Earlier quoted context omitted.
State government pensions are totally unrelated to Social Security. Under Federal law and under many state constitutions, vested benefits under state and municipal employee pension plans are a property right, and cannot be reduced unilaterally (depending on the theory, either because of the Takings Clause or Contracts Clause of the Federal constitution). And because, unlike private pensions and the USPS, Federal law…
We just spent 8 years of another party in the White House, and they didn’t solve the problem. So no, it’s not one party - it’s both. And that’s what the problem is.
Half of the US government's financial assets are student loans
291–294 of 294 posts
Re: Half of the US government's financial assets are student loans
#292Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, there are scary and potentially troubling things going on in the world. If you are waiting for scary things to pass, you'll wait forever. There will never be a perfect utopian time when the economy is running 100% efficiently, when humanity is in perfect harmony with nature, when there are zero threats of war, etc. Your argument doesn't address this simple truth: there has never been a better time and place for…
I agree with you that the Titanic is a wonderful, marvelous vessel. I'm just asking, "Hey, is that an iceberg?"
The idea that civilization will die has been a remote possibility for virtually all of human history. That we should not have children because of this remote possibility is fear-driven foolishness.
If you don't want or can't have children, no judgment. But let's not claim the reason is because civilization is so terrible - when in fact it's the best it's ever been, especially in rich first-world nations of the West.
Re: Half of the US government's financial assets are student loans
#293Earlier quoted context omitted.
State government pensions are totally unrelated to Social Security. Under Federal law and under many state constitutions, vested benefits under state and municipal employee pension plans are a property right, and cannot be reduced unilaterally (depending on the theory, either because of the Takings Clause or Contracts Clause of the Federal constitution). And because, unlike private pensions and the USPS, Federal law…
We just spent 8 years of another party in the White House, and they didn’t solve the problem. So no, it’s not one party - it’s both. And that’s what the problem is.
If you want to criticize Democrats, they did choose to expand Medicaid and Medicare without a more comprehensive long-term financing plan. OTOH, unlike the GOP tax reform, these expansions were at least nominally revenue neutral thanks to some targeted tax increases, the insurance mandate, etc. Democrats may spend but they _tax_ and spend, which is better than spending or (as Republicans do) cut taxes and spend.
Republicans could come to the table and attempt to compromise with Democrats. Democrats would want to expand benefits. Republicans would like to cut them, at the very least, if not eliminate benefits or privatize the entire program. But compromise theoretically could be fairly easy. But Republicans are committed to a nihilistic "starve the beast" strategy. That's the crux of the problem. Republican ideology has become so extreme that compromise is literally anathema. It's no coincidence that old-school Republicans have been bowing out left-and-right.
I see similar trends happening on the left with an insistence on single-payer healthcare, but it's early and not even remotely comparable to where Republican politics is at.