From the event last night

mule_eer

Freshman
May 6, 2002
20,439
59
48
I noticed a couple of interesting things.

Trump spoke against the investigation of his campaign, claiming that the D's were looking to imprison their political rivals. Shortly after that, he mentioned that the fantastic AG was going to look into Hillary.

Trump spoke negatively about the move to socialism, then immediately spoke about protecting Medicare and Social Security.
 

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,601
818
113
I noticed a couple of interesting things.

Trump spoke against the investigation of his campaign, claiming that the D's were looking to imprison their political rivals. Shortly after that, he mentioned that the fantastic AG was going to look into Hillary.

Trump spoke negatively about the move to socialism, then immediately spoke about protecting Medicare and Social Security.
The State Dept determined there was culpability so why wouldnt the DOJ look into it just like they did Trump?
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,650
6,243
113
I noticed a couple of interesting things.

Trump spoke against the investigation of his campaign, claiming that the D's were looking to imprison their political rivals. Shortly after that, he mentioned that the fantastic AG was going to look into Hillary.

Trump spoke negatively about the move to socialism, then immediately spoke about protecting Medicare and Social Security.

If both were made voluntary rather than compulsory and funded privately instead of through Government how many of you freedom Loving Leftists would support those reforms?
(BTW, those are his proposals for "saving" both)
 

Airport

All-American
Dec 12, 2001
86,309
7,014
113
I noticed a couple of interesting things.

Trump spoke against the investigation of his campaign, claiming that the D's were looking to imprison their political rivals. Shortly after that, he mentioned that the fantastic AG was going to look into Hillary.

Trump spoke negatively about the move to socialism, then immediately spoke about protecting Medicare and Social Security.
Dems are always going demagogue the SS and medicare to it's uninformed electorate.
 

mule_eer

Freshman
May 6, 2002
20,439
59
48
If both were made voluntary rather than compulsory and funded privately instead of through Government how many of you freedom Loving Leftists would support those reforms?
(BTW, those are his proposals for "saving" both)
Where do you see that those are his proposals for Medicare and Social Security? That wasn't specified in his comment. It's also not on his campaign website as his policy position. It has yet to be something that I've seen him propose as part of a legislative agenda item.
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,650
6,243
113
Where do you see that those are his proposals for Medicare and Social Security? That wasn't specified in his comment. It's also not on his campaign website as his policy position. It has yet to be something that I've seen him propose as part of a legislative agenda item.

Of course it doesn't get accurately covered in the Socialist media, and when it is mentioned they always attack it as a "plan to destroy Social Security and Medicare".

There are very thoughtful analysis pieces on the idea though outside of the main news media, and philosophically this is Trump's long term plan to rescue both programs from fiscal insolvency.

Trump's top economic advisor has a surprising take on Social Security

https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/07/19/trumps-top-economic-advisor-has-a-surprising-take.aspx

Excerpt

Kudlow backs the idea of partially or fully privatizing Social Security to allow working Americans control over a portion of their retirement benefit. To be fair, the average rate of return on Social Security's asset reserves is a much healthier 2.9% today. But if working Americans could invest in the stock market over the long term, they would have an opportunity to best this 2.9% return.

The danger with privatization is that the American public isn't very knowledgeable when it comes to understanding investing basics
 

mule_eer

Freshman
May 6, 2002
20,439
59
48
Of course it doesn't get accurately covered in the Socialist media, and when it is mentioned they always attack it as a "plan to destroy Social Security and Medicare".

There are very thoughtful analysis pieces on the idea though outside of the main news media, and philosophically this is Trump's long term plan to rescue both programs from fiscal insolvency.

Trump's top economic advisor has a surprising take on Social Security

https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/07/19/trumps-top-economic-advisor-has-a-surprising-take.aspx

Excerpt

Kudlow backs the idea of partially or fully privatizing Social Security to allow working Americans control over a portion of their retirement benefit. To be fair, the average rate of return on Social Security's asset reserves is a much healthier 2.9% today. But if working Americans could invest in the stock market over the long term, they would have an opportunity to best this 2.9% return.

The danger with privatization is that the American public isn't very knowledgeable when it comes to understanding investing basics
Umm, the Trump campaign website is part of the socialist media? And even your link shows what you describe as Kudlow's plan, not Trump's. And that plan is 12 years old - predating the 2008 crash. They detail Trump's plan which is basically to stay the course and let economic improvement fill the gaps.
 

bamaEER

Freshman
May 29, 2001
32,435
60
0
I’m just amazed that Biff is still obsessed with Hillary. She lives rent free in his head and he can’t stop obsessing over her. 2016 election is apparently not over.
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,650
6,243
113
Where do you see that those are his proposals for Medicare and Social Security? That wasn't specified in his comment. It's also not on his campaign website as his policy position. It has yet to be something that I've seen him propose as part of a legislative agenda item.


