Why won't Obama be a real Democrat?

He doesn't seem so scared of North Korea or Libya or any enemy country, but when it comes to negotiating with John Boehner he becomes a big sissy. He's now willing to negotiate away social security cost of living increases. Folks that live on SS can't afford to balance the national budget.
Why is Obama such a coward?

He's now willing to negotiate away social security

If Social Security is a simple actuarial based pension plan, and not a part of government's general welfare powers, is it wrong to every 30 years adjust the assumptions of that pension plan? Life expectancy and other factors may require sound actuarial adjustments which should be done free of the politics which have allowed Republicans to argue that Social Security is failing.....it is not, or Democrats who argue that Social Security should be ran like the City of Detroit with no adjustments based on sound pension actuarial tables.....somewhere in the middle lies the answer, and if the President is serving all Americans, is it not incumbent on him to try to adjust this pension plan and guarantee our grandchildren can enjoy the same?

I think that creating social security was justified as part of the general welfare powers of the government. I'm not sure it can be run like a normal business pension plan. Obama has promised several times to leave it alone but he just doesn't know how to keep a promise. He's a real disappointment to me.

bluemoon wrote:He doesn't seem so scared of North Korea or Libya or any enemy country, but when it comes to negotiating with John Boehner he becomes a big sissy. He's now willing to negotiate away social security cost of living increases. Folks that live on SS can't afford to balance the national budget.
Why is Obama such a coward?

That's a pretty silly statement saying he is afraid of Bohner. He is simply compromising w/ the repugs.

20+ years later and Japan just launched another massive quantitative easing program to boost its economy (they also have an aging population). Its stock market is soaring...we can keep "paying" for these things a lot longer than people think. A gradual slide in the average U.S. standard of living is probably the best outcome at this point. Stop fighting The Man.

Compromise? Really? Is that what you think he wants?

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:With no political will to fix Social Security, the system is doomed to collapse while Baby Boomers are collecting it. How cost of living adjustments are caluculated are the least of the system's problems.

The generations following the Boomers already know they hold the short straw for SS. However, the Boomers (yes, I am a Boomer) are in for a big surprise. I read one book that said the Silent Generation (those born between 1924 and 1942) are the last generation to get full SS as we currently know it.

I'm thinking I will get 75% of what they are promising. Works for me. Would I like to get 100%? Sure, but I agree, there might have to be some cuts. The problem with SS is that Congress has used it and opened it up to so many people that probably do not deserve it.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Compromise? Really? Is that what you think he wants?

He offered many of the exact proposals (R)s demanded. He was still rejected out of hand. The only meaningful platform the (R)s have to campaign on are the deficit and national debt. I don't think any thoughtful person expects the (R)s to compromise at this point....might as well hit the links.

Margin Call wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Compromise? Really? Is that what you think he wants?

He offered many of the exact proposals (R)s demanded. He was still rejected out of hand. The only meaningful platform the (R)s have to campaign on are the deficit and national debt. I don't think any thoughtful person expects the (R)s to compromise at this point....might as well hit the links.

Wrong.

The (R)s still have the constitution to run on. That seems to be trampled on a lot lately. especially by the left.

and as usual the same ole same ole defend and blame, blame blame

Chrissy wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Compromise? Really? Is that what you think he wants?

He offered many of the exact proposals (R)s demanded. He was still rejected out of hand. The only meaningful platform the (R)s have to campaign on are the deficit and national debt. I don't think any thoughtful person expects the (R)s to compromise at this point....might as well hit the links.

Wrong.

The (R)s still have the constitution to run on. That seems to be trampled on a lot lately. especially by the left.

and as usual the same ole same ole defend and blame, blame blame

Most people don't understand nor give a shit about the Constitution. Q.E.D.

Margin Call wrote:

Chrissy wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Compromise? Really? Is that what you think he wants?

He offered many of the exact proposals (R)s demanded. He was still rejected out of hand. The only meaningful platform the (R)s have to campaign on are the deficit and national debt. I don't think any thoughtful person expects the (R)s to compromise at this point....might as well hit the links.

Wrong.

The (R)s still have the constitution to run on. That seems to be trampled on a lot lately. especially by the left.

and as usual the same ole same ole defend and blame, blame blame

Most people don't understand nor give a shit about the Constitution. Q.E.D.

Rrrrrrr

bluemoon wrote: Obama has promised several times to leave it alone but he just doesn't know how to keep a promise. He's a real disappointment to me.

All he's proposed is what essentially amounts to limiting the increase in cost of living adjustments by 0.3%.
You also should be aware that a year or two ago we passed the point where we pay in what we get out. Because the lifespan has increased, and because the boomers starting to collect it are so great in number, and the remaining payees are not, and because those remaining payees are paying less into the system because so many of them are under-employed with lower incomes;
because of all that we will now get out more than what we put in and there will be less and less money in the pot over time.

With that in mind, I repeat, all Obama has proposed is to cut the COLA increase by 0.3%.

Seniors or will be seniors don't need to oppose this. What you need to do is say "we'll go along with it IF you make other shit make the sacrifice too". Like welfare, defense, and all the rest.

Margin Call wrote:

Chrissy wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Compromise? Really? Is that what you think he wants?

He offered many of the exact proposals (R)s demanded. He was still rejected out of hand. The only meaningful platform the (R)s have to campaign on are the deficit and national debt. I don't think any thoughtful person expects the (R)s to compromise at this point....might as well hit the links.

Wrong.

The (R)s still have the constitution to run on. That seems to be trampled on a lot lately. especially by the left.

and as usual the same ole same ole defend and blame, blame blame

Most people don't understand nor give a shit about the Constitution. Q.E.D.

yea, I know. rights suck if they don't benefit you directly.