Which issue is more important to you?

[MaC]

option 2.  Although I don't agree with Waltermitty's stance, I can definitely see why he would choose option 1.

[Dr. Cynic]

Health Care... I'm leaning towards thinking that I'm not going to live long enough to collect a social security pension... Thus Health Care is higher on my priority list.

[Inverted Things]

Social security. I hate old people thinking they're entitled to MY money. Given a choice, I'd rather to pay to heal a sick person as opposed to pay some old fart for beating the odds. At least the sick person might still have their best years ahead of them and substantially contribute to society. The old fart is just going to sit around and whine that his/her free ride isn't sweet enough.

[MasterJedi]

Social Security

[CPT MikeyMike]

Social Secuirty but it wouldn't be a top priority for me.

[SPC]

Social security. I hate old people thinking they're entitled to MY money. Given a choice, I'd rather to pay to heal a sick person as opposed to pay some old fart for beating the odds. At least the sick person might still have their best years ahead of them and substantially contribute to society. The old fart is just going to sit around and whine that his/her free ride isn't sweet enough.

Good reasoning.

[Hatman 🍁]

Social security. I hate old people thinking they're entitled to MY money. Given a choice, I'd rather to pay to heal a sick person as opposed to pay some old fart for beating the odds. At least the sick person might still have their best years ahead of them and substantially contribute to society. The old fart is just going to sit around and whine that his/her free ride isn't sweet enough.

You better hope that old fart isn't a verteran.

[Inverted Things]

Social security. I hate old people thinking they're entitled to MY money. Given a choice, I'd rather to pay to heal a sick person as opposed to pay some old fart for beating the odds. At least the sick person might still have their best years ahead of them and substantially contribute to society. The old fart is just going to sit around and whine that his/her free ride isn't sweet enough.

You better hope that old fart isn't a verteran.

When I actually find a career, I'll expect to receive a full pension after working for so many years. I therefore don't begrudge government employees (including veterans) a pension. (Although there shouldn't be quite so many government employees... but that's a different topic altogether).

The fact remains that old farts are taking my money, which they did nothing to earn, and whining thatI'm not giving them more. Old people are just jerks that way.

[Beet]

I hate anyone thinking they're entitled to MY money. You can all go to hell.

[adam]

Social security. Though, neither issue is of great importance to me.

[The Dowager Mod]

Easily health care.

[Smash255]

Social security. I hate old people thinking they're entitled to MY money. Given a choice, I'd rather to pay to heal a sick person as opposed to pay some old fart for beating the odds. At least the sick person might still have their best years ahead of them and substantially contribute to society. The old fart is just going to sit around and whine that his/her free ride isn't sweet enough.

You better hope that old fart isn't a verteran.

When I actually find a career, I'll expect to receive a full pension after working for so many years. I therefore don't begrudge government employees (including veterans) a pension. (Although there shouldn't be quite so many government employees... but that's a different topic altogether).

The fact remains that old farts are taking my money, which they did nothing to earn, and whining thatI'm not giving them more. Old people are just jerks that way.

you do realize many companies have made rather large cuts to their pension plans over the last few years don't you??

  Anyway I pick health care

[DownWithTheLeft]

I am very concerned with both issues but Health Care moreso.  The effort on the SS front is for more privitization, not more government involvement therefore I do not see myself in a position to lose.  However, the Health Care effort is more government interference rather than privitization so I stand more to lose.  Therefore, Health Care reigns supreme

[WalterMitty]

obviously, health care.

however, i am very concerned about social security, as everyone in my generation *should* be.  i was watching something on c-span the other day and they mentioned that social security should be fine and solvent at least until the year 2042.  i thought about that for a minute and realized that i turn age 65 in 2042.  so 20 and 30 somethings..the gig is up when we retire, unless something is done.

i support more of a libertarian view when it comes to social security.  i believe in complete privatization.  i would support create a new welfare program...elder care...or some such...to provide stipends to oldsters who happen to squander their social security money instead of investing it.  a new welfare program would be for cheaper than this social security mess we are in.

[opebo]

I'd say health care, though provision of both by the State is absolutely necessary for the well-being of the working class.

[David S]

Each of you young folks will have money confiscated from your paycheck to pay for SS and medicare. The money will be taken with or without your consent. You won't be given a choice as to whether you want to participate or not. Your employer will also be forced to pay an equal amount on your behalf. At present the amount paid will be about 12%  of your pay including your payment plus your employer's. ( Edit- actually its 12.4% and that covers only SS. Medicare is in addition to that.)

