2024 elections Congressional & State

[houndawg]

If the GOP House passes a bill with Soc Securiy, Medicare and other the Draconian cuts the Anti-American Fascist extremists want to, it most certainly will be on the GOP.

Kind of like how the Anti-American Marxist extremists passing the oxymoronic Inflation Reduction Act was on the Donks?

Social Security needs to be reformed. It's a Ponzi scheme that relies on revenue from current workers to pay retirees their benefits. The problems that creates are coming to a head as Boomers retire and there aren't enough workers contributing to cover their costs. Social Security should be truly self funding.

Republicans Signal Cuts To Social Security, Medicare With New House Majority

The Republican Study Committee proposed a budget for fiscal 2023 that would gradually increase the eligibility ages for Social Security and Medicare, and change the Social Security benefit formula for people 54 and younger, while not changing it for people closer to receiving benefits.

The devil is in the details but on the surface this isn't unreasonable.

Remove the wage cap
Make Congress pay back their IOUs - a couple of trillion mas y menos
no renegotiation of the formula until the boomers expire
no privatization of SS but when you reach the age at which you qualify for 100% , 65+, you have x period of time to cash out and leave the system if you so desire and best of luck.


See where that puts us in ten years and where it projects after the pig-in-the-python generation is off the chart

[houndawg]

Hence why I said “part of”. And the decisions prior to CU rendered it basically icing on the cake of corruption anyway.

The root cause is a dominator culture moving toward tge extreme end of selfishness and resistance to change. I’m fine with competition and who doesn’t like innovation?

The root cause is a "dominator" culture? We've been driven by a "dominator" culture for more 200 years. The breakdown in community as a result of technology and mobiliity has played a much greater part in the problems that you highlight than any "dominator" culture. You want government to fill that void when I don't see any evidence that they won't fvck it up. You also leave out the huge impact of the "entitled now" culture. Saving is for suckers, I'm entitled to free college, a living wage job, the newest iPhone, a 72" TV, a new Tahoe and a home where I want it.

Free college, or college paid for with public service, needs to become the norm - right now we're on the road to George Carlin's "..just smart enough to find their way to the timeclock.." public.

[BDKJMU]

The root cause is a "dominator" culture? We've been driven by a "dominator" culture for more 200 years. The breakdown in community as a result of technology and mobiliity has played a much greater part in the problems that you highlight than any "dominator" culture. You want government to fill that void when I don't see any evidence that they won't fvck it up. You also leave out the huge impact of the "entitled now" culture. Saving is for suckers, I'm entitled to free college, a living wage job, the newest iPhone, a 72" TV, a new Tahoe and a home where I want it.

Free college, or college paid for with public service, needs to become the norm - right now we're on the road to George Carlin's "..just smart enough to find their way to the timeclock.." public.

No what we need are less people seeking nearly worthless NON STEM 4 year degrees, and more going into the trades.

[kalm]

Free college, or college paid for with public service, needs to become the norm - right now we're on the road to George Carlin's "..just smart enough to find their way to the timeclock.." public.

No what we need are less people seeking nearly worthless NON STEM 4 year degrees, and more going into the trades.

Seems given the cultural and ethical decline of our culture we need MORE NON STEM degrees. Or at least those going into STEM fields need more of it in their curriculum. The ancient stoics believed you could be both virtuous and productive.

[BDKJMU]

No what we need are less people seeking nearly worthless NON STEM 4 year degrees, and more going into the trades.

Seems given the cultural and ethical decline of our culture we need MORE NON STEM degrees. Or at least those going into STEM fields need more of it in their curriculum. The ancient stoics believed you could be both virtuous and productive.

We don’t habe enough Americans gwtting STEM degrees, and we don’t have enough recent HS grads going into the trades, where we have a shortage that is just getting worse, and your answer isn’t more going into STEM amd trades, but more NON STEM degrees..

[houndawg]

No what we need are less people seeking nearly worthless NON STEM 4 year degrees, and more going into the trades.

Seems given the cultural and ethical decline of our culture we need MORE NON STEM degrees. Or at least those going into STEM fields need more of it in their curriculum. The ancient stoics believed you could be both virtuous and productive.

