The Elderly Must Pay!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2010 8:53 AM GMT
    "A little–noticed law could soon result in smaller Social Security checks for hundreds of thousands of the elderly and disabled who owe the U.S. money from defaulted loans and other debts more than a decade old."

    "[T]he U.S. can collect debts to federal agencies by "offsetting," or withholding Social Security and disability payments."

    "The Treasury currently withholds benefits of 3.1 million Social Security recipients to recover defaulted student–, farm– and small–business loans, unpaid income taxes, amounts veterans owe for health care, and other debts to the government."

    The new legislation "allows Treasury's Financial Management Service to collect older debts and levels the playing field so that all eligible debts, regardless of age, are subject to debt collection."


    http://finance.yahoo.com/retirement/article/109011/defaulted-loans-may-haunt-seniors?mod=retire-planning

    It's a good thing that the major multinational banks [that made all the bad loans and engineered the financial crisis in collusion with our governments] were given trillions upon trillions of dollars that the elderly can now pay back.

    It's a good thing we "saved the banks", now we can make old people pay, we can watch the racial gaps widen, we can see the wealth gap widening, we can pay much higher taxes, and we can experience our standards of living decline rapidly.

    Good thing we saved the banks.

    A recent study found that in the United States, socio-economic conditions are much more extreme than previously thought in terms of their racial and gendered features.

    "Women of all races bring home less income and own fewer assets, on average, than men of the same race, but for single black women the disparities are so overwhelmingly great that even in their prime working years their median wealth amounts to only $5."

    "Among the most startling revelations in the wealth data is that while single white women in the prime of their working years (ages 36 to 49) have a median wealth of $42,600 (still only 61 percent of their single white male counterparts), the median wealth for single black women is only $5."

    "Wealth, or net worth, measures the total of one's assets -- cash in the bank, stocks, bonds and real estate; minus debts -- home mortgages, auto loans, credit cards and student loans. The most recent financial data was collected before the economic downturn, so the current numbers likely are worse now than at the time of the study."


    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10068/1041225-28.stm

    If the trillions given to the banks was about "saving" the economy, why are we deconstructing our society?

    But the banks don't have to pay. They don't even have to be regulated. They were given a blank check and the authority to regulate themselves.

    Isn't "democracy" fun?

    Unless you're old, black, a woman, hispanic, disabled, Muslim, gay and... oh wait... and now pretty much everyone else.

    But at least I have choice, right?

    Pepsi... or Coca-Cola? IBM... or Mac? Democrat... or Republican?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2010 2:20 PM GMT
    Feeling like a ray of sunshine this morning, MoM?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2010 2:25 PM GMT
    Im not very educated on this matter, BUT I do know 2 things. Medicare, at the rate its going, will not be around for my future, AND I still have to pay back my student loans . . why shouldnt they?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2010 3:01 PM GMT
    I'd like to know who in Congress inserted this into a farm bill. One of the flaws of our lawmaking process, in my view, is that all kinds of unrelated amendments can be added, but the bill itself must be approved or disapproved on a single vote in each chamber, and then signed or vetoed by the President as-is (Disregarding the unconstitutional practice of "signing messages" that Bush did).

    These legislative bills are so huge that hardly anyone in Congress can read them through entirely, nor debate every item. So then we have the ludicrous situation, seen time & again, when crap like this surfaces, and lawmakers say: "I didn't see that in there," or "We didn't realize the full ramifications." Often these bills are urgently needed, and delays & battles over side issues like these amendments are not popular with voters, so they get approved, even when their flaws are discovered beforehand.

    So the question remains, which Member of Congress added this to the farm bill? AARP members here might see mention of it with more detail, an issue I expect would be of special interest to that group.
  • travelot

    Posts: 27

    Mar 12, 2010 5:40 PM GMT
    BRAVO! so much truth and this is what is going on with the HR bill. How much of the 2700+ pages actually deal with health care and how much is Pork.

    I wish someone would show the details of the whole thing. I would guess we would find only about 10% deal with true Health care issues. As with the Stimulas, Obama, after the fact, replied to a question detailing some of the content and said " I didn't know that was even in there" He doesn't even read or know what he is signing into law.

    Good, bad, for it or against it, (HR) it is the waste and pork that are in these laws that all of us need to start addressing.





    Red_Vespa saidI'd like to know who in Congress inserted this into a farm bill. One of the flaws of our lawmaking process, in my view, is that all kinds of unrelated amendments can be added, but the bill itself must be approved or disapproved on a single vote in each chamber, and then signed or vetoed by the President as-is (Disregarding the unconstitutional practice of "signing messages" that Bush did).

    These legislative bills are so huge that hardly anyone in Congress can read them through entirely, nor debate every item. So then we have the ludicrous situation, seen time & again, when crap like this surfaces, and lawmakers say: "I didn't see that in there," or "We didn't realize the full ramifications." Often these bills are urgently needed, and delays & battles over side issues like these amendments are not popular with voters, so they get approved, even when their flaws are discovered beforehand.

    So the question remains, which Member of Congress added this to the farm bill? AARP members here might see mention of it with more detail, an issue I expect would be of special interest to that group.
  • kaccioto

    Posts: 284

    Mar 12, 2010 5:59 PM GMT
    MeOhMy saidDemocrat... or Republican?


    you must be another self-loathing gay to question such things [end sardonicism]. good thread.

    as a gay man, i find amusing the public's myopia to repeatedly vote for an Administration and continue to complain about its lack of action.

    but a financier first, i'll continue to vote for Bobama.. sorry plebeian gays, have more patience and keep it down a bit, thanks.

    http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-02-23/n-y-controller-dinapoli-says-wall-st-bonuses-rose-17-in-2009.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2010 9:31 PM GMT
    reppaT saidFeeling like a ray of sunshine this morning, MoM?


    You know me, always a peach!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2010 9:36 PM GMT
    <a href=/punditkitchen.com/2010/03/04/political-pictures-nancy-pelosi-flying-monkeys/">nancy pelosi
    see more Political Pictures">
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2010 9:48 PM GMT
    Stupid question but if Medicare is going to be gone by the time I retire why do I have to pay into it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2010 9:53 PM GMT
    ATC84 saidStupid question but if Medicare is going to be gone by the time I retire why do I have to pay into it.


    I've often wondered the same thing
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2010 9:55 PM GMT
    TheIStrat said
    ATC84 saidStupid question but if Medicare is going to be gone by the time I retire why do I have to pay into it.


    I've often wondered the same thing


    So that they can take your money, too.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 13, 2010 9:28 AM GMT
    "Detroit family homes sell for just $10"

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/7427691/Detroit-family-homes-sell-for-just-10.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 13, 2010 9:32 AM GMT
    icon_eek.gif wow .. amazing!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 18, 2010 8:07 AM GMT
    "[T]he richest 1% of adults alone owned 40% of global assets in the year 2000, and that the richest 10% of adults accounted for 85% of the world total. In contrast, the bottom half of the world adult population owned barely 1% of global wealth."

    "The richest 2% of adults in the world own more than half of global household wealth."


    http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/218/46555.html

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 18, 2010 8:09 AM GMT
    kaccioto said... sorry plebeian gays, have more patience and keep it down a bit, thanks.



    hmmm...