Obama's giving Boehner a verbal ass-kicking

[/dev/null]

You are probably the stupidest poster on this board, and that is something!

Paging Mr Kettle

Paging Mr Kettle

 

Mr Kettle you have a call from a Mr Pot

[....lybob]

Wildly optimistic, based on a .1 reduction on a year to year study? Yeah, like that is going to throw off the actuarial studies. And the lower life expectancy statistic is more than countered by the increasing birthrates of Hispanics, which means that the rise in population will offset a one month shorter life when you're computing total benefit spending.

 

But that's ok, because you showed us a Daily Kos link, and we know how well they understand actuarial calculus.

Increased Hispanic birthrates help Social security not hurt it, more workers paying in.

[GG]

Increased Hispanic birthrates help Social security not hurt it, more workers paying in.

 

Not if the unemployment rate remains above 9%, and Hispanics stay at the lower end of the economic scale.

 

In any event, the actuarial studies already assume a phantom increase in employment & return to 3% GDP growth rates, whenever the Summer of Recovery kicks in.

 

Any day now.

 

Perhaps when temperatures hit boiling point.

[DC Tom]

Increased Hispanic birthrates help Social security not hurt it, more workers paying in.

 

1) One does not contribute to Social Security merely by being BORN...you actually have to work.

2) Hispanic unemployment rates are running about 12%, and underemployment twice that. Including those not statistically counted (i.e. not looking for work, hence not legally "unemployed"), only about 50% of Hispanics are actually working.

3) The Hispanic labor force is approximately 20 million people. Very roughly, based on a mid-range estimate of undocumented hispanics in the US and the labor participation rate of Hispanics in the US, four million of them are undocumented, and hence not paying anything in to Social Security, regardless of unemployment status.

 

In other words...for every ten hispanic babies born, you can count on four of them paying ANYTHING in to Social Security, starting sixteen years down the road, and probably at a lesser rate than white or asian workers.

 

Something tells me your response to this will include a hope of bailout by rainbow-farting unicorns...

[....lybob]

1) One does not contribute to Social Security merely by being BORN...you actually have to work.

2) Hispanic unemployment rates are running about 12%, and underemployment twice that. Including those not statistically counted (i.e. not looking for work, hence not legally "unemployed"), only about 50% of Hispanics are actually working.

3) The Hispanic labor force is approximately 20 million people. Very roughly, based on a mid-range estimate of undocumented hispanics in the US and the labor participation rate of Hispanics in the US, four million of them are undocumented, and hence not paying anything in to Social Security, regardless of unemployment status.

 

In other words...for every ten hispanic babies born, you can count on four of them paying ANYTHING in to Social Security, starting sixteen years down the road, and probably at a lesser rate than white or asian workers.

 

Something tells me your response to this will include a hope of bailout by rainbow-farting unicorns...

Illegal immigrants pay social security payroll taxes but are not eligible for benefits. During 2006, Standard & Poor's analysts wrote: "Each year, for example, the U.S. Social Security Administration maintains roughly $6 billion to $7 billion of Social Security contributions in an "earnings suspense file" -- an account for W-2 tax forms that cannot be matched to the correct Social Security number. The vast majority of these numbers are attributable to undocumented workers who will never claim their benefits.

[Dave_In_Norfolk]

1) One does not contribute to Social Security merely by being BORN...you actually have to work.

2) Hispanic unemployment rates are running about 12%, and underemployment twice that. Including those not statistically counted (i.e. not looking for work, hence not legally "unemployed"), only about 50% of Hispanics are actually working.3) The Hispanic labor force is approximately 20 million people. Very roughly, based on a mid-range estimate of undocumented hispanics in the US and the labor participation rate of Hispanics in the US, four million of them are undocumented, and hence not paying anything in to Social Security, regardless of unemployment status.

 

In other words...for every ten hispanic babies born, you can count on four of them paying ANYTHING in to Social Security, starting sixteen years down the road, and probably at a lesser rate than white or asian workers.

 

Something tells me your response to this will include a hope of bailout by rainbow-farting unicorns...

There is a recession going on you know? So saying anything, or drawing any conclusions about kids entering the workforce 20 years from now are unicorn farting dreams, indeed! You would think that after 30 thousand posts you might actually get something right, but no

[DC Tom]

There is a recession going on you know? So saying anything, or drawing any conclusions about kids entering the workforce 20 years from now are unicorn farting dreams, indeed! You would think that after 30 thousand posts you might actually get something right, but no

 

That's actually a long-term trend. Got it from the BLS data.

 

Illegal immigrants pay social security payroll taxes but are not eligible for benefits. During 2006, Standard & Poor's analysts wrote: "Each year, for example, the U.S. Social Security Administration maintains roughly $6 billion to $7 billion of Social Security contributions in an "earnings suspense file" -- an account for W-2 tax forms that cannot be matched to the correct Social Security number. The vast majority of these numbers are attributable to undocumented workers who will never claim their benefits.

 

My mistake...but your numbers are wrong. The SSA says $12B.