[GannonFan]

Seems given the cultural and ethical decline of our culture we need MORE NON STEM degrees. Or at least those going into STEM fields need more of it in their curriculum. The ancient stoics believed you could be both virtuous and productive.

We don’t habe enough Americans gwtting STEM degrees, and we don’t have enough recent HS grads going into the trades, where we have a shortage that is just getting worse, and your answer isn’t more going into STEM amd trades, but more NON STEM degrees..

I probably agree that we don't really have enough STEM majors, but one the plus side I really don't mind using immigration to fill that gap. Immigration is a major strength for us (no on immigrates to places like China, or Russia, or Japan or the like), so let's use that strength. In addition, I don't want to be dictating to people what they need to study - there's something to be said for freedom and the freedom to determine your own life and your own happiness are center to that.

What I do disagree on is the idea to make colleges "free" or to even boost things like community colleges (maybe by making those free). Nothing is free, it's just passing the cost on to someone else. And that makes it even more costly as they people paying the cost (those not attending those colleges) have no skin in the game and therefore no way to push back. Colleges already cost too much money because they know no matter what they ask for, students will give it to them. And students can give it to them because we make borrowing money way too easy, which colleges also know. Throwing more money into that situation will just be throwing money directly to the colleges.

We're already starting down the right path - not every career needs a college education. There are trades, there are non-trade jobs that just don't need 4 years of a liberal arts education. If you look at the actual numbers, and factor in the costs of borrowing money to pay for college, there are way too many degrees that end up having college graduates making less lifetime earnings than folks who skipped college and started working right away. That needs to be encouraged - and if college really appeals to you, do it later in life when you have actually lived some of that life.

[houndawg]

Seems given the cultural and ethical decline of our culture we need MORE NON STEM degrees. Or at least those going into STEM fields need more of it in their curriculum. The ancient stoics believed you could be both virtuous and productive.

We don’t habe enough Americans gwtting STEM degrees, and we don’t have enough recent HS grads going into the trades, where we have a shortage that is just getting worse, and your answer isn’t more going into STEM amd trades, but more NON STEM degrees..

If you have a STEM degree you already know that these people are, generally, not suited for the kind of work that that requires decisions that aren't already rigidly guided by something like the laws of physics. The only Presidents that come to mind for me that were engineers were Jimmy Carter and Herbert Hoover

[GannonFan]

We don’t habe enough Americans gwtting STEM degrees, and we don’t have enough recent HS grads going into the trades, where we have a shortage that is just getting worse, and your answer isn’t more going into STEM amd trades, but more NON STEM degrees..

If you have a STEM degree you already know that these people are, generally, not suited for the kind of work that that requires decisions that aren't already rigidly guided by something like the laws of physics. The only Presidents that come to mind for me that were engineers were Jimmy Carter and Herbert Hoover

Stereotypes of a bygone era. STEM majors today aren't like the ones produced in the 70's and 80's. Folks with PhD's, sure a lot of them are still the bookish types, but the other ones are from far more broad-based learning than what happened in the past. Nothing wrong with pushing for more smart people to learn things that are hard to learn.

[houndawg]

We don’t habe enough Americans gwtting STEM degrees, and we don’t have enough recent HS grads going into the trades, where we have a shortage that is just getting worse, and your answer isn’t more going into STEM amd trades, but more NON STEM degrees..

I probably agree that we don't really have enough STEM majors, but one the plus side I really don't mind using immigration to fill that gap. Immigration is a major strength for us (no on immigrates to places like China, or Russia, or Japan or the like), so let's use that strength. In addition, I don't want to be dictating to people what they need to study - there's something to be said for freedom and the freedom to determine your own life and your own happiness are center to that.

What I do disagree on is the idea to make colleges "free" or to even boost things like community colleges (maybe by making those free). Nothing is free, it's just passing the cost on to someone else. And that makes it even more costly as they people paying the cost (those not attending those colleges) have no skin in the game and therefore no way to push back. Colleges already cost too much money because they know no matter what they ask for, students will give it to them. And students can give it to them because we make borrowing money way too easy, which colleges also know. Throwing more money into that situation will just be throwing money directly to the colleges.

