iOS app Android app
Clicking Follow Back will add user to your friends list and may allow access to your Social News timeline..

HuffPost Social News

Your Badges and the Badge Module will be removed from your profile

Columbus 2011's Comments

View Comments:   Sort:
huffingtonpost entry

Higher Taxes or Smaller Entitlements: What Should Voters Choose?

Commented Apr 24, 2011 at 10:30:48 in Politics

“I know we agree on the root of the problem cayuse, and I wish our legislators had the ability to have a dialog like this to fix some basic problems and leave politics behind. The founders of our constitution knew they had to create a government that didn't put all the power in one branch of government, like the British monarchies, so they created three branches, executive, legislative, and judicial. Unfortunately all three branches have become political and our constitution has been plundered by legislators and special interests with access to government we the people don't have. So to ask them to execute the law, as you say, isn't likely, it's proof we're moving towards an oligarchy. Don't forget:
"Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"”

cayuse on Apr 24, 2011 at 11:36:34

“Mammon it is called by Christ 2000 years ago. Why the secular, atheist and community organizers saying Accept the Modern Time is folly and not of truth


Oxford defines: god of wealth, regarded as evil or immoral; 'those who worship mammon' are equivalent to greedy people who value money too highly.[1] Webster's dictionary defines "Mammon" or "Mann" as: 1) the false god of riches and avarice. 2) riches regarded as an object of worship and greedy pursuit; wealth as an evil, more or less personified.[2]”
huffingtonpost entry

Higher Taxes or Smaller Entitlements: What Should Voters Choose?

Commented Apr 22, 2011 at 13:05:48 in Politics


cayuse on Apr 22, 2011 at 18:42:54

“I said SSA was not insolvent

I said nothing else. Presumption of you too”
huffingtonpost entry

Higher Taxes or Smaller Entitlements: What Should Voters Choose?

Commented Apr 22, 2011 at 13:04:46 in Politics

“A few years ago I might have agreed with you, but my point is that the system has become broken due to corruption in our government and I'm not sure it can be fixed. Short of a full revolution, what do we do? In the meantime I would prefer to control my retirement destiny in lieu of "trusting" it to party politics. Would there also need to be legislation to make it work? Of course, required employer contributions just like every other country in this world. They won't do it voluntarily.”
huffingtonpost entry

Higher Taxes or Smaller Entitlements: What Should Voters Choose?

Commented Apr 21, 2011 at 16:49:27 in Politics

“I would argue the American worker has dutifully been paying for their retirement for years, several modifications to SSI have been made to keep it solvent. Specifically the Social Security Trust Fund was supposed to invest the huge surplus and ensure adequate funding. Unfortunately our government has been raiding the cookie jar and leaving behind useless IOU's. I was never an advocate for SSI privatization but it's obvious the government is corrupted and will only act to steal our money, along with their buddies on Wall Street. Rather than let the politicians manipulate us to fight against one another and continue to steal our hard earned money wouldn't the solution be to get the government out of the insurance business? If a worker pays into a private annuity plan, their money will only go to them or their heirs. Isn't that the way it should be?”

cayuse on Apr 24, 2011 at 08:34:19

“In the USA Budget for 2010, as bad as it is for jobs, still SSA revenue $800 Billion and expenses $200 Billion.

Government is not the problem it is a Law, that is being manipulated by politicians, as you say, FOR Stock Traders of wall street is more correct.

Government should execute the Law to create maintain Justice instead of the injustice, you speak.

Collusion, Conspiracy, Monopoly, Robbery are all against the law. Executing the law and punishment is far better than revolution.”

cayuse on Apr 22, 2011 at 11:31:54


In 2010 Revenue from SSA payment was $800 Billion and Expense of SSA was only $600 Billion

The $200 Billion is what the Politicians of both parties want to give the Rich. While creating DEBT to the worker for Rich Tax Cuts for Obama, Clinton and the other rich.”

SmileAndActNice on Apr 21, 2011 at 23:13:23

“Imagine you are making just enough to feed and clothe yourself working for an employer who cares nothing for you personally. Jerk or, or, soulless mega-corporation, whatever.

Now imagine that government "got out of the insurance business" tomorrow. What do you think will happen to your paycheck?

Do you think the employer contribution to SS will show up in it? If you do you have a very trusting nature. So right off the bat you are privately investing only half of the money you were investing before. A little bit of math will show you that even if you got insane 15% returns on the free market ( you won't get that ) that doesn't come close to getting 3% returns (SS average) with double the monthly contribution.

But thats not all! Not only have we reduced your monthly contribution by at least half, you no longer have SS disability insurance and will have to go without or purchase your own. If you purchase your own that leaves you with even less to invest.

But this is just a snapshot in time. Your take home pay before was the amount it was because it was just enough to get by. In a few years time, it will again be just enough to get by and you will have nothing to invest at all.

And you will take the job anyway because you need to get by.”