Here is another story on the concept, (distorted of course by media opposition) but it is a concept Trump and his advisors have advocated to rescue these vital programs from Government fiscal mismanagement.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/26/privatization-is-really-a-plan-to-dismantle-social-security.html

excerpt
Key points
  • Younger workers can wait out market dips, but those about to retire have less of a cushion against portfolio losses, making safer Social Security savings all the more important.
  • If GOP survives the 2018 midterm elections still in control of both the White House and Congress, Social Security privatization may snake its way into the forefront again.
  • Social Security is income insurance, while privatization would mean playing the markets with all the attendant risk.
 

mule_eer

Freshman
May 6, 2002
20,439
59
48
Here is another story on the concept, (distorted of course by media opposition) but it is a concept Trump and his advisors have advocated to rescue these vital programs from Government fiscal mismanagement.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/26/privatization-is-really-a-plan-to-dismantle-social-security.html

excerpt
Key points
  • Younger workers can wait out market dips, but those about to retire have less of a cushion against portfolio losses, making safer Social Security savings all the more important.
  • If GOP survives the 2018 midterm elections still in control of both the White House and Congress, Social Security privatization may snake its way into the forefront again.
  • Social Security is income insurance, while privatization would mean playing the markets with all the attendant risk.
And where is Trump quoted in this piece? I'm not disagreeing that the idea is out there. It was pushed in the early oughts as a possible solution. The closest you have come to linking that idea to Trump is that his economic advisor was part of that push in the oughts with no comment recently still pushing that agenda. That article also clearly outlined Trump's plan for Soc Sec, basically improve the economy and let that push the problem further out. Neither link said a word about Medicare.
 

Boomboom521

Redshirt
Mar 14, 2014
20,115
6
0
And where is Trump quoted in this piece? I'm not disagreeing that the idea is out there. It was pushed in the early oughts as a possible solution. The closest you have come to linking that idea to Trump is that his economic advisor was part of that push in the oughts with no comment recently still pushing that agenda. That article also clearly outlined Trump's plan for Soc Sec, basically improve the economy and let that push the problem further out. Neither link said a word about Medicare.
It’s “us and them” always
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,650
6,243
113
Umm, the Trump campaign website is part of the socialist media? And even your link shows what you describe as Kudlow's plan, not Trump's. And that plan is 12 years old - predating the 2008 crash. They detail Trump's plan which is basically to stay the course and let economic improvement fill the gaps.

The last half of what you posted is Trump's ongoing plan to temporarily address both program's pending insolvency. His long term fix is privatization and giving younger workers the option of choosing alternative self funded retirement insurance and medical insurance through private sources for their golden years.
 

WVU82_rivals

Senior
May 29, 2001
199,091
693
0
Trump spoke against the investigation of his campaign, claiming that the D's were looking to imprison their political rivals. Shortly after that, he mentioned that the fantastic AG was going to look into Hillary.

OK, what laws did Trump break ???

and what laws did Hilliary break ?

are you that short sighted ?
 

Mntneer

Sophomore
Oct 7, 2001
10,192
196
0
I noticed a couple of interesting things.

Trump spoke against the investigation of his campaign, claiming that the D's were looking to imprison their political rivals. Shortly after that, he mentioned that the fantastic AG was going to look into Hillary.

Trump spoke negatively about the move to socialism, then immediately spoke about protecting Medicare and Social Security.

It's Trump. He's a typical populist. He's not a Conservative, or a Liberal, he's a leaf on the wind. A big.... fat.... orange... leaf.... on the wind.
 

mule_eer

Freshman
May 6, 2002
20,439
59
48
The last half of what you posted is Trump's ongoing plan to temporarily address both program's pending insolvency. His long term fix is privatization and giving younger workers the option of choosing alternative self funded retirement insurance and medical insurance through private sources for their golden years.
I'm gonna need a reference for that. I think this is a possible agenda item in a second term - no future elections to worry about - but it is not attributed to Trump at this point in anything I can find, and that includes his campaign site for the 2020 election.

One of your earlier links pointed out why Trump was not going after retirement entitlements (Soc Sec & Medicare). He views them as political losers. I think he's right. I always say that old people vote. You say the words reform & social security in the same breath on the campaign trail, and you are putting votes at risk.
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,650
6,243
113
I'm gonna need a reference for that. I think this is a possible agenda item in a second term - no future elections to worry about - but it is not attributed to Trump at this point in anything I can find, and that includes his campaign site for the 2020 election.