We're already starting down the right path - not every career needs a college education. There are trades, there are non-trade jobs that just don't need 4 years of a liberal arts education. If you look at the actual numbers, and factor in the costs of borrowing money to pay for college, there are way too many degrees that end up having college graduates making less lifetime earnings than folks who skipped college and started working right away. That needs to be encouraged - and if college really appeals to you, do it later in life when you have actually lived some of that life.

Yes nothing is free, but thats not really relevant - there is a return on the investment of having a populace that is better educated through high school than we are - at a minimum we won't have to import as many STEM grads

[kalm]

We don’t habe enough Americans gwtting STEM degrees, and we don’t have enough recent HS grads going into the trades, where we have a shortage that is just getting worse, and your answer isn’t more going into STEM amd trades, but more NON STEM degrees..

I probably agree that we don't really have enough STEM majors, but one the plus side I really don't mind using immigration to fill that gap. Immigration is a major strength for us (no on immigrates to places like China, or Russia, or Japan or the like), so let's use that strength. In addition, I don't want to be dictating to people what they need to study - there's something to be said for freedom and the freedom to determine your own life and your own happiness are center to that.

What I do disagree on is the idea to make colleges "free" or to even boost things like community colleges (maybe by making those free). Nothing is free, it's just passing the cost on to someone else. And that makes it even more costly as they people paying the cost (those not attending those colleges) have no skin in the game and therefore no way to push back. Colleges already cost too much money because they know no matter what they ask for, students will give it to them. And students can give it to them because we make borrowing money way too easy, which colleges also know. Throwing more money into that situation will just be throwing money directly to the colleges.

We're already starting down the right path - not every career needs a college education. There are trades, there are non-trade jobs that just don't need 4 years of a liberal arts education. If you look at the actual numbers, and factor in the costs of borrowing money to pay for college, there are way too many degrees that end up having college graduates making less lifetime earnings than folks who skipped college and started working right away. That needs to be encouraged - and if college really appeals to you, do it later in life when you have actually lived some of that life.

You sound like an elitist here.

Everyone has skin in the game. Life is challenging on many different levels. Providing free tuition supports the entire society and helps build the middle class.

[houndawg]

If you have a STEM degree you already know that these people are, generally, not suited for the kind of work that that requires decisions that aren't already rigidly guided by something like the laws of physics. The only Presidents that come to mind for me that were engineers were Jimmy Carter and Herbert Hoover

Stereotypes of a bygone era. STEM majors today aren't like the ones produced in the 70's and 80's. Folks with PhD's, sure a lot of them are still the bookish types, but the other ones are from far more broad-based learning than what happened in the past. Nothing wrong with pushing for more smart people to learn things that are hard to learn.

I sure don't disagree - and my engineering schooling was in the 80s

[GannonFan]

I probably agree that we don't really have enough STEM majors, but one the plus side I really don't mind using immigration to fill that gap. Immigration is a major strength for us (no on immigrates to places like China, or Russia, or Japan or the like), so let's use that strength. In addition, I don't want to be dictating to people what they need to study - there's something to be said for freedom and the freedom to determine your own life and your own happiness are center to that.

What I do disagree on is the idea to make colleges "free" or to even boost things like community colleges (maybe by making those free). Nothing is free, it's just passing the cost on to someone else. And that makes it even more costly as they people paying the cost (those not attending those colleges) have no skin in the game and therefore no way to push back. Colleges already cost too much money because they know no matter what they ask for, students will give it to them. And students can give it to them because we make borrowing money way too easy, which colleges also know. Throwing more money into that situation will just be throwing money directly to the colleges.

We're already starting down the right path - not every career needs a college education. There are trades, there are non-trade jobs that just don't need 4 years of a liberal arts education. If you look at the actual numbers, and factor in the costs of borrowing money to pay for college, there are way too many degrees that end up having college graduates making less lifetime earnings than folks who skipped college and started working right away. That needs to be encouraged - and if college really appeals to you, do it later in life when you have actually lived some of that life.

