Home Off Topic

1% Intertest Increase via FED will raise our YEARLY Debt

HeatwaveHeatwave Posts: 1,997 Captain
The Job of the FED was to only create a money, and control the monetary policy. With the increase in TV, CNBC, and Bloomberg, we have help create a MONEY nation. Everything is about the dollar, stocks, the GDP (when needed) and they have learned how to manipulate us.

With the new tax bill coming and the FED slowly raising rates. We will in short order be paying a yearly Interest payment of 160 Billion dollars. This is not the nation we are suppose to be. We are the world leader and this will be the final straw that throws us behind China and with time other nations, Russia, ? Then, when they are ready, they will dominate us. The President at the time will be ASKING FOR HELP... All because of Greed runaway today.

I clearly remember on this site 10 or more years ago. Guy's would write, it is their money and they are a MAN, just like you and I, why should they pay a higher tax just because they are rich. That was the Wealthy's "Flavor of the year" 10 years ago, or trickle down, give us the money and we are sure to spend it thus creating other jobs, lawn cutting, boat captain, car cleaner, maids, etc... With that, they added we need all the immigrants available, who else will pick the fruit or vegetables, and we need someone that will cut the lawn.

160 Billion a year and not once will you ever hear our leader mention it. Just like they dont mention how well they will make put with the tax cut...Now all we have to do is sit back and listen to the people that STILL support this group tell us how great it is, how it is going to pump the economy so high it will pay for itself, why will they say this ? Because it is what they have heard 25 times in the past month. Funny to hear people repeat it... The economy is going to be so good that money will fall from the trees, Whiskey will poor out of springs in Texas, and GOLD will be found in the Alabama Hills. All the while, the national debt will just disappear.

Oue last leader is too blame also, he didn't do what FDR what have done, or what will surely happen in 15 - 20 years. Tax the rich or we will all be poverty ridden.. But for now, follow thy leader.
«1

Replies

  • mplspugmplspug Palmetto FloridaPosts: 12,878 AG
    Aw *sadface*

    Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

    Captain Todd Approves

  • MelbourneMarkMelbourneMark Posts: 2,200 Captain
    We have a spending problem, not a taxing problem. We spend ~1trillion more every year than we should.
    Also, if the fed did not create $ out of thin air, then the dolts in congress couldn't spend more than they receive. A true balanced budget would be nice.
  • mplspugmplspug Palmetto FloridaPosts: 12,878 AG
    The feds need to invest in bitcoins.

    Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

    Captain Todd Approves

  • Nick NikonNick Nikon Posts: 3,421 Captain
    Anyone who would like a deeper understanding of the issues involved should read this:

    "Money - Whence It Came, Where it Went" by John Kenneth Galbraith.

    It can be a bit of a slog, but the authors sly wit brings periodic chuckles.

    Keep in mind the words of that flaming liberal icon, Richard Nixon:

    "We're all Keynesians now."
  • mustang190mustang190 Posts: 10,104 AG
    And as soon as someone proposes a spending cut or eliminating a government agency or department people like heatwave will scream bloody murder.
  • dave44dave44 Posts: 11,773 AG
    I have been saying a rate hike would cost us a lot of money for years. People on the big government side kept ignoring that possibility.


    Probably why yeltson kept the rates down for so long, it would be hard to ignore the ramifications if the rates stayed down. That and the extremely anemic recovery for 8 years of malaise.
  • GardawgGardawg Posts: 10,059 AG
    For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

    020-greed-wall-street-gekko-monty-python-creosote.png
    “Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves.

    Heres Tom with the Weather.”
  • mplspugmplspug Palmetto FloridaPosts: 12,878 AG
    Gardawg wrote: »
    For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

    Said a very poor person once.

    You guys prefer inflation?

    Captain Todd Approves

  • Bimini TwistedBimini Twisted Posts: 11,444 AG
    mustang190 wrote: »
    And as soon as someone proposes a spending cut or eliminating a government agency or department people like heatwave will scream bloody murder.

    Does that include the military, and military retirement benefits?
  • mustang190mustang190 Posts: 10,104 AG
    Does that include the military, and military retirement benefits?

