Might be test time eh?

[subroc]

...Let people control their own retirement; privatize Social Security.: I disagreed with this. For those that agree, one question will be how to reimburse those who have paid in hundreds of thousands of after tax dollars and received no benefits...

It would take a generation, but is an effort that is worth starting.

It will be unsustainable in less than a generation anyway.

[YardleyLabs]

It would take a generation, but is an effort that is worth starting.

It will be unsustainable in less than a generation anyway.

Actually, the unsustainability problem is smaller than it appears and transitory. The changes made in 1986 pretty much did the job, despite the fact that the resulting surplus was used immediately to justify the deficit. Now we need an adjustment of about 10% in he combination of benefits and rates to reflect changes in post-retirement life expectancy. Once past the baby boomer bust, the imbalance in the system goes away and surpluses return. I think the primary reason the problem gets treated hysterically is because of one simple fact: the amounts that have already been borrowed will need to be repaid to cover the costs of the benefits that were already purchased. The Bush plan buried this into an estimated $2 trillion plus in borrowing that would be needed for the "transition and cuts in benefits that would effectively confiscate the contributions already made by younger tax payers. In fact, the social security trust was the primary source of financing for deficits incurred under Bush. Bush himself made it clear that, as far as he was concerned, social security taxes were simply another source of revenues to pay for government programs, whether or not related to the program itself.

Some in our country think that Social Security is a trust fund -- in other words, there's a pile of money being accumulated. That's just simply not true. The money -- payroll taxes going into the Social Security are spent. They're spent on benefits and they're spent on government programs. There is no trust. We're on the ultimate pay-as-you-go system -- what goes in comes out. And so, starting in 2018, what's going in -- what's coming out is greater than what's going in. It says we've got a problem. And we'd better start dealing with it now.(http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archiv...050209-15.html)

In fact, current funding levels for social security are sufficient to pay benefits through 2040-2050 with no change. If economic growth is better than projected, the funds might never run out. If worse, the adjustment needed is still limited. However, one has to accept and demand that it is possible to prepay the cost of future benefits through government and have those obligations honored. That means living within our means over time. Instead, the Bush approach argued that permanent deficits were acceptable. Inherent in this belief was an implicit assumption that we would ultimately default on our debt obligations either through non-payment in the case of social security, or through devaluation in the case of debt sold to the public and to foreign investors.

[ppro]

I guess I am not libertarian . I scored 20/100 conservative

[ducknwork]

Hmm. 40-30, centrist. Go figure. I guess I get to hang out with Yardley and DNF.

The description is dead nuts on target though:

Centrist prefer a "middle ground" regarding government control of the economy and personal behavior. Depending on the issue, they sometimes favor government intervention and sometimes support individual freedom of choice. Centrists pride themselves on keeping an open mind, tend to oppose "political extremes," and emphasize what they describe as "practical" solutions to problems.

The questions were waaaaay too vague, IMO. Too hard to answer some of them definitively.

[david gibson]

Hmm. 40-30, centrist. Go figure. I guess I get to hang out with Yardley and DNF.

The description is dead nuts on target though:


The questions were waaaaay to vague, IMO. To hard to answer some of them definitively.

exactly. for instance, i dont advocate getting rid of welfar completely, but it needs to be tightened up, so thats a maybe. same with SS. 70/60 here, to the left a hair and top line of centrist. last i took this test 2 years ago i was a tad right.

[road kill]

My score was 50-50.

Dead center!!


RK

[david gibson]

My score was 50-50.

Dead center!!


RK

not in this crowd dude, 50/50 is considered right wing extremism, remember?

[Cody Covey]

The questions themselves are interesting.


Let people control their own retirement; privatize Social Security.: I disagreed with this. For those that agree, one question will be how to reimburse those who have paid in hundreds of thousands of after tax dollars and received no benefits.

Needless to say, I scored as a left/libertarian.

Why do democrats spew this crap when they know that no one is suggesting completely getting rid of Social Security without addressing people that have already paid. When Bush said privatize social security he was talking about 2%. What i think they should do is phase out social security. everyone who has already paid in gets what they paid while no new people would be added. They can invest how they see fit and if they don't to bad for them. That money will go back into the economy via the buying of goods and services since they didn't invest.

[Marvin S]

Yeah, that's shocking given the "test" is a Libertarian website. And hey, what do you know....on the same "test" website you can also join and/or donate money to the Libertarians.

It's hard not to end up being some sort of Libertarian . When Virginia Postrel was Editor of Reason I could ID with the cause, when Nick Gillespie took over things changed & I no longer even read the magazine.

But, from people's postings on this particular forum their scores make me wonder. Not those who consider themselves somewhat conservative as most are MOR's, but the lefty's .

[road kill]

It's hard not to end up being some sort of Libertarian . When Virginia Postrel was Editor of Reason I could ID with the cause, when Nick Gillespie took over things changed & I no longer even read the magazine.

But, from people's postings on this particular forum their scores make me wonder. Not those who consider themselves somewhat conservative as most are MOR's, but the lefty's .

You beleive my score don't you?
I'm sure everyone was totally honest, aren't you???



RK