congressional supercommittee wheels and deals

[Guest]

could this really happen?

excerpts taken from the kennebec journal - but please read the article before commenting - thanx

http://www.kjonline.com/news/new-formula-slashessocial-security-increases_2011-11-07.html

"The inflation measure under consideration is called the Chained Consumer Price Index, or chained CPI. On average, the measure shows a lower level of inflation than the more widely used CPI for All Urban Consumers."

"The new measure would reduce Social Security cost-of-living adjustments, or COLAs, by an average of 0.3 percentage points each year, according to the Social Security Administration. Next year's increase, the first since 2009, will be 3.6 percent, starting in January.

Under the chained CPI, yearly benefits for a typical 65-year-old would be about $136 less, according to an analysis of Social Security data. At age 75, annual benefits under the new index would be $560 less. At 85, the cut would be $984 a year, and at 95, the annual income loss would amount to $1,392."

hoping it is too soon to start shaking in my boots!

[Guest]

If you think that cutting government spending and taking the baby steps towards a balanced budget currently being considered by the "supercommittee" will be without pain, you're kidding yourself. There are many here who would enthusiastically support a balanced budget amendment, with implementation immediately. This little change in the calculation of the Social Security inflator index is nothing compared to the life-changing things that will have to disappear from our lives as we move even more aggressively towards balancing government spending with revenues. We can argue about who's ox will be gored more than another, but everyone will have to suffer if we are serious about moving towards fiscal responsibility.

[Guest]

well, vk, if that's the way it's gonna be - i might as well jump in front of the bus rather than wait to be thrown under it...at least my ox will be saved!

[Guest]

during Obama's reign nothing that drastic will ever be implemented. He and his lack of action congress will continue to spend and increase the deficit as long as there are lenders out there willing to continue to buy out our country.

The drastic actions will be left to the NEW POTUS and new congress to deal with. That new POTUS will get one entitlement none of his predecessors really ever had....they all said it but they did not....inherit the mess from the prior administration.

It is going to take a new POTUS to have any chance what so ever to reunite this country and in so doing we will do what ever has to be done.....just as we have in the past.

Do not vote for ANY incumbents...NONE!

btk

[Guest]

...Do not vote for ANY incumbents...NONE!...btkI'm with you 100%, Billie. That seems to be the only chance we have to begin to re-form a government For The People.

[Guest]

I'm with you 100%, Billie. That seems to be the only chance we have to begin to re-form a government For The People.

So, does that mean you wouldn't vote for Marco Rubio, or Jim Demint, or Eric Cantor, or others of their ilk. Their incumbency dooms them also in your eyes?

[Guest]

Yep, they served their term, new faces, like a new broom sweeps clean. Out with the old, in with the new.

[Guest]

as long as the "super committee" operates on the not my programs and I won't touch your programs, they will as history confirms time and again, accomplish nothing.

If they weren't politicians, they could at least come up with alternatives that could very well be unacceptable...but they are just waiting for the clock to run out and the default plan to kick in. Useless legislooters!!!btk

[Guest]

So, does that mean you wouldn't vote for Marco Rubio, or Jim Demint, or Eric Cantor, or others of their ilk. Their incumbency dooms them also in your eyes?Yes, I mean exactly that. They've served and have accomplished nothing. In fact, as a part of the 111th Congress, they've done more harm than good. Those who have been attributed with leadership qualities haven't lead. Those that were elected to govern failed to do so. Those that were elected to serve "for the people" didn't.

Yes, if I had a vote on all of the names you mentioned, I would vote to elect their opponents.