "straight line" budget item to specifically apply to programs like SS and Medicare that have current taxes taken out. These programs are woefully underfunded and that is a fact. But ALL the proposed solutions do not impact anyone over the age of 55 and I believe that is both fair and right as it is obviously too late for them to seek other alternatives.

And I completely agree about the misuse of SS funds as originally done by LBJ to cover up the cost of his Great Society programs and that has been abused ever since by politicians of all stripes. But look at it this way, once that genie was out of the bottle, would you want to be the politician that tries to put it back? I know I would not.

I will now answer your questions:

1. How can you call SS and entitlement program when I have paid for it all of my life?

A. Here is the definition of an entitlement program and SS clearly falls under that definition: government program helping specific group: a government program that targets a particular section of the population to receive specific social benefits.

2. How can you call SS and unfunded program when I have paid in far more than I will ever get back?

A. Again, I grouped unfunded and underfunded and clearly SS as well as Medicare fall into the underfunded category. Medicaid and other entitlement programs are completely unfunded and are paid out of the general fund. But there is no doubt that SS is underfunded, right? And if you are 66 today your life expectancy is around 82 and if you live that long or longer it is highly likely you will take out more than you put in. But it is inescapable that both SS and Medicare are underfunded even if the lock box exists, which it obviously doesn't.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Its a drop in the bucket
Date:	1/16/2013 2:58:50 PM

As I said I am not opposed to eliminating foreign aid but it is akin to putting a band aid over a severed limb. It just doesn't address the real issue even if it makes you feel better at having done something.

As for SS, I believe it was LBJ that originally took SS funds and replaced them with IOU's. He did it to make his war on poverty revenue neutral. Frankly if any president should be forced to reverse that it should be this one. But don't count on it. Printing money is way easier than that.

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	It was LBJ
Date:	1/16/2013 3:41:56 PM

Under the astute leadership of of Tip Oneal during his 30 or so years as speaker of the house. It was his bullying that got it done.

Quick Links
Lake Martin News
Lake Martin Photos
Lake Martin Videos