Someone in DC with a brain?

fast_eddie_72 wrote:

poopshovel wrote: Holy crap! Do we have concensus here!? IMHO, killing the mortgage interest deduction when people are losing/walking away from their houses left and right is insane, though I do think an increase in the far-too-long-artificially-low prime rate is due (and yes, that would berkeley me, but I think it makes sense economically.)

I don't think you should just cut it, but over a very long period of time, phasing it out slowly would work. It sucks for me, but I can get behind it. As for Social Security- the problem here is that I paid in all those years, I want my pay out. (Not *me* personally, *me* collectively). So it kind of needs to be the same thing. Phase it out slowly over a very long time. When SS was passed, how long did people live? I don't know, 60s? 70s? Man, a load of folks living up in to their 80s and 90s now. But we haven't really changed the age for SS in a significant way. It's too bad. If they had done that a year at a time it would have taken care of this. But boat loads of Babby Boomers in their 60s running around in $100k Mobile Homes living off my SS payments are getting to be a pretty heavy load. Got to figure out a way to make SS more like what it was intended to be- a safety net for people who are too old and in too poor health to work. A little something to get them through the last few years of their lives. Not three decades of vacation on the backs of us working stiffs.

I know it hurts, but I think it's the way it has to be. I literally pay 10's of thousands of dollars in taxes every year that I don't see a dime of. The only time I've ever used a cop's time is when they're handing me a bill for more taxes (speeding tickets.) I pay property taxes for schools that I don't use. I pay into Medicare/Medicaid that I won't use. I pay into unemployment, even though I'll never be able to claim it.

But I know that these are, for the most part, necessary evils. I might argue with the rate I'm paying for these supposed 'services' that I'll never get any benefit from, but I know we've all got to kick in to the pot. Same goes for SS. I'm okay with making sure that grandma, who either didn't plan accordingly, or got hit from outta nowhere financially doesn't starve to death. I'm NOT okay with making someone's Bentley payment.

And, I'm sure you know this already, but it helps to have a reminder to keep you in the right mindset: Your SS money is not sitting in an account somewhere. Your SS money goes in, some gets skimmed off the top for our supreme government overlords, and what's left goes straight to granny's nursing home (...or to pay for your retired neighbor's Bentley.) When Bernie Madoff does it, people spit at him. When the feds do it, it's called "Social Security."

FOR PREZ

z31maniac wrote:

alfadriver wrote:

z31maniac wrote: I am especially a fan of the income tax rate changes. Yeah, it would suck to lose the Mortgage Interest deduction.....but a 10% lower tax rate would be nice as well. Although in reality I'm for the fairtax.

It will end up being tax neutral for most tax paying people, so in the end, you'll pay about the same amount. The point is to stop some of the excessive deductions people are making. Which I am fine with.

I wonder what the income cut-off point is, it'd be interesting to see. poop, once again I COMPLETELY AGREE with you!

Good question- but I think it varies. Based on some of the things I've heard, there are a lot of people who bought WAY above their heads, and while they can barely afford the house payments- they can largely becuase of the tax break. OTOH, there are plenty of people who have modest homes and great incomes- so once again, living within your means could be a bonus.

alfadriver wrote:

z31maniac wrote:

alfadriver wrote:

z31maniac wrote: I am especially a fan of the income tax rate changes. Yeah, it would suck to lose the Mortgage Interest deduction.....but a 10% lower tax rate would be nice as well. Although in reality I'm for the fairtax.

It will end up being tax neutral for most tax paying people, so in the end, you'll pay about the same amount. The point is to stop some of the excessive deductions people are making. Which I am fine with.

I wonder what the income cut-off point is, it'd be interesting to see. poop, once again I COMPLETELY AGREE with you!

Good question- but I think it varies. Based on some of the things I've heard, there are a lot of people who bought WAY above their heads, and while they can barely afford the house payments- they can largely becuase of the tax break. OTOH, there are plenty of people who have modest homes and great incomes- so once again, living within your means could be a bonus.

What's truly frightening, and frankly (though I hate the word) "unfair" about that scenario is that

A: While my property tax rates in bum-berkeley (no coincidence by the way - I got twice the house for half the price, and half the taxes by buying 40 miles away from work instead of right next door,) property tax rates for some folks I know are close to 70% of their mortgage payments. So while losing the mortgage interest deduction may not kill me, it may kill people 40 miles south of me.

