Progressive Ideology

[a fan]

quite the cherry pick.

You're giving me grief for cherry picking? Right before you cherry pick on your own.

Do you really think that Florida residents putting in 205 Billion...and only collecting 26.8 Billion from the Government? If that was remotely true, we'd be running the biggest government surplus the world has every seen.

You're citing direct funding to State coffers, and ignore total Federal spending. That link below? All it lists are grants. Cherry picking, and ignoring the big ticket items.

ALL STATES are taking more.....billions more..... than they are sending to the Federal government. Why do you think our deficit is running in the Trillions?

do you believe social security, which is a return of capital, belongs in the expenditure column? with all those seniors?

Yep. Do you think that they're taking out more than they put in? Take a wild guess. (SS is built on the math of increasing US population)

here are federal tax receipts and federal monies as part of state budgets: 2018ish
........majority is medicaid and chip. and then public infra, education, etc.

That only counts payments that lands in a State-run bank account. It doesn't count one penny that goes directly from the Federal Government to a Hospital/HMO, for example.

My argument is simple: our entire economy is built on borrowed money, and some States take a *hit-ton more than others. Florida is one of them, simply because of all the people on Medicare. Pull that borrowed Federal money out? Florida is F'ed.

Colorado was lucky enough to have a fracking boom. But as with all other States, if you pull that Federal Money out? We'd be F'ed.

New York? You could pave the roads with gold if you simply did two things: Pass a balanced budget amendment on the Federal level. And secondly, pass a "State Balanced Budget Amendment", where each State got $.95 for every dollar they send to DC. Five cents for overhead.

Do that? Pretty much every State but Cali, Texas, NY, CT, and IL would be hurting. And AL, MI? Sooooooo screwed. Second world nation status in five years.

[Peter Brown]

Do that? Pretty much every State but Cali, Texas, NY, CT, and IL would be hurting. And AL, MI? Sooooooo screwed. Second world nation status in five years.

hayzeus dude. you have got to be kidding. Of the 5 states you mention, all but one are bankrupt today and it has zero to do with what you perceive as an imbalance of payments from states to feds and back (which is a total shibboleth of the Left; I have previously pointed out here why it is a dumb claim, but whatevs, you will never be dissuaded so I am not going to point out again why the claim is buffoonish).

You are clearly not too familiar with Newton's 3rd Law... If you made all 50 states independent countries, the only states that would immediately recalibrate are Republican-led states. States with at-will labor laws, inviting regulatory structures, decent natural resources, and a generally peaceful citizenry would thrive. Other states like NY/IL/CT/CA would go belly up and I don't think they'd have the cojones to recalibrate their finances.

I swear, seriously man?

[a fan]

You are clearly not too familiar with Newton's 3rd Law... If you made all 50 states independent countries, the only states that would immediately recalibrate are Republican-led states. States with at-will labor laws, inviting regulatory structures, decent natural resources, and a generally peaceful citizenry would thrive. Other states like NY/IL/CT/CA would go belly up and I don't think they'd have the cojones to recalibrate their finances.

Poor Californians, Texans, and NYers. They don't stand a chance competing with Mississippi and Alabama, right, Pete?

Please. Pretty please. Make each State independent countries. Good luck figuring out how to finance all those health care expenses for the 4 million+ Florida Retirees without borrowing billions from Uncle Sam.....

[Peter Brown]

You are clearly not too familiar with Newton's 3rd Law... If you made all 50 states independent countries, the only states that would immediately recalibrate are Republican-led states. States with at-will labor laws, inviting regulatory structures, decent natural resources, and a generally peaceful citizenry would thrive. Other states like NY/IL/CT/CA would go belly up and I don't think they'd have the cojones to recalibrate their finances.

Poor Californians, Texans, and NYers. They don't stand a chance competing with Mississippi and Alabama, right, Pete?

Please. Pretty please. Make each State independent countries. Good luck figuring out how to finance all those health care expenses for the 4 million+ Florida Retirees without borrowing billions from Uncle Sam.....

I like how you slide Texas into the CA/NY axis when Texas is as different from those two states as can be imagined.

