In this thread, we talk about the State of the Union Address

[Senusret I]

Originally Posted by agzg

Agreed on your first point, although I missed most of the speech so maybe I would have been better moved if I had heard the whole thing.

And wasn't there a guy last year who screamed out "You're a liar!"?

[agzg]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

Also, OMG, Joe Biden wore the same outfit this year! #fashionfauxpas

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by agzg

Also, OMG, Joe Biden wore the same outfit this year! #fashionfauxpas

HAHAHAHAHAHA, great.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

Because foreign engineers from Russia, Romania, China, India, etc. who come here on worker visas will work for less. $50k is a fortune in Romania, but do you think an American engineer will be happy to make that?

We bring in so many foreign engineers in this country that the kids studying engineering in American universities can't get jobs. So a lot of kids aren't choosing engineering anymore. My husband, who is an aerospace engineer, says he would never advise a college student in the U.S. today to study engineering - our country's companies just don't want to hire American engineers anymore. Proof: it took more than 10 years for my husband to get an engineering job in aerospace, first at a government contractor, but finally at Boeing (after applying for various positions within the company over 14 years). He has engineering degrees from one of the best engineering schools (Michigan), a MBA, post-grad experience from a year study in Russia, and he's one of the smartest people I've ever met...he's seriously a genius. When he finally got to Boeing, he met all the foreign contractors he was competing with for jobs. Not only do they have less education than him, but they have no emotional investment in the company they're working for or the country they're working in. They're all here to make a tidy sum, then go back to their home countries where they can live rich and use the information and experience gained at America's largest exporter against us. It really infuriates him, and me. Same thing happens at all the technology companies.

I don't think you can use an anecdotal experience and call it proof per se. My dad is an engineer turned manager/supervisor who has hiring power and he hires American engineers all the time. My sister's boyfriend is a nuclear engineer and once he started looking for a job (long story) he found one within about a year and he was handicapped by not having completed an internship during school. That's why the plural of anecdote isn't data.

That said, how do you solve the problem then? Either you make yourself more marketable or you work for a different industry or you work for that lower pay. Because if that is what the job skills are actually worth then that is what you're going to get paid, even if you're Engineery McAwesomesauce (which a company won't find out until they hire you, not really.)

We make it really hard to immigrate here, I'm not surprised that people from elsewhere aren't particularly invested in America. Why should they be?

Originally Posted by AGDee

I agree, but I don't think we should have a single payer system either. I think employers should give health insurance vouchers and allow us to shop for our own. This would increase competition among health insurance providers and make us their REAL customers while providing them incentives to keep costs down, because we could switch if we are unhappy. Currently, their customers are the employers. Why should our employer get to choose our insurer? I want options.

While that would give you options it still puts costs on the employer and in fact would increase costs because the only reason you pay as 'little' as you do for employee insurance is because the company has put you into a big pool with all of its employees. A voucher would, in anything resembling the current system, cost much more. Single payer healthcare takes the costs off of employers, spreads them out over the largest possible pool of people and eliminates the profit margin of insurance companies for the operating costs of Medicare (about 4% per the last reports the Dems were using).

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

Blah, blah, blah investments... blah, blah blah competition. ZZZZZZ

His jokes fell flat and made me feel sorry for him. Don't think that was the intent.

Time to forget all that blather and take an ax to the budget. Let's go back to 2001 (last year the budget was in balance or had a surplus) for the budget and then go with a 10% across the board cut in all budget items and programs.

Allow those who wish to opt out of SS to do so and raise the retirement age 3 years for those who wish to remain in the program. Privatize it for those who wish to invest their own funds. Others can remain in the program as is.

I'm sure Obama feels your pity from here.
That whole 10% across the board thing is silly.

And serious question, someone takes their money out of SS. They invest, they make every reasonable choice, they lose all of their money because the market crashes. Now what? Same question but this time they blew it all on lottery tickets, Now what?

Originally Posted by agzg

Also, did any of you guys see the word cloud that NPR did? Basically, they asked their twitter followers to tweet them one word to describe the speech. Then they did a word cloud. This was the result.


Link.

3 words, but yes I thought that was cool. I've always enjoyed the create-a-word-cloud websites.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

Allow those who wish to opt out of SS to do so and raise the retirement age 3 years for those who wish to remain in the program. Privatize it for those who wish to invest their own funds. Others can remain in the program as is.

Not if people are allowed to opt out, because there will be no more "as is" anymore. The "as is" will have changed drastically.

I think Social Security needs some serious overhaul and rethinking, but unless the plan is to phase SS out altogether (which I don't think is a good idea), I think allowing opt outs and allowing privatization will make things worse, not better.