B: It's still a tax, which means the government can decide to jack the rate to whatever arbitrary number they see fit at any time.

In reply to poopshovel:

I would assume that property tax would still be deductable. Usually big taxes are not counted toward your income... I think that's where you are going with it.

alfa, thankfully the wife and I were smart enough to buy a house that costs less than our annual gross income. I can't think of anyone that does that anymore.

poop, 70% is the property tax! CRIPES! I think our payment with principal/interest/PMI/insurance/property tax is $735, about $100/month is property tax, or only ~14%

alfadriver wrote: In reply to poopshovel: I would assume that property tax would still be deductable. Usually big taxes are not counted toward your income... I think that's where you are going with it.

Duh. (no really, DUH!) I don't know where the berkeley my brain went from "interest" to "taxes." Been a long, hectic week. Sorry!

Here's one bound to piss everyone off

1/2 the military budget (and for the love of god, let NASA go) raise the social security age and get rid of the salary cap Tort reform to reduce medical insurance costs and lower the cost of entry to the medical profession.

Boom, instant budget balancing and everyone's pissed.

GregTivo wrote: Here's one bound to piss everyone off 1/2 the military budget (and for the love of god, let NASA go) raise the social security age and get rid of the salary cap Tort reform to reduce medical insurance costs and lower the cost of entry to the medical profession. Boom, instant budget balancing and everyone's pissed.

toss in a healthy dose of "you can now buy your health insurance from another state" and hell might freeze over!

spitfirebill wrote: A guy in my church is a pretty good financial advisor and he says social security is fixable. Medicare is not. Whatever, we have got to do something and its going to hurt. I doubt anything this commission comes up with will pass, because politicans don't want to give up anything. Pretty much what Dave says ^^^.

some choices... do away with Social Security and I'll have to work 'til my 80's regardless of how much I've managed to save in 401k's and IRA's... do away with Medicare and I'll still have to work 'til my my 80's, cause there's no way in hell I could afford health ins on the open market... no matter what ObamaCare promises .... give me back what I've put in (with the interest I would have earned along the way) and I could at least make a stab at getting by...

and yes I am aware that SS was never intended to be my/anyones retirement, and I've tried to prepare... lots haven't... but I've also worked better than 40 yrs under the assumption that the cushion would be there....

Heard a bit more about this on the radio today, and the more I hear, the more I like. Here are the two biggest bullet points I came away with:

A plan to partially restructure the tax system. Basically, they'll be cutting out a bunch of deductions, but that will allow them to then lower the base tax rate.

Roughly $3 in spending cuts per $1 in increased revenue.

In short, it's the gov't financial equivalent of "Simplify, then add lightness."

Salanis wrote: In short, it's the gov't financial equivalent of "Simplify, then add lightness."

Were you drunk or sober when you typed that?

Because gov't has shown no ablity or willingness to embrace either concept...............

poopshovel wrote: Holy crap! Do we have concensus here!? IMHO, killing the mortgage interest deduction when people are losing/walking away from their houses left and right is insane, though I do think an increase in the far-too-long-artificially-low prime rate is due (and yes, that would berkeley me, but I think it makes sense economically.) Phase one of my eVil plan for Social Security: If you don't NEED it, you don't GET it. I've mentioned several times the friends of a friend who use their SS check to make the payments on their Bentley. Phase one of my eVil plan for Medicaid: Need Medicare/Medicaid? NO PROBLEM! When you apply, a case worker comes to your house. Got cable? Not anymore! Got internet? Not anymore - it's called a library. The rest of us pay for it. Use it! Got a cell phone? Sorry, baby mamma, land-line only for you. "While I'm here, I'm going to need everyone in the household to pee in a cup." Drugs or alcohol in the system of anyone in the household? Sorry! Go beg your neighbor for food or start cutting their grass for a living. Need Medicaid for a pregnancy? NO PROBLEM! As soon as we cut the cord, here's your Norplant. We'll remove when you've paid back your debt to your neighbors.

Phase two involves 2 years of mandatory community service before your 30th birthday. If you haven't done any by your 28th birthday then you get drafted. After you've completed your service you will have some skill set that the government can verify, validate, and quantify that we all agree benefits your local community. If at any point in the rest of your life you get down on your luck and need a handout it'll be easy, just go back to work doing whatever it was you did for your service.

