Thursday, January 13, 2005

Good Stuff

We interrupt this masturbatory blog to bring you a serious topic for consideration:

The Rude Pundit's altern-a-take on Social Security reform...Since he speaks so eloquently, I'll do the opposite: well fuckin' said, Rude Pundit, well said.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming of casual racism and unbridled egotism.

23 Comments:

At 9:09 AM, Blogger ethan said...

i don't know nearly enough on this topic, but isn't there a way to allow those who already have life insurance and/or disability insurance through alternate means (work, etc.) to opt out of that portion of SS?

for fuck's sake, we can put a man on the moon but we can't figure out a way to make SS have options that would be beneficial to many different types of people?

 
At 9:26 AM, Blogger Ace Cowboy said...

I'm willing to listen to arguments about privitization, I've got an open mind. But I just think it's not as simple as Bushie and his fellow d-bags make it out to be. It's not just "take your money, own your life, you win in the end," which is exactly the way the president pitches it every time he hits the stump.

The real question is: What's the fuckin urgency? Yes, it needs to be fixed in the next 20 years or so, but SS will not reach insolvency 'til 2042! What's the fuckin rush, Mr. President? This is priority numero uno? Let's relax, let's get a bunch of economists from both sides together and reach a consensus, with options for different types of Americans -- it can be done. Greenspan and company helped saved SS in 1983 through a commission and its findings, why can't we do the same in 2005? We can. So my point is, let's slow the fuck down and look at the BEST possible solution, not the quickest. This is not a situation that requires urgency, it requires careful thought.

I posted that article because it provides a look at reform that I haven't seen anywhere, and it's good to get some diversity of opinion. I do agree with the guy for the most part, though, for the record.

 
At 12:27 PM, Blogger stephie said...

This is not about SS reform but I agree... What's the hurry.

This comment is about The Surreal Life from your last post. Okay, I had never watched it before but last night my husband turned to VH1 to check out the Hottest Hotties or something and they had The Surreal Life on and I have to tell you something... There is nothing funnier than a drunk Mini Me being carried to bed by a (suprisingly good looking all grown up) Peter Brady! Then Mini Me was moaning like he was having an orgasm or something... Naked and pissing on a wall later on... Good shit man. Funny shit.

 
At 1:08 PM, Blogger poophopanonymous22 said...

ahh i too stumbled across a drunken mini me last night, just at the time stephie described above. not sure what was funnier, the moaning, seeing the brat in a house with white people, or seeing chyna in pj's, it was like comedic sensory overload

 
At 1:30 PM, Blogger The Ambiguously Gay Uno said...

I've never watched the Surreal Life before, but on Howard this morning they had the noise that Mini-Me was making that night. They kept playing it over and over again- it was disturbing to say the least.

 
At 1:49 PM, Blogger ahren said...

"what's the hurry?"

>> maybe the hurry is the philosophical problem sane people have with the concept of the government using its monopoly on force to take property from people and disperse it for the "greater good" as the government sees fit. i mean, that did work really well for the nazis though. and stalin. so maybe it's the way to go after all.

 
At 1:55 PM, Blogger Ace Cowboy said...

Ahhh, just move to NH already with the rest of your Free State anarchists...the rest of us with some "sane" sense of personal responsibility and care for the welfare of others will try to keep the rest of the population from being so poor they resort to stealing all your shit.

 
At 2:04 PM, Blogger The Ambiguously Gay Uno said...

The Nazi's had pieces of Flair... Just ask Prince Harry.

 
At 3:45 PM, Blogger ethan said...

you guys want some extreeeme fajitas?

 
At 4:15 PM, Blogger hoobs said...

wow, ace! where has the old ace gone? the one i used to know would never say a phrase like "sense of personal responsibility and care for the welfare of others." but i like it. next thing we know, you'll be trying to save the spotted owl and recycling pepsi cans. power to the people. three day weekends for all!

 
At 4:45 PM, Blogger Ace Cowboy said...

Fuck the spotted owl (that good enough?). And fuck three day weekends, I'll be here on Monday. Hey, I like black people, I can't get MLK Day off? Weak sauce.

The more the country moves right, the more I find myself goin' left. So bring on that owl...actually, I found myself extolling the virtues of environmental controls for big corporations yesterday...weird, eh? I used to love littering.

"Can't. Get. Left." --Clark W. Griswold

 
At 6:25 PM, Blogger ahren said...

"the rest of us with some "sane" sense of personal responsibility and care for the welfare of others will try to keep the rest of the population from being so poor they resort to stealing all your shit."

your statement says everything about its philosophical origins very concisely. if you really have a sense of personal responbsibility and care for the welfare of others, why on earth would you need the government to mandate your (and others') participation in social wealth redistribution programs?? if you truly believe that this sense of "responsibility" burns so intensely in so many, why can't we set up private, voluntary programs to address these issues? i believe we can, because i believe the vast majority of people really do understand the value of social investment.

it's really misanthropic to assume that just because people are poor, they would resort to "stealing my shit." that argument basically reduces to, "i'll steal some of your shit now and give it to the people who i think would otherwise steal your shit of their own devices."

it's not the poor people i have to defend my "shit" from, it's the central planners.

 
At 7:33 AM, Blogger ethan said...

"I used to love littering."

littering and...
littering and...
littering and...

smokin' the reefer.

 
At 9:25 AM, Blogger Ace Cowboy said...

Did you say "yeah, sure" or "yes, sir?"