    I have said many times that there is a difference between military spending and defense spending. Obviously you don’t know the difference.
    If you add up the military retirement budget it is minuscule compared to the rest of the entitlement budget.
    And by the way, a military retirement and medical retirement was earned, unlike your Obama phone you got.
  • Bimini TwistedBimini Twisted Posts: 11,444 AG
    mustang190 wrote: »
    I have said many times that there is a difference between military spending and defense spending. Obviously you don’t know the difference.
    If you add up the military retirement budget it is minuscule compared to the rest of the entitlement budget.
    And by the way, a military retirement and medical retirement was earned, unlike your Obama phone you got.

    Last I checked I 've been paying into social security since I was sixteen years old, I'd consider those benefits earned too, yet your ilk wants to cut them.

    A government check, is a government check, no matter how you slice it. Some have cashed more than others.
  • fins4mefins4me Posts: 14,487 AG
    In the "good ol days" interest rates (for savings and loans) were in the mid and upper teens. It encouraged savings and discouraged debt. A good but sadly abandoned notion.
    ALLISON XB 21,, MERCURY 300 Opti Max Pro Series (Slightly Modified) You can't catch me!!!
    "Today is MINE"
  • dragon baitdragon bait Posts: 9,253 Admiral
    Since 2001, the cost per service member in the active-duty force has increased by 41 percent, excluding war funding and adjusting for inflation.[2] If personnel costs continue growing at that rate and the overall defense budget grows with inflation, military personnel costs will consume the entire defense budget by 2039.

    https://budget.house.gov/hbc-publication/364048/
  • mustang190mustang190 Posts: 10,104 AG
    Last I checked I 've been paying into social security since I was sixteen years old, I'd consider those benefits earned too, yet your ilk wants to cut them.

    A government check, is a government check, no matter how you slice it. Some have cashed more than others.

    Who is wanting to cut it?
    My opinion on SS is that it is a Ponzi scheme. I too have been paying in since 1975. If you were honest about it you would demand that Congress return the money back into it! Instead of using it on the general fund!
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,011 AG
    mustang190 wrote: »
    Who is wanting to cut it?

    People who understand that at current course & speed it is not sustainable. Here's a good and objective description of that perspective: https://www.fool.com/retirement/2017/03/26/heres-why-social-security-is-going-broke.aspx
    mustang190 wrote: »
    My opinion on SS is that it is a Ponzi scheme. I too have been paying in since 1975. If you were honest about it you would demand that Congress return the money back into it! Instead of using it on the general fund!

    Please share with me whatever information led you to believe that Congress took money from SS.

    Here's my source that says it did not: https://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html

    There has never been any change in the way the Social Security program is financed or the way that Social Security payroll taxes are used by the federal government. The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been "put into the general fund of the government."

    Most likely this question comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the "unified budget." This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are "on-budget." This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken "off-budget." This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are "on-budget" or "off-budget" is primarily a question of accounting practices--it has no effect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself.


    Do you care to comment on this apparent disconnect between what you said and what the Social Security Administration says?
  • mustang190mustang190 Posts: 10,104 AG
    Tarponator wrote: »
    People who understand that at current course & speed it is not sustainable. Here's a good and objective description of that perspective: https://www.fool.com/retirement/2017/03/26/heres-why-social-security-is-going-broke.aspx



    Please share with me whatever information led you to believe that Congress took money from SS.

    Here's my source that says it did not: https://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html

    There has never been any change in the way the Social Security program is financed or the way that Social Security payroll taxes are used by the federal government. The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been "put into the general fund of the government."

    Most likely this question comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the "unified budget." This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are "on-budget." This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken "off-budget." This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are "on-budget" or "off-budget" is primarily a question of accounting practices--it has no effect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself.


    Do you care to comment on this apparent disconnect between what you said and what the Social Security Administration says?

    So where is the money then?? I think we both agree it is a shell game.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,011 AG
    We have already covered that: In the Social Security trust fund.

    In short and by law, the assets in OASI are held in government bonds: https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/describeoasi.html

    Here is the balance sheet: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4a3.html

    It has been that way since 1940.

    Any more questions?
  • FinfinderFinfinder Posts: 9,999 Admiral
    This thread is about eight years too late
  • mplspugmplspug Palmetto FloridaPosts: 12,878 AG
    We should be allowed to invest half of our SS payments in Bitcoins.

    Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

    Captain Todd Approves

  • mustang190mustang190 Posts: 10,104 AG
    mplspug wrote: »
    We should be allowed to invest half of our SS payments in Bitcoins.

    Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

    Won’t happen. The government hates competition.
  • mustang190mustang190 Posts: 10,104 AG
    Tarponator wrote: »
    We have already covered that: In the Social Security trust fund. G

    In short and by law, the assets in OASI are held in government bonds: https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/describeoasi.html

    Here is the balance sheet: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4a3.html

    It has been that way since 1940.

    Any more questions?

    Yeah! Where the hell is the money?
    Everything I have read is the Ponzi scheme is going broke.
    But we all know that politicians in DC are the best money managers.
  • treemanjohntreemanjohn Posts: 5,129 Admiral
    They're no such thing as money any more. It's all based on perception with nothing backing it up. It's all paper

    SSA was passed in 1935 started collecting taxes in 1937 and we abandoned the gold standard in 1933. That's not an accident
    We’re like the piggy bank that everybody is robbing, and that ends
  • Bimini TwistedBimini Twisted Posts: 11,444 AG
    Never in the past have exiles and refugees been able to flee oppressive governments and their home countries with all their wealth, with simply a password in their head.

    Could be a revolutionary, literally, game changer.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,011 AG
    mustang190 wrote: »
    Yeah! Where the hell is the money?
    Everything I have read is the Ponzi scheme is going broke.
    But we all know that politicians in DC are the best money managers.

    I already told you were the money is. Please see post #18 if you missed it.

    Oddly enough, in the 75+ years of Social Security they have never missed an obligation.

    You should be such a good money manager. Hell, so should I.

    But you're right, the projected outflows will exceed the inflows, and when the cost of care is factored into the equation, most economists (you know, the guys you liken to a criminal syndicate) agree that Social Security is in trouble.

    Which is all the more reason to take up some of the suggestions for reforms....and precisely why a tax cut at this time is the wrong idea.

    But perhaps it's easier for you to think of it as a Ponzi scheme....good thing that won't stop you from cashing your checks.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,011 AG
    They're no such thing as money any more. It's all based on perception with nothing backing it up. It's all paper

    Very true. The US Dollar is properly called a fiat currency.
    SSA was passed in 1935 started collecting taxes in 1937 and we abandoned the gold standard in 1933. That's not an accident

    Connect the dots for me. What's not an accident? What's the larger play?
  • mustang190mustang190 Posts: 10,104 AG
    Tarponator wrote: »
    I already told you were the money is. Please see post #18 if you missed it.

    Oddly enough, in the 75+ years of Social Security they have never missed an obligation.

    You should be such a good money manager. Hell, so should I.

    But you're right, the projected outflows will exceed the inflows, and when the cost of care is factored into the equation, most economists (you know, the guys you liken to a criminal syndicate) agree that Social Security is in trouble.

    Which is all the more reason to take up some of the suggestions for reforms....and precisely why a tax cut at this time is the wrong idea.

    But perhaps it's easier for you to think of it as a Ponzi scheme....good thing that won't stop you from cashing your checks.

    Do you know the difference in a payroll tax, ie. social security/ Medicare deduction and a income tax withholding?
  • dave44dave44 Posts: 11,773 AG
    We have to be very careful here, despite all the assurances by some of our members, companies are announcing raises, bonuses, reinvestment, new hiring and a brighter outlook because of the corporate tax rate cut.

    That’s gotta hurt.
  • CyclistCyclist Posts: 23,346 AG
    dave44 wrote: »
    We have to be very careful here, despite all the assurances by some of our members, companies are announcing raises, bonuses, reinvestment, new hiring and a brighter outlook because of the corporate tax rate cut.

    That’s gotta hurt.

    Actually they are not. They are buying back stock and paying higher dividends to wealthy share holders.
  • mplspugmplspug Palmetto FloridaPosts: 12,878 AG
    Time to polish up the resume! Happy days are here again!

    Captain Todd Approves

  • dave44dave44 Posts: 11,773 AG
    Cyclist wrote: »
    Actually they are not. They are buying back stock and paying higher dividends to wealthy share holders.

    Actually it’s time to close the huffpo page and pay attention. Start looking around. It will mean more to you if you find it for yourself.
Sign In or Register to comment.