One of your earlier links pointed out why Trump was not going after retirement entitlements (Soc Sec & Medicare). He views them as political losers. I think he's right. I always say that old people vote. You say the words reform & social security in the same breath on the campaign trail, and you are putting votes at risk.

I'll link you to Trump's own thoughts on it here:
https://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Donald_Trump_Social_Security.htm

Some analysis on where his philosophical affinity for it lies here:
https://thefederalist.com/2018/05/2...ty-theyd-support-privatizing-social-security/

And his ongoing efforts despite opposition from Democrats & Republicans in his own party opposing him on it here:
https://www.ncpssm.org/entitledtokn...s-commitment-to-cut-social-security-medicare/

Again, Trump's economic adviser is NOT acting on his own! Trump fully supports Larry Kudlow's desires as an agenda for the eventual elimination of Government funding for both Social Security and Medicare. The tactics achieving that as a legislative item which can pass reluctant members of Congress in BOTH parties who are afraid of their own shadows is obviously part of his ongoing strategy to privatize both programs.

However it is unarguable this is where Trump's long term objectives on those programs exist, the only question is implementing his strategy in the face of strong opposition to the general idea from Socialist members of the "swamp" in BOTH parties.
 

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,601
818
113
I’m just amazed that Biff is still obsessed with Hillary. She lives rent free in his head and he can’t stop obsessing over her. 2016 election is apparently not over.
Interesting. Hillary said she would accept the results if the election yet she hasnt.
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,650
6,243
113
@mule_eer just some more to support my suggestion this is nothing new for Trump, and has always been part of his long term view towards these programs.

A Republican privatization of Social Security is a real possibility
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2017/01/15/a-republican-privatization-of-social-security-is-a.aspx


excerpt
what can't be ignored are the clear ties Trump and members of his cabinet have had to the idea of privatizing Social Security, even if those ties are many, many years old.

Privatizing Social Security involves setting aside a portion of your lifetime benefits, or all of your lifetime benefits, in a special account that you'd be able to control. Right now, Social Security's more than $2.8 trillion in spare cash is almost entirely invested in special issues bonds for Trusts. These bonds have yields ranging from 1.375% to north of 5%, albeit the Federal Reserve's multi-year stretch of record low interest rates has been weighing down the yields of new bond issues. In other words, Social Security's spare cash is earning very low returns. Privatizing Social Security would allow workers the option of investing their benefits however they see fit, perhaps even generating a greater return in the process.

...more
In 2000, when Trump released his book The America We Deserve, he described his vision of privatizing Social Security. Here's an excerpt from his book:

The solution to the Great Social Security crisis couldn't be more obvious. Allow every American to dedicate some portion of their payroll taxes to a personal Social Security account that they could own and invest in stocks and bonds. Federal guidelines would make sure that your money is diversified, that it is invested in sound mutual funds or bonds, and not in emu ranches. The national savings rate would soar and billions of dollars would be cycled from savings, to productive assets, to retirement money. And unlike the previous systems, the assets in this retirement account could be left to one's heirs, used to start a business, or anything else one desires.
 
Last edited:

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,650
6,243
113
@mule_eer ...and on Medicare

Trump agenda: Privatization of Social security and Medicare
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/201...tization-of-medicare-and-social-security.html

excerpt: (from analysis discussed on the issue)
"It’s a way to make the federal government’s balance sheet look better, because both of these are expensive programs. They’re expensive not because they’re inefficient. They’re extremely efficient. They’re expensive because healthcare costs, private as well as public, are rising astronomically high, and we need to control healthcare costs in the private sector as well as in the public sector.

We shouldn’t be shifting costs and what the block rated Medicaid and turning Medicare into Obamacare does, is it shifts costs from the federal government, in the case of Medicaid, to the states, and in the case of Medicare, to seniors and people with disabilities".

...more
"What this privatizing means is, instead of setting the money aside and putting it in a trust fund in the government and having these guaranteed benefits, it would be invested in the stock market and you’d have the ups and downs of the stock market, all the risks, and if you run out of money, that’s your problem. You’re on your own. That’s Social Security.

Medicare right now, you sign up, you’ve got your card, you’ve earned it your whole working life. You go to a hospital, you go to your doctor, you present the card, and the costs are paid for. What this would do is the federal government would say, “Here’s some money, go out on the market and go talk to all these various insurance companies and figure out what you want.” Now, before Medicare was enacted, that’s what we had, except without the government subsidy.
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,650
6,243
113
@mule_eer

Trump ran on protecting Medicare, but his health Secretary wants to Privatize it.
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/29...-health-secretary-pick-wants-to-privatize-it/

That's enough for now. As I said when I first brought this up to you, most of the media coverage you will find is reported negatively, as efforts of Trump to either "dismantle" or "remove" retirement and medical insurance for older Americans. However, Trump has a two pronged approach to save both of these programs.