Ahren, that's the second time in one day you've used the words "central planning." I don't know, but every time I think the libertarian ethos seems remotely appealing out comes this weird paranoia about the grabby hands of government. Do you honestly think private, voluntary programs are going to accomplish what the government can accomplish in collecting funds? I mean, it's not like they're just stealing that money from you...and besides, you probably pay a lower tax rate than 90% of the world, so you don't have it so bad.

Without Social Security, half of all seniors would be living in poverty...as it stands, the poverty rate for seniors is only 10.2 percent. When you and your government-hatin' cronies can envision and implement a logical plan with this success rate, I'll gladly sign on. Like I said, I'm open to ideas, reform sounds lovely, but this current everyone-for-themsleves carve-out private accounts bullshit just ain't gonna cut it. And even this administration, which is great at transparency, has admitted the transition costs to privitization could total $2 trillion. Nobody's figured out how to pay for that just yet...

Ehhh, I don't wanna debate no' mo'. I'm tired today, my brain hurts.

 
At 10:19 AM, Blogger Gypsy Rose said...

I agree, Ace. Does it really matter if anarchy would ensue without a public Social Security program? That’s not even a thought for me. How about keeping it in its current state because it is the decent and humane thing to do?

It is the very least that we can do as a society for our elderly. It is an embarrassment the way that older people are treated in America. Nearly two million older Americans are living in nursing homes and studies show that 1 in 3 of those living in homes will suffer some sort of abuse.

Unfortunately, America has demonstrated a need for a “central planner” when it comes to our elderly. We’re not even taking proper care of them with the SS safety net in place. I shudder to think at how many of our senior citizens be treated without that financial incentive.

Now we have an entire generation of aging Americans without pensions. Why is that? Because the same corporations receiving welfare from the government have deemed it unnecessary to continue funding pension plans. I would be all for privatizing SS if companies upped workers’ salaries to accommodate for the lack of defined benefit pension plans. But they haven’t and they won’t. Salary increases have not even kept pace with inflation in recent years. What we are left with are corporations fattening their own bottom lines and executive salaries, while an aging generation of working Americans scrapes by unable (not necessarily unwilling) to save for their own futures.

We could afford to keep SS afloat if the powers that be wanted to, but they don’t. I don’t see what is so compassionate about this form of conservatism.

 
At 10:43 AM, Blogger Ace Cowboy said...

Always good for some back-up, Gypsy, couldn't agree more.

 
At 12:18 PM, Blogger ahren said...

the "half the seniors would be living in poverty" argument is retarded, because you're referring to people who spent their lives paying into a program, then evaluating their situation as if the program just disappeared. why not let those same people take all the money they paid into the program over their lives, spend/invest/save it as they choose, and then we'll evaluate their situation?

it's kinda a pointless argument for us to have really, because we've reduced the situation to its philosophical premises, and when it comes down to it-- you feel it's ok for a majority to legislate away the property rights of certain groups of people, if the "intention" is good, and i never think it's ok to legislate away people's property rights.

 
At 12:46 PM, Blogger Gypsy Rose said...

You're right. It's a fundamentally different belief system. You assume that everyone has the know how to produce a suitable return on their investment and if they don't it's their own dependent fault.

I'm just saying that if we can afford to pay interest on the billions in treasury bills owned by Asian nations, we can afford to guarantee a suitable return on miniscule individual retirement funds to ensure a basic (very basic) standard of living for the elderly. I don't want the government to run my life, but I don't mind a system ensuring basic security for those less young and sprightly and financially aware than myself.

Social Security began after the Great Depression and we haven't had that kind of financial devestation since, as a nation. Does it have to happen again in order for us to value FDR's brilliant social program?

 
At 2:34 PM, Blogger ahren said...

"I don't want the government to run my life, but I don't mind a system ensuring basic security for those less young and sprightly and financially aware than myself."

>> well, i mind it. and that's the fundamental difference between our ideal systems. yours demands something of me, whether i want to participate or not. mine demands nothing of you. you want to legislate your moral code upon other people, at the expense of their freedom. i think that sucks.

 
At 2:55 PM, Blogger Ace Cowboy said...

Allright, we agree to disagree. Let's just make up and move on...

Ahren, if I ever form a militia, you're numero uno on my list of invitees.

 
At 4:55 AM, Blogger ahren said...

"i'm just saying that if we can afford to pay interest on the billions in treasury bills owned by Asian nations, we can afford to guarantee a suitable return on miniscule individual retirement funds to ensure a basic (very basic) standard of living for the elderly."

>> are you serious? are you seriously arguing that if we can afford to pay off money we owe other people, that we should prioritize our own comfort above those debts? you can't possibly mean that. hey, i may owe the bank $100,000 for my trailer renovation, but i just made $100 extra dollars at work this week... let's go buy a brand new satellite dish!!!! rad!!! we can catch the new episode of jerry springer before the fuzz sends us to the shelter... good plan, cunts.

 
At 10:54 AM, Blogger Gypsy Rose said...

First of all, I was perfectly willing to let you get the last word and agree to disagree, as per the blogger's request.

But since you persist, I would just like to point out that I said we can afford to do BOTH with the proper planning. I can't dignify your argument with a response beyond that. Real class act. Believe me you won't have to worry about me engaging in this discussion here again.

 
At 11:53 AM, Blogger Ace Cowboy said...

Whoa whoa whoa, just realized there was some after-the-bell action in the final round...

Well, it's time to let this die, a week after the fact. This ain't a freakin' political blog, we like to have fun here. So, let's make like the Bush administration's original war rationale and drop this thing.

Gypsy, don't let that scare you off...I, and many like-minded ctiizens, happen to agree with your perspective.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home