(You know I have to disagree with you some, don't you? )

[33girl]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Not if people are allowed to opt out, because there will be no more "as is" anymore. The "as is" will have changed drastically.

I think Social Security needs some serious overhaul and rethinking, but unless the plan is to phase SS out altogether (which I don't think is a good idea), I think allowing opt outs and allowing privatization will make things worse, not better.

(You know I have to disagree with you some, don't you? )

If we just start putting up billboards everywhere that say "Bob Dylan never mattered" the Baby Boomers will start dropping over dead from shock at the rate of 41 a day and the Social Security problem will be solved.

[AnchorAlum]

Originally Posted by 33girl

If we just start putting up billboards everywhere that say "Bob Dylan never mattered" the Baby Boomers will start dropping over dead from shock at the rate of 41 a day and the Social Security problem will be solved.

I'm a fan of tongue in cheek commentary. I'm apt to use that approach myself.

Boomers cannot afford to drop dead at this point. Many of us are busy taking care of our aged parents who, due to the advent of so many wonder drugs, are staying alive, independent, grumpy, and uncooperative in unprecedented numbers. After we finish taking care of Mom and Dad at their fully paid for house, parking their fully paid for car in the garage and making sure all is well, we head home to find our 25 year old slob of a kid lying on the sofa texting their friends. It's okay, though. They can still be included on our health insurance at no small cost to us. So in case they should get stressed out about not being able to find a job paying them what they have been led to believe they're worth, they can go see a Doc about how stressed out they are.
FTR, my kids aren't like that. They're grown, married, and making a good deal of money. Of course, as the offspring of Boomers, they've been brought up in a semi-privileged world and understand the NEED to make money. LOL.

Just kidding. Well, sort of. I am a Boomer and I can only dream about retiring. Maybe I will just drop dead so that someone else can do what I'm doing. Hanging on to my job, paying my bills, desperately trying to save more money since my 401K got KILLED in '08, and staring down the 30 somethings who think they deserve my job.

Hell, from where I'm sitting, Bob Dylan really didn't matter. Ever.

[Ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Not if people are allowed to opt out, because there will be no more "as is" anymore. The "as is" will have changed drastically.

There is no trust fund and all the IOU's are worthless. The money has gone into the general fund and the general fund is $1.5 trillion in debt for this year alone. None of this is sustainable. Common sense dictates this (not that you don't have common sense). We are in a real world of hurt and must get our finances under control or we will end up like Greece, Portugal, Spain, the U.K., France etc. Sorry, but SS is now simply a ponzi scheme because the money promised is gone and will not come back. Those on the top will get their money but those on the bottom will not. The only real option is to privatize as our government is incapable of putting the funds where they will not be touched.

For DF: a 10% across the board cut is the only real way to resolve this. Everyone and I mean everyone shares the pain. When the need is so immediate extreme measures must be taken. I have spent all my life working in the business world and it can be done and has been done several times by many multinational companies. It is not easy and it is not fun but it can be accomplished.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

Sorry, but SS is now simply a ponzi scheme because the money promised is gone and will not come back.

It's only a "Ponzi scheme" under certain conditions:

1 - a "reverse-pyramid" of a tax base (which is incredibly rare, and only currently exists because of Boomers - but will revert)

2 - an ever-weakening dollar (let's not use 2 years as a total trend).

Etc. The system needs considerable work, but it isn't conceptually impossible or broken as theory.

The only real option is to privatize as our government is incapable of putting the funds where they will not be touched.

Right - the way to solve a cash-strapped system is to suddenly remove tons of money from it. I can't see this becoming anything but a run on the bank, and a huge boon to mutual funds and similar (which will dilute the market, meaning the actual investors make very little). Then what? You'll replace Social Security with social services, a much less efficient system. It'll cost more, not less.

The government sucks at money management, I'll agree there. Most people suck much worse, unless the millions of "Check Into Cash" places operate at a loss.

Additionally, aren't there some logical inconsistencies with what you're saying? If there's no money/"the IOUs are no good", then what is there to actually withdraw?

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

There is no trust fund and all the IOU's are worthless. The money has gone into the general fund and the general fund is $1.5 trillion in debt for this year alone. None of this is sustainable. Common sense dictates this (not that you don't have common sense). We are in a real world of hurt and must get our finances under control or we will end up like Greece, Portugal, Spain, the U.K., France etc. Sorry, but SS is now simply a ponzi scheme because the money promised is gone and will not come back.

I agree that there is no trust fund, and I think this is a major flaw in how SS was set up. And I think it's an overstatement to simply say "our government is incapable of putting the funds where they will not be touched." It is capable of doing it -- many governments do do it. So far, neither side of the aisle has had the will to do it.

Otherwise, KSig Rc said pretty much what I would say.