[SK in CV]

[quote=bearishgurl]Cuts need to be made to the SSD an SSI programs. I believe these programs are in whole or part funded from FICA taxes which also funds the OASDI program (all are Social Security Admin programs).

I know a couple of handfuls of able-bodied American adults of working age that have collected $1800-$3000 mo SSD for many years. My OASDI benefit (if its still there when I’m old enough to claim it, lol) won’t be anywhere near that. If mine and my employers’ original contribution on my behalf will not even be available for me, I think it is only fair to pay me the lump sum now.

And I don’t think recent immigrants should be eligible for SSI benefits. They didn’t feed anything into the system, entered the US at an advanced age and their sponsors swore to the INS on affidavits to support them for life as a condition of their legal residence in this country.

IMO, Social Security reform needs to be undertaken ASAP. It’s a ponzi scheme in which benefits will likely not be available in the future except to maybe the first five years of baby boomers . . . for a limited time.[/quote]

SSI is entirely funded through the general fund. SSD through the SS fund.

And I agree with you entirely that SSD needs to be tightened up. It is way too easy to qualify.

But I reject the whole ponzi scheme. It is a defined benefit plan, that is projected to be fully funded, without any changes, until 2039. THe just ended recession and continued unemployement has knocked about 4 years off that estimate. (It was 2043 until a couple years ago.) That will take the oldest baby boomers thru about age 95, the youngest to about 75. A 1% increase in FICA taxes would extend it indefinitely, as would uncapping the FICA taxes.

[SK in CV]

[quote=bearishgurl]Cuts need to be made to the SSD an SSI programs. I believe these programs are in whole or part funded from FICA taxes which also funds the OASDI program (all are Social Security Admin programs).

I know a couple of handfuls of able-bodied American adults of working age that have collected $1800-$3000 mo SSD for many years. My OASDI benefit (if its still there when I’m old enough to claim it, lol) won’t be anywhere near that. If mine and my employers’ original contribution on my behalf will not even be available for me, I think it is only fair to pay me the lump sum now.

And I don’t think recent immigrants should be eligible for SSI benefits. They didn’t feed anything into the system, entered the US at an advanced age and their sponsors swore to the INS on affidavits to support them for life as a condition of their legal residence in this country.

IMO, Social Security reform needs to be undertaken ASAP. It’s a ponzi scheme in which benefits will likely not be available in the future except to maybe the first five years of baby boomers . . . for a limited time.[/quote]

SSI is entirely funded through the general fund. SSD through the SS fund.

And I agree with you entirely that SSD needs to be tightened up. It is way too easy to qualify.

But I reject the whole ponzi scheme. It is a defined benefit plan, that is projected to be fully funded, without any changes, until 2039. THe just ended recession and continued unemployement has knocked about 4 years off that estimate. (It was 2043 until a couple years ago.) That will take the oldest baby boomers thru about age 95, the youngest to about 75. A 1% increase in FICA taxes would extend it indefinitely, as would uncapping the FICA taxes.

[SK in CV]

[quote=bearishgurl]Cuts need to be made to the SSD an SSI programs. I believe these programs are in whole or part funded from FICA taxes which also funds the OASDI program (all are Social Security Admin programs).

I know a couple of handfuls of able-bodied American adults of working age that have collected $1800-$3000 mo SSD for many years. My OASDI benefit (if its still there when I’m old enough to claim it, lol) won’t be anywhere near that. If mine and my employers’ original contribution on my behalf will not even be available for me, I think it is only fair to pay me the lump sum now.

And I don’t think recent immigrants should be eligible for SSI benefits. They didn’t feed anything into the system, entered the US at an advanced age and their sponsors swore to the INS on affidavits to support them for life as a condition of their legal residence in this country.

IMO, Social Security reform needs to be undertaken ASAP. It’s a ponzi scheme in which benefits will likely not be available in the future except to maybe the first five years of baby boomers . . . for a limited time.[/quote]

SSI is entirely funded through the general fund. SSD through the SS fund.

And I agree with you entirely that SSD needs to be tightened up. It is way too easy to qualify.