NY, CA, CT, NJ, and IL are bankrupt, not because you think they're getting 'robbed', but because they have unsustainable pension schemes.

Finally, Trump could teach you something about wealth; the poorest bum on the street is worth more than a guy who owes billions to banks and can't pay it. Alabama is just fine...you and Neil Young don't need to worry about her.

[a fan]

I like how you slide Texas into the CA/NY axis when Texas is as different from those two states as can be imagined.

Not everyone has your silly worldview of D's and R's Pete. Texas has an actual economy. They would compete on the world stage just fine. They'd thrive. Alabama and MS?

And Florida has plenty of Dems, Pete. And if you cut them off from Federal borrowing? They'll circle the toilet drain, right along with you....

And my Colorado would be in deep trouble, too.

Wake up.

Finally, Trump could teach you something about wealth

Yeah. Inherit your money from Daddy, and don't learn how to build something on your own like I did.

[seacoaster]

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/alabama

[Brooklyn]

I like how you slide Texas into the CA/NY axis when Texas is as different from those two states as can be imagined.

NY, CA, CT, NJ, and IL are bankrupt, not because you think they're getting 'robbed', but because they have unsustainable pension schemes.

Finally, Trump could teach you something about wealth; the poorest bum on the street is worth more than a guy who owes billions to banks and can't pay it. Alabama is just fine...you and Neil Young don't need to worry about her.

TexASS got screwed by Repuke gov Rick Perry until his sorry rump was bailed out by Obama.

[Peter Brown]

I like how you slide Texas into the CA/NY axis when Texas is as different from those two states as can be imagined.

Not everyone has your silly worldview of D's and R's Pete. Texas has an actual economy. They would compete on the world stage just fine. They'd thrive. Alabama and MS?

And Florida has plenty of Dems, Pete. And if you cut them off from Federal borrowing? They'll circle the toilet drain, right along with you....

And my Colorado would be in deep trouble, too.

Wake up.

Finally, Trump could teach you something about wealth

Yeah. Inherit your money from Daddy, and don't learn how to build something on your own like I did.

I think you keep overlooking why NY/CA/IL/NJ/CT are such messes. It's not because they aren't full of the 'educated', or don't have great companies, or don't have a great labor pool...it's because their public pension schemes, which gladhand Democrats only, are Chapter 11 ointments. And no politician there will change it.

So far as Alabama, their economy is great thanks to right-to-work laws. Mercedes-Benz, Airbus, Honda, Toyota, Hyundai, Austal think the labor pool is awesome!

Mississippi now part of the debate? Right to work there too. All good.

Next.

[Typical Lax Dad]

I like how you slide Texas into the CA/NY axis when Texas is as different from those two states as can be imagined.

Not everyone has your silly worldview of D's and R's Pete. Texas has an actual economy. They would compete on the world stage just fine. They'd thrive. Alabama and MS?

And Florida has plenty of Dems, Pete. And if you cut them off from Federal borrowing? They'll circle the toilet drain, right along with you....

And my Colorado would be in deep trouble, too.

Wake up.

Finally, Trump could teach you something about wealth

Yeah. Inherit your money from Daddy, and don't learn how to build something on your own like I did.

I think you keep overlooking why NY/CA/IL/NJ/CT are such messes. It's not because they aren't full of the 'educated', or don't have great companies, or don't have a great labor pool...it's because their public pension schemes, which gladhand Democrats only, are Chapter 11 ointments. And no politician there will change it.

So far as Alabama, their economy is great thanks to right-to-work laws. Mercedes-Benz, Airbus, Honda, Toyota, Hyundai, Austal think the labor pool is awesome!

Mississippi now part of the debate? Right to work there too. All good.

Next.

https://apple.news/ANS4SyGTJSF6NylSSOnJxCg

[a fan]

I think you keep overlooking why NY/CA/IL/NJ/CT are such messes. It's not because they aren't full of the 'educated', or don't have great companies, or don't have a great labor pool...it's because their public pension schemes, which gladhand Democrats only, are Chapter 11 ointments. And no politician there will change it.

We've already discussed this---both you and I---and the rest of the forum for 15+ years. Public Pensions are insane...I'm not overlooking anything....I've said they are idiotic for years of Laxpower Water Cooler discussion. And as you know, I'm also anti-Union for government employees. You're complaining to the wrong guy again.