 

Jesus Christ, can't any of you retards ever quote a primary source for once in your hydrocephalic misspent lives?

[Doc]

I thought most illegal immigrant workers got paid in cash?

[GG]

I thought most illegal immigrant workers got paid in cash?

You're talking about the day laborers not employees.

[DC Tom]

I thought most illegal immigrant workers got paid in cash?

 

Turns out a lot of them get fake SSNs, and end up paying SDI that the SSA can't pay out, since the SSNs are faked.

 

Though you'd think they could just match up the SSN they're given to payroll records, find the illegals, and deport them...

[Doc]

Turns out a lot of them get fake SSNs, and end up paying SDI that the SSA can't pay out, since the SSNs are faked.

 

Though you'd think they could just match up the SSN they're given to payroll records, find the illegals, and deport them...

I thought those were the minority. And no doubt the $12B goes nowhere.

 

Now if they really wanted to stop illegal immigration, or at least employment, the should target the employers. But I have the sneaking suspicion no one really wants to do it.

Edited July 26, 2011 by Doc

[DC Tom]

I thought those were the minority. And no doubt the $12B goes nowhere.

 

All monies collected by the government get spent. That $12B is in the same form as the other trillions in the Social Security fund: a special class of government-issued bonds. Basically, it's a liability carried by the government that will never be collected by the SSA...albiet still a liability.

 

Now if they really wanted to stop illegal immigration, or at least employment, the should target the employers. But I have the sneaking suspicion no one really wants to do it.

 

SSA would just argue that they're not responsible for immigration enforcement, anyway. You'd think they'd be responsible for fraudulent SSNs...but they'd probably just argue that that was an immigration issue, too.

[Dave_In_Norfolk]

Larry Kudlow started laughing at Eric Cantor's nonsense tonight. I think these clowns know they have nothing to lose now that they voted on that huge cut to Medicare so they have to try to get Democrats to take the same plunge

[OCinBuffalo]

do you mean to say a contest to see who's the furthest negative outlier

between you and briddog? that's a tough one. How about we base it on: who is the biggest phony when it comes to pretending that their opinion is based on what is good for the country, rather than what is best for themselves?

Not the same study, bozo. In fact, THIS one doesn't even hypothesize about the causal effects of health care spending or inefficiency...so you're trying to defend a bull **** article derived from a Reuters article about a scientific study by posting a different press release that doesn't even study the same thing as the study your original link was based on. What, are you just throwing up anything with "life expectancy" in the title, and hoping it somehow applies?

This is hilarious because of this:

Wildly optimistic, based on a .1 reduction on a year to year study? Yeah, like that is going to throw off the actuarial studies. And the lower life expectancy statistic is more than countered by the increasing birthrates of Hispanics, which means that the rise in population will offset a one month shorter life when you're computing total benefit spending.

 

But that's ok, because you showed us a Daily Kos link, and we know how well they understand actuarial calculus.

1. First of all, you are both assuming that ...lybob knows what the word actuary means, and what one does as an actuary.

2. We know that the left in general is unfamiliar with the terms: actuary, actuarial, calculus, and doesn't have the slightest clue how to apply them to anything.

3. Contradictory Evidence of #2: sound actuarial methodology wasn't included any of FDR/LBJ "math". I have it on good authority that it wasn't until the late 70's that somebody said "wait a minute, we better get some real actuaries in here, because the numbers when the baby boomers hit benefit age don't look so good."

4. Further contradictory evidence of #2: all of the LBJ "great douchebaggery" ideas were formulated in the economic context of "the rest of the world has barely recovered from WWII, and the money we are making now, and our economic dominance will never be in doubt, and who cares about the Baby Boomers? We will all be dead in the long run anyway, right Mr. Keynes?"

 

 

The bottom line is: every health care provider I talk to tells me that their main enemy is Medicaid now. This is starting to follow the same "design pattern" as rent control. Providers are trying desperately to get out of the Medicaid business any way they can because of the "rent controlled" prices that are forced upon them that DO NOT cover their costs by as much as double. Providers exiting the market means less supply of health care to the poor/lower middle class. Government needs to either tone it down and let the market serve the poor without hindrance, or, providers will continue to exit, which means even less supply, and even higher prices than would be there without their "help".

 

Inefficiency means NOTHING in the face of these much larger and market-wide artificial, government-imposed pressures. How the F am I supposed to improve efficiency(which is btw exactly WTF I tell my board I am supposed to be doing every day) if there's nobody left in the business sector?

 

Idiots like ...lybob are apparently too dense to understand that it is their very policies that are making health care unaffordable for the poor. Worse, when they realize that the rich private pay/insurance patient/resident is making up the difference, they want to tax the insurance provider/rich and make them pay even more , thus raising the price for the ENTIRE market, making it even MORE unaffordable for the poor, and now threatening the middle class's ability to pay.

 

Actuarial calculus? You are asking waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much of ...lybob and his friends. Let's start with ECON 110 and for that matter, algebra, first.

Edited July 26, 2011 by OCinBuffalo