But I reject the whole ponzi scheme. It is a defined benefit plan, that is projected to be fully funded, without any changes, until 2039. THe just ended recession and continued unemployement has knocked about 4 years off that estimate. (It was 2043 until a couple years ago.) That will take the oldest baby boomers thru about age 95, the youngest to about 75. A 1% increase in FICA taxes would extend it indefinitely, as would uncapping the FICA taxes.

[SK in CV]

[quote=bearishgurl]Cuts need to be made to the SSD an SSI programs. I believe these programs are in whole or part funded from FICA taxes which also funds the OASDI program (all are Social Security Admin programs).

I know a couple of handfuls of able-bodied American adults of working age that have collected $1800-$3000 mo SSD for many years. My OASDI benefit (if its still there when I’m old enough to claim it, lol) won’t be anywhere near that. If mine and my employers’ original contribution on my behalf will not even be available for me, I think it is only fair to pay me the lump sum now.

And I don’t think recent immigrants should be eligible for SSI benefits. They didn’t feed anything into the system, entered the US at an advanced age and their sponsors swore to the INS on affidavits to support them for life as a condition of their legal residence in this country.

IMO, Social Security reform needs to be undertaken ASAP. It’s a ponzi scheme in which benefits will likely not be available in the future except to maybe the first five years of baby boomers . . . for a limited time.[/quote]

SSI is entirely funded through the general fund. SSD through the SS fund.

And I agree with you entirely that SSD needs to be tightened up. It is way too easy to qualify.

But I reject the whole ponzi scheme. It is a defined benefit plan, that is projected to be fully funded, without any changes, until 2039. THe just ended recession and continued unemployement has knocked about 4 years off that estimate. (It was 2043 until a couple years ago.) That will take the oldest baby boomers thru about age 95, the youngest to about 75. A 1% increase in FICA taxes would extend it indefinitely, as would uncapping the FICA taxes.

[SK in CV]

[quote=pri_dk]

Any plan that is mathematically possible requires big cuts to some combination of defense, social security, and medicare.

[/quote]

That’s kind of a misnomer. In 2010, SS by itself will have it’s first deficit in almost 30 years. Estimated at 41 billion, it is almost entirely do to the recession and high unemployment. According to the Trustees Report, SS is expected to run a surplus from 2012 through 2014. Social Security is not causing the deficit. It has never contributed significantly to the deficit.

It is the other spending, primarily defense, that has to be cut. The two wars we’re fighting have already consumed almost 10% of the national debt, over $1 trillion. Current defense budget is close to $700 billion. That’s where the cuts will have to come from if the budget is ever to be balanced.

[SK in CV]

[quote=pri_dk]

Any plan that is mathematically possible requires big cuts to some combination of defense, social security, and medicare.

[/quote]

That’s kind of a misnomer. In 2010, SS by itself will have it’s first deficit in almost 30 years. Estimated at 41 billion, it is almost entirely do to the recession and high unemployment. According to the Trustees Report, SS is expected to run a surplus from 2012 through 2014. Social Security is not causing the deficit. It has never contributed significantly to the deficit.

It is the other spending, primarily defense, that has to be cut. The two wars we’re fighting have already consumed almost 10% of the national debt, over $1 trillion. Current defense budget is close to $700 billion. That’s where the cuts will have to come from if the budget is ever to be balanced.

[SK in CV]

[quote=pri_dk]

Any plan that is mathematically possible requires big cuts to some combination of defense, social security, and medicare.

[/quote]

That’s kind of a misnomer. In 2010, SS by itself will have it’s first deficit in almost 30 years. Estimated at 41 billion, it is almost entirely do to the recession and high unemployment. According to the Trustees Report, SS is expected to run a surplus from 2012 through 2014. Social Security is not causing the deficit. It has never contributed significantly to the deficit.

It is the other spending, primarily defense, that has to be cut. The two wars we’re fighting have already consumed almost 10% of the national debt, over $1 trillion. Current defense budget is close to $700 billion. That’s where the cuts will have to come from if the budget is ever to be balanced.

[SK in CV]

[quote=pri_dk]

Any plan that is mathematically possible requires big cuts to some combination of defense, social security, and medicare.

[/quote]

That’s kind of a misnomer. In 2010, SS by itself will have it’s first deficit in almost 30 years. Estimated at 41 billion, it is almost entirely do to the recession and high unemployment. According to the Trustees Report, SS is expected to run a surplus from 2012 through 2014. Social Security is not causing the deficit. It has never contributed significantly to the deficit.