So far as Alabama, their economy is great thanks to right-to-work laws. Mercedes-Benz, Airbus, Honda, Toyota, Hyundai, Austal think the labor pool is awesome!

Mississippi now part of the debate? Right to work there too. All good.

They're doing ok with the Federal funding...the context here is--what happens when that funding is pulled.

And of course they think those tax breaks AL lawmakers hand out like candy are awesome!

[CU77]

do you believe social security, which is a return of capital

Social security is most definitely NOT a "return of capital". It's an insurance plan. Die early and you get nothing. Die very late and you get a lot. Ignoring that, the AVERAGE annual rate of return (which is around 4.5% for someone born in 1985 and 6.5% for someone born in 1920) is awfully good compared to other totally safe investments.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-colu ... YG20121018

[wgdsr]

quite the cherry pick.

You're giving me grief for cherry picking? Right before you cherry pick on your own. of course!!! i thought that was what we were doing!!!

Do you really think that Florida residents putting in 205 Billion...and only collecting 26.8 Billion from the Government? If that was remotely true, we'd be running the biggest government surplus the world has every seen.

You're citing direct funding to State coffers, and ignore total Federal spending. That link below? All it lists are grants. Cherry picking, and ignoring the big ticket items.

ALL STATES are taking more.....billions more..... than they are sending to the Federal government. Why do you think our deficit is running in the Trillions?

do you believe social security, which is a return of capital, belongs in the expenditure column? with all those seniors?

Yep. Do you think that they're taking out more than they put in? Take a wild guess. (SS is built on the math of increasing US population)
in 2018 it was highest levels ever of surplus. no one wins big on the roi of ss. the vast majority of people of reg retirement age now will have passed by the time we get to breakeven. all that said... an ever aging pop living older with little growth will need new numbers. as they should. myself included, for future generations.
and all THAT said... including that (and medicare) throws that all into the fuzzy math category. they move to florida for their lifelong indiv benefits and fla isn't paying their bills? we'll have to agree to disagree. ftr, it looks like fla has about 5% more per pop (low 20s vs mid+ teens, 30% higher- ish) than colo taking ss, and a number north of 65-70 billion for fla in ss "expenditures".

here are federal tax receipts and federal monies as part of state budgets: 2018ish
........majority is medicaid and chip. and then public infra, education, etc.

That only counts payments that lands in a State-run bank account. It doesn't count one penny that goes directly from the Federal Government to a Hospital/HMO, for example.

My argument is simple: our entire economy is built on borrowed money, and some States take a *hit-ton more than others. Florida is one of them, simply because of all the people on Medicare. Pull that borrowed Federal money out? Florida is F'ed.

Colorado was lucky enough to have a fracking boom. But as with all other States, if you pull that Federal Money out? We'd be F'ed.

New York? You could pave the roads with gold if you simply did two things: Pass a balanced budget amendment on the Federal level. And secondly, pass a "State Balanced Budget Amendment", where each State got $.95 for every dollar they send to DC. Five cents for overhead.

Do that? Pretty much every State but Cali, Texas, NY, CT, and IL would be hurting. And AL, MI? Sooooooo screwed. Second world nation status in five years.

we need to balance our budgets...

JK, that'll never happen!!!! maybe ever again!!!! at least until we inflate our way out, maybe the dollar collapses, maybe we and everyone defaults to the fed and every other country debt. cancel everybody's!!! no problems there!!!

the way i see it... we all just believe "more" or "less" is our argument and perspective. there may be arguments made on what is and isn't either "socialism" or "too much/less" gov't services/distribution, the arguments come from a philosophical place without a guideline other than what came before.
make taxes lower and people scream "i can't believe they cut taxes!!!"
make taxes higher and someone else screams "i can't believe they raised taxes!!!"

so what's the right number on taxes, the last one? how did we get it so right? meanwhile, expenditures climb and climb and the surplus/deficit annually nary matters.