Over the years of your career that will amount to a substantial sum. Let me illustrate with my own case because I have all the numbers, for SS at least. Medicare is not funded the same way so I don't have the numbers for that. Over my career I paid about $90k into SS. My employer paid an additional $90k For a total of $180k.

Now if I owed the government money for late taxes they would charge me interest. So I want interest on the amount they owe me. I won't charge the high interest rates govt charges. I'll settle for the rate paid on 6 mo CDs over that period of time. That would bring the total to $420k as of the end of 2006. ( I have the spreadsheet to prove it)

Now I would be quite happy to say give me back my $420k and I'll  let them keep their monthly SS checks. But I don't get that option. The options are; take the monthly checks or get nothing at all. In fact government can't give the $420k back because they don't have it. They already spent every penny of it.

Each of you who work for a living will face the same situation, except worse.
It will be worse because according to the Treasury Department's December financial report SS is underfunded by $6 trillion over the next 75 years and Medicare is in much worse shape than that. So for government to meet its promised payments it will have to raise your taxes...alot.

Now you might think that government could  get out of this fix by monetizing the debt i.e. by simply printing money to cover the costs. But that won't work for SS because printing money out of nothing causes inflation and SS payments are indexed to inflation so that option will simply make the SS debt bigger yet. The result would be similar for medicare because medical costs automatically rise with inflation. So the options are going to be raise taxes alot or cut benefits.

How did we get into this mess? We got into it because we allowed government to do things the constitution doesn't authorize it to do, SS and medicare. On top of that we voted for politicians who were more than willing to promise more and more goodies without worrying about the long term consequences.

How bad is it? Well the government's chief accountant; Comptroller General David Walker warned on 60 Minutes that the nation could face bankruptcy if something isn't changed.

As for me, I expect to be worm food long before the system collapses, but you young folks will have to deal with it. All I can say is; another fine mess!

[Inverted Things]

Each of you young folks will have money confiscated from your paycheck to pay for SS and medicare. The money will be taken with or without your consent. You won't be given a choice as to whether you want to participate or not. Your employer will also be forced to pay an equal amount on your behalf. At present the amount paid will be about 12%  of your pay including your payment plus your employer's.

Over the years of your career that will amount to a substantial sum. Let me illustrate with my own case because I have all the numbers, for SS at least. Medicare is not funded the same way so I don't have the numbers for that. Over my career I paid about $90k into SS. My employer paid an additional $90k For a total of $180k.

Now if I owed the government money for late taxes they would charge me interest. So I want interest on the amount they owe me. I won't charge the high interest rates govt charges. I'll settle for the rate paid on 6 mo CDs over that period of time. That would bring the total to $420k as of the end of 2006. ( I have the spreadsheet to prove it)

Now I would be quite happy to say give me back my $420k and I'll  let them keep their monthly SS checks. But I don't get that option. The options are; take the monthly checks or get nothing at all. In fact government can't give the $420k back because they don't have it. They already spent every penny of it.

Each of you who work for a living will face the same situation, except worse.
It will be worse because according to the Treasury Department's December financial report SS is underfunded by $6 trillion over the next 75 years and Medicare is in much worse shape than that. So for government to meet its promised payments it will have to raise your taxes...alot.

Now you might think that government could  get out of this fix by monetizing the debt i.e. by simply printing money to cover the costs. But that won't work for SS because printing money out of nothing causes inflation and SS payments are indexed to inflation so that option will simply make the SS debt bigger yet. The result would be similar for medicare because medical costs automatically rise with inflation. So the options are going to be raise taxes alot or cut benefits.

How did we get into this mess? We got into it because we allowed government to do things the constitution doesn't authorize it to do, SS and medicare. On top of that we voted for politicians who were more than willing to promise more and more goodies without worrying about the long term consequences.

How bad is it? Well the government's chief accountant; Comptroller General David Walker warned on 60 Minutes that the nation could face bankruptcy if something isn't changed.

As for me, I expect to be worm food long before the system collapses, but you young folks will have to deal with it. All I can say is; another fine mess!

Pretty much my thoughts on the matter, although summed up more eloquently then I normally manage.

However, I do have my own spin to put on what David said here. Money is simply the medium with which wealth is transfered. It's obvious that wealth can be created or destroyed. The 1990's saw the creation of an incredible amount of wealth; we're all better off because of the advances in computer technology, for instance. Conversely, most wars destroy wealth; look at Russia circa 1918 or 1945, or the US circa 1865. (Side note: why not the US circa 1945? Because we took advantage of the war and used it to create wealth. We got paid a lot for the guns we manufactured and the scientific advances we made.)

Obviously, everyone is better off if we maximize wealth per capita.