The first half is to stop the red ink, and make them sustainable short term for those who need it now. Longer term, the idea is to allow younger potential recipients to either opt out of the mandatory funding of these programs, and either voluntarily sign up for them, or go into the private equity markets to purchase their own individual insurance funded through private investments.

I don't think this is arguable in terms on where Trump stands on either issue.
 

WVUBRU

Freshman
Aug 7, 2001
24,731
62
0
In all fairness, the 2016 election popular vote showed socialism over capitalism.........
Wrong. Hillary is not a socialist and that election was not a referendum on either. And neither will 2020. Don't fall into the lies the right spews. This country will not become a socialist society.
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,650
6,243
113
Wrong. Hillary is not a socialist and that election was not a referendum on either. And neither will 2020. Don't fall into the lies the right spews. This country will not become a socialist society.

You two argue over who is or is not more Socialist, meantime the rest of us will vote for Freedom and continued restraints on Leviathan.
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,650
6,243
113
In all fairness, the 2016 election popular vote showed socialism over capitalism.........

Who votes "for" Socialism? Usually when and where Socialists come into power, it's through violent revolution and/or overthrow of an existing government, then no one is allowed to vote them (Socialists) out once their income redistribution schemes fail.

Exhibit A and our most recent example is Venezuela. No one there wants anything more to do with that Socialist experiment which is a dismal failure. Why aren't they (Venezuelan people) allowed to vote it out of power?
 

mule_eer

Freshman
May 6, 2002
20,439
59
48
I'll link you to Trump's own thoughts on it here:
https://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Donald_Trump_Social_Security.htm

Some analysis on where his philosophical affinity for it lies here:
https://thefederalist.com/2018/05/2...ty-theyd-support-privatizing-social-security/

And his ongoing efforts despite opposition from Democrats & Republicans in his own party opposing him on it here:
https://www.ncpssm.org/entitledtokn...s-commitment-to-cut-social-security-medicare/

Again, Trump's economic adviser is NOT acting on his own! Trump fully supports Larry Kudlow's desires as an agenda for the eventual elimination of Government funding for both Social Security and Medicare. The tactics achieving that as a legislative item which can pass reluctant members of Congress in BOTH parties who are afraid of their own shadows is obviously part of his ongoing strategy to privatize both programs.

However it is unarguable this is where Trump's long term objectives on those programs exist, the only question is implementing his strategy in the face of strong opposition to the general idea from Socialist members of the "swamp" in BOTH parties.
The first absolutely has quotes from Trump in 2000 saying that he thought it should be privatized. It also has more recent quotes that show a change from that stance.

The second is an opinion piece about what route he think the GOP should take, not what Trump has stated is his intention.

The third has no mention of private outside of Kudlow's general statement about entitlements with no specific mention of Soc Sec or Medicare. he also said that he thought those entitlements would be addressed in the next fiscal year, the fiscal year we are in. Where's the push to privatize?

ETA: One point in there was to hit everyone worth more than $10 million with a one-time tax of 14.25% to pay off the debt. That was also from 2000. If you claim he hasn't changed lanes on benefits, why would you assume he's moved off this point?
 
Last edited:

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,650
6,243
113
Wrong. Hillary is not a socialist and that election was not a referendum on either. And neither will 2020. Don't fall into the lies the right spews. This country will not become a socialist society.

California Democrats booed John Hickenlooper for saying the exact same thing.

 
Last edited:

mule_eer

Freshman
May 6, 2002
20,439
59
48
@mule_eer just some more to support my suggestion this is nothing new for Trump, and has always been part of his long term view towards these programs.

A Republican privatization of Social Security is a real possibility
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2017/01/15/a-republican-privatization-of-social-security-is-a.aspx


excerpt
what can't be ignored are the clear ties Trump and members of his cabinet have had to the idea of privatizing Social Security, even if those ties are many, many years old.

Privatizing Social Security involves setting aside a portion of your lifetime benefits, or all of your lifetime benefits, in a special account that you'd be able to control. Right now, Social Security's more than $2.8 trillion in spare cash is almost entirely invested in special issues bonds for Trusts. These bonds have yields ranging from 1.375% to north of 5%, albeit the Federal Reserve's multi-year stretch of record low interest rates has been weighing down the yields of new bond issues. In other words, Social Security's spare cash is earning very low returns. Privatizing Social Security would allow workers the option of investing their benefits however they see fit, perhaps even generating a greater return in the process.