[wgdsr]

do you believe social security, which is a return of capital

Social security is most definitely NOT a "return of capital". It's an insurance plan. Die early and you get nothing. Die very late and you get a lot. Ignoring that, the AVERAGE annual rate of return (which is around 4.5% for someone born in 1985 and 6.5% for someone born in 1920) is awfully good compared to other totally safe investments.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-colu ... YG20121018

for the purposes of this discussion, i'm calling it one.
i understand what it is.
pension, annuity, call it what you will.

everybody's return (via age group, marital status, earnings, ethnicity) will vary.

there are plenty of other actuaries that come up with diff numbers. and they are lower. they are buying treasuries so of course they are lower. what you are bolding there is for couples where one makes money, the other gets spousal benefits. one of the best deals.
single earners get less.
african americans by many calculations lose money as a group.

it's forced investment. imo a good one. no, a great one as half the folks in the u.s. don't/can't save anything and need it. most of the other half can use it.

for my money, it's a return of capital to the indiv, not the state (for this discussion). if it's important to you, your mileage may vary.

[CU77]

do you believe social security, which is a return of capital

Social security is most definitely NOT a "return of capital". It's an insurance plan. Die early and you get nothing. Die very late and you get a lot. Ignoring that, the AVERAGE annual rate of return (which is around 4.5% for someone born in 1985 and 6.5% for someone born in 1920) is awfully good compared to other totally safe investments.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-colu ... YG20121018

for the purposes of this discussion, i'm calling it one.
i understand what it is.
pension, annuity, call it what you will.

everybody's return (via age group, marital status, earnings, ethnicity) will vary.

there are plenty of other actuaries that come up with diff numbers. and they are lower. they are buying treasuries so of course they are lower. what you are bolding there is for couples where one makes money, the other gets spousal benefits. one of the best deals.
single earners get less.
african americans by many calculations lose money as a group.

it's forced investment. imo a good one. no, a great one as half the folks in the u.s. don't/can't save anything and need it. most of the other half can use it.

for my money, it's a return of capital to the indiv, not the state (for this discussion). if it's important to you, your mileage may vary.

Well I think you're stretching the definition of "return of capital", but fine. You clearly understand how it actually works, which many don't.

[a fan]

it's forced investment. imo a good one.

Yes. But I don't think Americans understand what SS is for. It's not for you. It's to protect you from the bad decisions and/or bad choices/or bad luck made by your fellow Americans. Do you want to be on the hook for them? I don't. So take a little to make sure that every American can at least eat and have a roof over their head when they hit 65.

That way, everyone isn't trying to figure out what to do with millions of homeless 65+ year olds.

[CU77]

I completely agree with you and with the quote, but it was wgdsr who wrote it. (I blame nested quote syndrome.)

[a fan]

Whoops. My apologies to you both. Corrected!

[cradleandshoot]

do you believe social security, which is a return of capital

Social security is most definitely NOT a "return of capital". It's an insurance plan. Die early and you get nothing. Die very late and you get a lot. Ignoring that, the AVERAGE annual rate of return (which is around 4.5% for someone born in 1985 and 6.5% for someone born in 1920) is awfully good compared to other totally safe investments.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-colu ... YG20121018

So is the government hoping like all hell that people die early? It sure benefits them if they get to keep all that money. I am a huge advocate of giving every retiree their full SS benefit when they retire. let them do with it what they want. I wonder if that should include the employer match that was made over all those years of work? Yeah like that will ever happen?

[Peter Brown]

do you believe social security, which is a return of capital

Social security is most definitely NOT a "return of capital". It's an insurance plan. Die early and you get nothing. Die very late and you get a lot. Ignoring that, the AVERAGE annual rate of return (which is around 4.5% for someone born in 1985 and 6.5% for someone born in 1920) is awfully good compared to other totally safe investments.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-colu ... YG20121018

So is the government hoping like all hell that people die early? It sure benefits them if they get to keep all that money. I am a huge advocate of giving every retiree their full SS benefit when they retire. let them do with it what they want. I wonder if that should include the employer match that was made over all those years of work? Yeah like that will ever happen?

Might explain why Cuomo and Murphy sent all the Positives to infect their nursing homes?

[Brooklyn]

Canada - proof of the wisdom of progressive politics: