Welfare Queens...

[DarthZeth]

i see, so raising taxes to pay off debt would kick the economy in the nuts and be counter prodcutive?

so it'd be better to wait until intrest rates are high, lower SPENDING, pay off debt, increase the supply of loanable money (get rid of the "crowding out" effect), which would lower interest rates? So i guess the proper timing is just at the end of a boom and the begining of a recession? because that would have the effect of proping up the economy with cheep loans AND getting the government's innefficent ass out of it.

of course, just when the boom is in its fullest and the tax money is rolling in is when politicians decide to spend it like mad. doh.

[Dynamite Kid]

The US approach to electoral finance is ridiculous. Either fund all candidates equally through a public finance system, or deregulate the whole mess and let it become a spending war. Funny, people spending gobs of money for a job that's a pay cut while telling you how little they'll waste. I'd be tempted to take the hit on my income tax if I were home just to get that pair of smirking, disingenuous jackals off my television.

money is just about always better in the hands of the private sector.

When speaking in purely economic terms, yes it is. However, as government works for people as opposed to business, there are several places where money in the hands of the private sector work against people.

For example: pension fund schemes. People bitch (constantly) about Social Security and all, but there is at the very least a political guarantee that it will be around in some form. The same does not hold true for a private, work-provided pension fund.
There's no guarantee the employer or union will be solvent when the elderly need these funds to live off of. If you want to 'opt out' of anything, it's work-sponsored retirement benefits schemes. Talk to steelworkers about that one.

[DarthZeth]

or, just put your retirement funds into an IRA or 401(k)

most people today don't work for pensions anyway. oh, I’m sure there are a good number of people who work for pensions, and even more who get them. But pensions are a horrible retirement plan. besides, most people don't stay at a place long enough to get a pension, since it usually makes more economic sense to move companies then to stay on for a measly pension. and besides even THAT, too many companies tank before you get your pension. Its a crappy way to ensure your financial security for the future. If you put yours savings in something like a IRA, you can't loose it when a company tanks.

most people can (but don't) squirrel away money thru out their lives for the future. All you gotta do is take %10, or even 5% of your pay check, put it away, and don't touch it. And even if you REALLY do need ever last penny to live on, and can't save 5%? ok, fine, you can have social security. But in most case people don't NEED the money they don’t save that day. In most case people don't save because they are irresponsible.

the funny part is, you get more Social security the more money you made during your working life. If you made more money, you should have been able to SAVE more money and need less.

the whole concept that Social Security is a "savings" plan is bunk. its a "we take your money, spend it on shit today, then take money from your grandchildren to pay the crappy returns on the money we didn’t save for you” plan

[Viper Daimao]

yeah, like zeth said, why do people need the govt to take care of them? cant they save on their own? or for other people, arent they mature enough, dont they have the right to not save? The govt says no, the govt takes money from you under the guise of "taking care" of you and your future. funny, i thought i could take care of my future better than a couple hundred rich guys in washington.
Just save up a bit, $5000 or so, put it in a Small Time Deposit(CD) for a few years. While you wont be able to touch the money until maturity (so higher interest rates than market), if an emergency does happen and you really need the money, you can always borrow against it. this can be on top of your IRA or whatever your place of work does.

[Dynamite Kid]

Originally Posted by Viper Daimao

yeah, like zeth said, why do people need the govt to take care of them? cant they save on their own? or for other people, arent they mature enough, dont they have the right to not save? The govt says no, the govt takes money from you under the guise of "taking care" of you and your future. funny, i thought i could take care of my future better than a couple hundred rich guys in washington.
Just save up a bit, $5000 or so, put it in a Small Time Deposit(CD) for a few years. While you wont be able to touch the money until maturity (so higher interest rates than market), if an emergency does happen and you really need the money, you can always borrow against it. this can be on top of your IRA or whatever your place of work does.