It is the other spending, primarily defense, that has to be cut. The two wars we’re fighting have already consumed almost 10% of the national debt, over $1 trillion. Current defense budget is close to $700 billion. That’s where the cuts will have to come from if the budget is ever to be balanced.

[SK in CV]

[quote=pri_dk]

Any plan that is mathematically possible requires big cuts to some combination of defense, social security, and medicare.

[/quote]

That’s kind of a misnomer. In 2010, SS by itself will have it’s first deficit in almost 30 years. Estimated at 41 billion, it is almost entirely do to the recession and high unemployment. According to the Trustees Report, SS is expected to run a surplus from 2012 through 2014. Social Security is not causing the deficit. It has never contributed significantly to the deficit.

It is the other spending, primarily defense, that has to be cut. The two wars we’re fighting have already consumed almost 10% of the national debt, over $1 trillion. Current defense budget is close to $700 billion. That’s where the cuts will have to come from if the budget is ever to be balanced.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CardiffBaseball] Was the last undefeated regular season UNLV or Indiana? I can’t remember and am not that inclined to look it up this late.[/quote]

UNLV in the early 90’s, but they lost to Duke with Christian Laettner and Grant Hill in the NCAA’s. IU in ’76 was the last to go undefeated AND win the NCAA championship.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CardiffBaseball] Was the last undefeated regular season UNLV or Indiana? I can’t remember and am not that inclined to look it up this late.[/quote]

UNLV in the early 90’s, but they lost to Duke with Christian Laettner and Grant Hill in the NCAA’s. IU in ’76 was the last to go undefeated AND win the NCAA championship.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CardiffBaseball] Was the last undefeated regular season UNLV or Indiana? I can’t remember and am not that inclined to look it up this late.[/quote]

UNLV in the early 90’s, but they lost to Duke with Christian Laettner and Grant Hill in the NCAA’s. IU in ’76 was the last to go undefeated AND win the NCAA championship.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CardiffBaseball] Was the last undefeated regular season UNLV or Indiana? I can’t remember and am not that inclined to look it up this late.[/quote]

UNLV in the early 90’s, but they lost to Duke with Christian Laettner and Grant Hill in the NCAA’s. IU in ’76 was the last to go undefeated AND win the NCAA championship.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CardiffBaseball] Was the last undefeated regular season UNLV or Indiana? I can’t remember and am not that inclined to look it up this late.[/quote]

UNLV in the early 90’s, but they lost to Duke with Christian Laettner and Grant Hill in the NCAA’s. IU in ’76 was the last to go undefeated AND win the NCAA championship.

[SK in CV]

[quote=SD Realtor]

Steve Fisher was the best hire in school history. He has a little wooden in him.[/quote]

I knew John Wooden. I worked with John Wooden. John Wooden was a friend of mine. And Steve Fisher is a whole lot more like John Wooden than Dan Quayle was ever like JFK. At he is looking more and more like Wooden every year.

And there are other similarities. Like Wooden, Fisher is a pretty mediocre game coach. He preps well, usually goes into games with a good plan, but if things go awry, he seems like he doesn’t have a clue how to adjust. Like Wooden, he doesn’t use his bench much, rarely more than 2 deep.

His players are in great shape. They gotta be to play > 30 minutes a game.

They’re more disciplined this year than they have ever been. In the past they’ve been all over the place.

He has rules. He applies them differently and appropriately for each kid. Wooden did the same thing.

One area where they are different is off the court. Wooden had a great sense of humor. If Fisher has that, I’ve never seen it.

What’s really different this year about the Aztecs, is that he has 5 athletes starting. Having watched Aztec basketball for more than 40 years, I can tell you without exception that has never happened before. They’ve had skill at every position , even more than they do now, (particularly the teams of the late 70’s/early 80’s may have been more skilled.) but they have never had 5 guys that could run with anyone.

Anyway, it’s exciting. Could break into the top 5 this weeek in the rankings. (Wouldn’t surprise me though if they stayed put and Nova moves up.) If they win out at home and pick up a couple more road wins and they should be looking at a 2 seed, giving them a decent path to the sweet 16. And they got the bodies, from there anything could happen. Awesome 🙂

Go Aztecs!

[Author]

Posts