Peru used to have a carbon-copy of our social security system. Their boomer surge happened a bit sooner and they made sweeping changes that could work here. Research if you get bored or are really interested.

oldsaw wrote:

Salanis wrote: In short, it's the gov't financial equivalent of "Simplify, then add lightness."

Were you drunk or sober when you typed that? Because gov't has shown no ablity or willingness to embrace either concept...............

Just saying that's the proposed plan. Not saying it will get passed.

oldopelguy wrote: Phase two involves 2 years of mandatory community service before your 30th birthday. If you haven't done any by your 28th birthday then you get drafted. After you've completed your service you will have some skill set that the government can verify, validate, and quantify that we all agree benefits your local community. If at any point in the rest of your life you get down on your luck and need a handout it'll be easy, just go back to work doing whatever it was you did for your service. Peru used to have a carbon-copy of our social security system. Their boomer surge happened a bit sooner and they made sweeping changes that could work here. Research if you get bored or are really interested.

Are you saying full-time community service? So me, I'm 28 with no community service, I now get "drafted" so I lose my good paying job and go on the gov't payroll?

On the surface this sounds like a terrible idea.

z31maniac wrote: Are you saying full-time community service? So me, I'm 28 with no community service, I now get "drafted" so I lose my good paying job and go on the gov't payroll? On the surface this sounds like a terrible idea.

Applying logic helps here; any such plan would HAVE to grandfathered in so extreme examples (like yours) would be avoided.

On the surface, a community-service requirement could be beneficial IF participants actually walked away with marketable skills - and there was/is a market to use them.

oldopelguy wrote: Phase two involves 2 years of mandatory community service before your 30th birthday. If you haven't done any by your 28th birthday then you get drafted. After you've completed your service you will have some skill set that the government can verify, validate, and quantify that we all agree benefits your local community.

I should first say I don't know if you are being serious or sarcastic. But...

I'm not crazy about this idea. Actually, that's putting it mildly. First of all, compulsory service sounds pretty counter to the idea of freedom to me. To use the conservative vernacular, who is the government to tell me what I have to do? And in this case, it's a good question. Probably unconstitutional. At the very least, they would have to do it the way they did health care which, counter to many reports, you are not required to buy.

Secondly, if we're going to "train" people, community service may not be the best bang for our buck. I'd rather see us invest more in education, which, after all, is training for jobs that can help our country compete on a global stage.

I should also say, I'm not sure what problem this would solve. Certainly not unemployment. As we've seen recently, many, many skilled workers end up out of work if there isn't sufficent demand for their services. Unless you suggest that the government pay them for this community work they would be doing.

Sorry, I keep thinking about this- I have an important thought to add. Take away the compulsory aspect of your plan and I absolutely love it. In fact, I really believe we need something like it. I'll make you endure an anecdote if you care to hear why.

My wife’s sister is something of a lost cause. Drugs, jail- you know the kind. She, not surprisingly, has produced a large number of children she has no ability or interest in supporting. The oldest one lived with us for a year. Get him out of the horrible environment he lives in and try to set him down the right path.

He lives with my wife’s parents who, unfortunately, live in a tough neighborhood with a school system that is beyond broken. His school there is the very definition of “dropout factory”. I believe the graduation rate is somewhere in the teens, and the percentage going on to college is in the single digits. Not much hope for a motivated kid, let alone a kid who has been abandoned by his mother, father is dead and has been bounced around from home to home. If ever there were an “at risk” kid, this is it.

When time came for him to leave us and go back “home”, he really didn’t want to go. I’ll skip the complex reasons and complications, but one he was able to articulate clearly- he didn’t want to go back to that school. All the kids are on drugs and he was quite sure he would end up in a bad group that would suck him back into the wrong direction in life. I started doing some research and learned about Job Corps. Of course the program is underfunded and the pittance they live on is too much money for him to qualify. I even suggested to my wife that he could drop out of school, get a job at a fast food place and move out of their home so a few months later he would qualify. We quickly dismissed that idea as he’s clearly not mature enough to stay focused long enough to see that through.