This is sort of what I do, but as I don't have a place of work per se, I do my own investment. Right now it's in small stuff like Executive Life Insurance policies and a couple of pharmaceutical mutuals (if they're going to rob the sick blind, I'll have a bit too), but I will NEVER let my employer touch a dime of my money, unless it is a full state pension scheme. I don't want others having control of my money on the market. This is why I trust the government OAP type schemes about 3% more than private, employer-run programmes. Neither are great really, but the employer having an interest in the market and specifically in their own shares leads to bad advice. This is why I don't trust those crooks in Washington (the selfsame rich guys running SS) who want to plunge SS funds into the stock market. That's a forced investment, and one guaranteed to overheat the market and produce dangerous, unethical investing to support numbers and whims of Party interests.
If anything, I'd like to see a withdrawal scheme that allows an individual to allot a percentage of wages direct to chosen investment, combined with the option of staying on the SS pay as you go scheme and tighter regulation of securities and investment firms so people can be relatively assured of companies not defrauding their parents and having to find a room in the house for them.

[DarthZeth]

aaactally, the plan Bush was putting forwards was a choice as to where you want you SS "controbutions" to go. You could just leave them inteh SS system and get your 2 or 3% gaurenteed returns... or you could choose another place to put your SS "contrbutions". I don't think that proposal got past congress, since the stockmarket was dwindling just as the plan to let people put money into it was being considered, so a lot of people paniced and the proposal died.

Originally Posted by this guy until shiney edited it

not saying that any of you are wrong but, i would have to say that family welfare is not need any more! family welfare: of what i have seen through the events of my father that family welfare is only used by one gender that would be the EX-wife. so ex-wife welfare is agenst the fathers to put the father in paverty, it is the one thing that any or all men will face in califonia also other states but, i have only seen it in cal. if you are married you get in a heated argument you breack some thing that belongs soly to you. and at the end of the night you can and will be put in jail for a limited time. your wife will be told by the state to leave you and take your children, or that the state will take your children. so she will leave you and take your children.
the devorce: in a devorce your Ex will be mandated to take welfare in this there is no way out of this. you take the shaft!
back to when you where married say your wife is a, to put it lightly a fat slut that fuck everyone else but you. now say that she comes home and she is pregnet now say that the child can easly tell it did not come from you. so you devorce her well you get the shaft again. because the child was conseved while you two where married that child is yours and such, your in the welfare paying for someone elses child.
and if you think that family welfare is a set payment its not the price can cange by how much you make a week. oh but there is more i am to pissed of right now from writing this thats all a am going to say

(Shiney speaking.)

Stay out of the discussion forum. If you can't add a post that isn't blatant uninformed opinion, then you have no place here. That was just pure bias and opinion. Seems like bitterness too.

Just stay out of this argument and try to not contribute anymore to this or other conversations, at least until you have something to go on beyond personal beliefs and hearsay/'personal experience'.

[Dragonsbane]

This sort of thing is almost always biased in favor of the mother, since people just can't seem to picture a woman doing any violence (thus proving that people are stupid)

[AnonCastillo]

Ah, fellow libertarians.... you guys are gonna give me hope if you don't watch it.

While a few hundred million every election year may not seem like much compared to the billions and billions and billions of dollars the government wastes each year, it's money that does little if any good and is therefore extremely easy to cut.

As for social security, I'm actually going to disagree with all of you and say that social security is one of the fairest government programs out there. You spend your entire working life paying 8% of everything you earn, and then when you retire the govrenment pays you 8% of what it costs to live. Seems fair to me!

Anyways, I like Nolan better than I like Russo. It's mainly a strategy thing. The two major party candidates are both so pathetically awful that if we run a sane, intelligent candidate, we'll pull in a lot of dissatisfied voters. A crazier, publicity-stunt candidate like Russo only works when our opponents have smarter, but more boring candidates. Plus, I got to meet Nolan at this year's NORML conference. He's a cool guy.

[The Tortured one]

anon, I've met Nolan as well. He is a great guy. He seems like more of the caring charismatic non-extremist, where as Russo seems like the stereotypical angry third party candidate. I would like to a match off between Russo and Nader, it'd be fun to watch that ignorant idiot get his proverbial ass kicked by Russo. Nolan is great but he's not the best debater.