Now, absent social security, the elderly person has two options: create wealth or die. Either option leaves the wealth per capita ratio essentially constant. Social security, on the other hand, leaves the wealth constant while increasing the number of people, thus reducing the wealth per capita. This is a bad thing. And, in fact, it's worse than this. When people get to keep the wealth they create, that's a motivation for creating wealth. Reducing the reward for creating wealth reduces that motivation which results in less wealth being created. This lessens the wealth, which further hurts the wealth per capita ratio.

Maximizing wealth per capita, therefore, is incompatible with social security.

[angus]

option 2.  Although I don't agree with Waltermitty's stance, I can definitely see why he would choose option 1.

probably health care.  I'm still a long way from retirement, and any way I have resigned myself to the fact that I need to make provisions for my own post-retirement livelihood and not expect to depend on the government, so Social Security isn't as big an issue for me.  Health care, on the other hand, affects pretty much anyone who needs it, which, for the first 36 years of my life did not include me.  And in fact still doesn't include me directly.  But I got married and had a child.  Women and children require constant medical attention, it seems.  It just never seems to end.  So over the past few years I've thought more and more about health care--usually as I'm writing a big check to someone--and have become convinced that 15% of our aggregate GDP is a huge amount to pay for health care.  And it has a simple solution:  get the government out of it.  Completely, cleanly, and finally.  There's no reason a band-aid, which costs about seven cents at Wal-Mart, should cost seven dollars if a registered nurse puts it on.  There's no reason I should have to seek a physian's prescription if I want to purchase a bottle of Xanax pills.  There's no reason old ladies should have to choose between dog food and arthritis pills.  Except for the fact that an army of lawyers like it this way because the current set-up is good for them.  Some think the solution to the exhorbitant cost of health care is to involve the government even more.  I disagree, but at least we can agree that health care, and its current cost, it is a big problem.

[David S]

option 2.  Although I don't agree with Waltermitty's stance, I can definitely see why he would choose option 1.

probably health care.  I'm still a long way from retirement, and any way I have resigned myself to the fact that I need to make provisions for my own post-retirement livelihood and not expect to depend on the government, so Social Security isn't as big an issue for me.  Health care, on the other hand, affects pretty much anyone who needs it, which, for the first 36 years of my life did not include me.  And in fact still doesn't include me directly.  But I got married and had a child.  Women and children require constant medical attention, it seems.  It just never seems to end.  So over the past few years I've thought more and more about health care--usually as I'm writing a big check to someone--and have become convinced that 15% of our aggregate GDP is a huge amount to pay for health care.  And it has a simple solution:  get the government out of it.  Completely, cleanly, and finally.  There's no reason a band-aid, which costs about seven cents at Wal-Mart, should cost seven dollars if a registered nurse puts it on.  There's no reason I should have to seek a physian's prescription if I want to purchase a bottle of Xanax pills.  There's no reason old ladies should have to choose between dog food and arthritis pills.  Except for the fact that an army of lawyers like it this way because the current set-up is good for them.  Some think the solution to the exhorbitant cost of health care is to involve the government even more.  I disagree, but at least we can agree that health care, and its current cost, it is a big problem.

If you're running for office you have my vote.

[nclib]

Health care, though both are important.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Health Care. We do need to put in a euro style pension system but save it for after the boomers all die off.

[opebo]

Each of you young folks will have money confiscated from your paycheck to pay for SS and medicare. The money will be taken with or without your consent.

Hah, confiscated!  David S, the whole paycheck represents a confiscation from you by the powerful (your owner). 

[MaC]

David S, I've neglected to say anything for the last several weeks, but I have made a discovery as to opebo's posting behavior.  The only reason he went from capitalist to collectivist is because he thinks that since he's in power now, it will remain that way when the socialist elite enter and he'll be at the top of the hierarchy with all of his wealth in tact. 

[Smash255]

obviously, health care.

however, i am very concerned about social security, as everyone in my generation *should* be.  i was watching something on c-span the other day and they mentioned that social security should be fine and solvent at least until the year 2042.  i thought about that for a minute and realized that i turn age 65 in 2042.  so 20 and 30 somethings..the gig is up when we retire, unless something is done.

i support more of a libertarian view when it comes to social security.  i believe in complete privatization.  i would support create a new welfare program...elder care...or some such...to provide stipends to oldsters who happen to squander their social security money instead of investing it.  a new welfare program would be for cheaper than this social security mess we are in.

something I saw awhile back is that the 2042 timeline was flawed.  it was based off economic growth average of about 1.5% or so between now and then which is less than 1/2 the average of economic growth over the past 75 years