However, if we were to provide a program like the one you suggest- which isn’t remarkably dis-similar from Job Corps at no cost to the kids it would undoubtedly save many of them from going down the wrong path. He would have jumped at the chance to leave a poor school environment to learn a skill. But, again, it is vital that this be volunteer. Otherwise he would be stuck there with the same losers who are at the school. I’d love something that gives the kids who want a chance some option to get skills that may land them a decent job. But not just another holding cell for kids on the way to jail. We have plenty of underfunded and poorly staffed High Schools performing that job just fine as it is.

Toyman01 wrote: I figure a plan that makes everyone scream is probably a good one.

Reminded me of a saying re: diplomacy...

Which makes me a little sad, that we need to apply diplomacy with regarding internal politics.

fast_eddie_72 wrote: Sorry, I keep thinking about this- I have an important thought to add. Take away the compulsory aspect of your plan and I absolutely love it. In fact, I really believe we need something like it.

We have something like it.... and it's even allowed by the Constitution. ;-) This is the role the military has played for years... it's given millions and millions a path out of poverty and dead-end situations...

Of course the current problem (aside from the demonization of the military in many sectors) is that kids can't seem to stay out of trouble long enough to qualify... the problem there isn't "underfunded" schools (we spend more now than ever)... the main problem is lack of a family. When the majority of kids are born out of wedlock, then we have a systemic problem that no Government program is going to remedy.

wcelliot wrote: We have something like it.... and it's even allowed by the Constitution. ;-) This is the role the military has played for years... it's given millions and millions a path out of poverty and dead-end situations...

It's a good point- that's how my wife "got out". She did the National Guard and worked two jobs to get herself through school. Really impressed me, even as a young man. We talked to the nephew about it and he's thinking about it.

No demonization, but he is concerned about the idea because of Iraq and Afghanistan. It was much easier for my wife to do it during the Clinton administration when there were no signs that she would be shipped off to something like that. We could have a long discussion about it, but suffice to say, I understand his concerns and I'm not sure it would serve him well.

I have an Uncle who joined the Marines as a teenager and went to Viet Nam. My wife's father was there as well. Her dad, who the nephew is living with, has pretty serious PTSD and has a very hard time keeping any kind of decent job. My Uncle was diagnosed as a schizophrenic and died in a VA hospital of cirrhosis after years of drinking.

Actually my vision is more complicated than military service, but it would take a while to articulate. Gist is that certain jobs would earn you credit for your service, like military service, police, fire, or ems service, teaching, medical professions, road work, etc.

Any employer who could prove he provided a service that benefits the community could petition for his jobs to count, and use that benefit as a hiring incentive. Maybe some jobs would only earn you partial credit, like maybe landscaping or veterinary services would count proportionately with how much of your time is spent mowing the park or dealing with strays. It would be up to the community to determine what they would credit for based on what they need.

With that as a backdrop, add in a year for year extension to your time requirement for education. That means if you're in college for 6 years you now have until 34 to do something your community needs.

If you can't find something to do, then you get drafted. I suspect very few people would ever get drafted, and those that do would be slugs.

I'd also allow people to not participate in the mandatory service, with the understanding that they would then lose the rights that convicted felons lose. No voting and no guns. I think that's fair, if you don't contribute, you can't participate.

Sounds like an overly complicated, waste of effort.

Do you already work for the government?

Well, I'm pretty sure that's not Constitutional. And, for the constriction of our citizens, all the effort and expense... why? What problem does it solve?

It kind of gives me the willies to think about this. Sounds like something out of Soviet Russia.

fast_eddie_72 wrote: Um. Okay, I *know* that's not Constitutional. And, for making a slave labor force of our citizens, all the effort and expense... why? What problem does it solve? It kind of gives me the willies to think about this. Sounds like something out of Soviet Russia.

It punishes the poor in order to make people feel superior.

We've had the idea pushed on us that we're where we are today because all the lazy, greedy middle class and poor people in the country are making bad decisions. Which is a fanciful notion if you get your news from somewhere other than TV. A million people flat-out stealing $40K in benefits to cover their drug habits would be about equal to AIG's or Citi's or BOA's cut of TARP. And TARP is a tiny fraction of the total bailout. And the total bailout to date covers only a tiny fraction of the imaginary wealth made by financial firms by pushing credit on people they knew couldn't pay it back.

You want to talk about people who get a free ride in society, you don't focus on the poor.