...more
In 2000, when Trump released his book The America We Deserve, he described his vision of privatizing Social Security. Here's an excerpt from his book:

The solution to the Great Social Security crisis couldn't be more obvious. Allow every American to dedicate some portion of their payroll taxes to a personal Social Security account that they could own and invest in stocks and bonds. Federal guidelines would make sure that your money is diversified, that it is invested in sound mutual funds or bonds, and not in emu ranches. The national savings rate would soar and billions of dollars would be cycled from savings, to productive assets, to retirement money. And unlike the previous systems, the assets in this retirement account could be left to one's heirs, used to start a business, or anything else one desires.
Again, in 2000 he was all about privatization. He's changed lanes on that since, evidenced by quotes you have referenced. I have no argument that this was his stance in 2000. In 2013 he was telling the GOP that making chanes to Soc Sec and Medicare were bad politics. The fix was to improve the economy, hence income, hence money flowing into the fund.
 

mule_eer

Freshman
May 6, 2002
20,439
59
48
@mule_eer ...and on Medicare

Trump agenda: Privatization of Social security and Medicare
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/201...tization-of-medicare-and-social-security.html

excerpt: (from analysis discussed on the issue)
"It’s a way to make the federal government’s balance sheet look better, because both of these are expensive programs. They’re expensive not because they’re inefficient. They’re extremely efficient. They’re expensive because healthcare costs, private as well as public, are rising astronomically high, and we need to control healthcare costs in the private sector as well as in the public sector.

We shouldn’t be shifting costs and what the block rated Medicaid and turning Medicare into Obamacare does, is it shifts costs from the federal government, in the case of Medicaid, to the states, and in the case of Medicare, to seniors and people with disabilities".

...more
"What this privatizing means is, instead of setting the money aside and putting it in a trust fund in the government and having these guaranteed benefits, it would be invested in the stock market and you’d have the ups and downs of the stock market, all the risks, and if you run out of money, that’s your problem. You’re on your own. That’s Social Security.

Medicare right now, you sign up, you’ve got your card, you’ve earned it your whole working life. You go to a hospital, you go to your doctor, you present the card, and the costs are paid for. What this would do is the federal government would say, “Here’s some money, go out on the market and go talk to all these various insurance companies and figure out what you want.” Now, before Medicare was enacted, that’s what we had, except without the government subsidy.
A pre-inauguration guess by an analyst who thought that might be coming. Where is the reference to Trump supporting the idea?
 

mule_eer

Freshman
May 6, 2002
20,439
59
48
@mule_eer

Trump ran on protecting Medicare, but his health Secretary wants to Privatize it.
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/29...-health-secretary-pick-wants-to-privatize-it/

That's enough for now. As I said when I first brought this up to you, most of the media coverage you will find is reported negatively, as efforts of Trump to either "dismantle" or "remove" retirement and medical insurance for older Americans. However, Trump has a two pronged approach to save both of these programs.

The first half is to stop the red ink, and make them sustainable short term for those who need it now. Longer term, the idea is to allow younger potential recipients to either opt out of the mandatory funding of these programs, and either voluntarily sign up for them, or go into the private equity markets to purchase their own individual insurance funded through private investments.

I don't think this is arguable in terms on where Trump stands on either issue.
Same as the other Medicare hit, pre-inauguration guess by someone based on old comments by a potential appointee.
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,650
6,243
113
The first absolutely has quotes from Trump in 2000 saying that he thought it should be privatized. It also has more recent quotes that show a change from that stance.

The second is an opinion piece about what route he think the GOP should take, not what Trump has stated is his intention.

The third has no mention of private outside of Kudlow's general statement about entitlements with no specific mention of Soc Sec or Medicare. he also said that he thought those entitlements would be addressed in the next fiscal year, the fiscal year we are in. Where's the push to privatize?

Again, Larry Kudlow doesn't speak of Trump's economic policy objectives or beliefs on his own. He speaks for Trump! In case you haven't noticed, we're in the middle of an election cycle where these issues will be front and center. Trump needs super majorities in both Houses to have any chance of implementing these ideas since Democrats (and some Republicans) will NEVER support privatization of any Government run programs.

However as I mentioned, this is Trump's governing philosophy...from Health Insurance, to Education, to Space exploration, all the way up to and including Social Security and Medicare. You correctly mentioned there is the political reality that Americans must be convinced privatization works better than Government funding before legislation proposing such can be supported and passed.

This is why we vote. You're arguing something about Trump you claim doesn't exist, I'm arguing something about him that's part of his core philosophy regarding his views on Government's role in our lives.