Yes nothing is free, but thats not really relevant - there is a return on the investment of having a populace that is better educated through high school than we are - at a minimum we won't have to import as many STEM grads

Sure, if that return on investment was really worth it. But status quo, or making it more free, isn't worth the investment we're making in it. We're not really getting folks, coming out of college with some degrees, who are really any better off for the experience 4 or 5 years later. They're not really getting that much smarter, and they're doing it at tremendous cost. Again, even if we take the cost away from them and let everyone else bear an even bigger burden, those folks aren't going to be coming out of college any smarter than they are now. We already have jobs that can't be filled that need to be filled. And they're good paying jobs that will probably give us, society, a better return on investment in the long run. Nothing wrong with relying on immigration to some extent - it's what makes this country a better bet long term that a closed off society like China. People actually want to come and live here. No problem leaning into that strength of ours.

[Winterborn]

If you have a STEM degree you already know that these people are, generally, not suited for the kind of work that that requires decisions that aren't already rigidly guided by something like the laws of physics. The only Presidents that come to mind for me that were engineers were Jimmy Carter and Herbert Hoover

Stereotypes of a bygone era. STEM majors today aren't like the ones produced in the 70's and 80's. Folks with PhD's, sure a lot of them are still the bookish types, but the other ones are from far more broad-based learning than what happened in the past. Nothing wrong with pushing for more smart people to learn things that are hard to learn.

Well said.

I do find it funny how out of touch Houndy is.

[Winterborn]

I probably agree that we don't really have enough STEM majors, but one the plus side I really don't mind using immigration to fill that gap. Immigration is a major strength for us (no on immigrates to places like China, or Russia, or Japan or the like), so let's use that strength. In addition, I don't want to be dictating to people what they need to study - there's something to be said for freedom and the freedom to determine your own life and your own happiness are center to that.

What I do disagree on is the idea to make colleges "free" or to even boost things like community colleges (maybe by making those free). Nothing is free, it's just passing the cost on to someone else. And that makes it even more costly as they people paying the cost (those not attending those colleges) have no skin in the game and therefore no way to push back. Colleges already cost too much money because they know no matter what they ask for, students will give it to them. And students can give it to them because we make borrowing money way too easy, which colleges also know. Throwing more money into that situation will just be throwing money directly to the colleges.

We're already starting down the right path - not every career needs a college education. There are trades, there are non-trade jobs that just don't need 4 years of a liberal arts education. If you look at the actual numbers, and factor in the costs of borrowing money to pay for college, there are way too many degrees that end up having college graduates making less lifetime earnings than folks who skipped college and started working right away. That needs to be encouraged - and if college really appeals to you, do it later in life when you have actually lived some of that life.

You sound like an elitist here.

Everyone has skin in the game. Life is challenging on many different levels. Providing free tuition supports the entire society and helps build the middle class.

And after such a hopeful previous post from you.

I disagree with you as much here as I agree with Ganny on this topic.

[GannonFan]

You sound like an elitist here.

Everyone has skin in the game. Life is challenging on many different levels. Providing free tuition supports the entire society and helps build the middle class.

And after such a hopeful previous post from you.

I disagree with you as much here as I agree with Ganny on this topic.

I think he just likes to be argumentative.

As for the elitism, nonsense. I'm all in favor of public schools, I come from a long line of public school educators and my kids all went that route. I firmly believe in the value of public schools from pre K through 12th grade. But beyond that, nope, I'm not in favor of the public school model. There's a limit to what society really needs and to what we really need to be paying for. Being against collectivism, especially into adulthood, is not automatically elitism.

[kalm]

You sound like an elitist here.

Everyone has skin in the game. Life is challenging on many different levels. Providing free tuition supports the entire society and helps build the middle class.

And after such a hopeful previous post from you.

I disagree with you as much here as I agree with Ganny on this topic.

What part do you disagree with?

[Winterborn]

And after such a hopeful previous post from you.

I disagree with you as much here as I agree with Ganny on this topic.

I think he just likes to be argumentative.

As for the elitism, nonsense. I'm all in favor of public schools, I come from a long line of public school educators and my kids all went that route. I firmly believe in the value of public schools from pre K through 12th grade. But beyond that, nope, I'm not in favor of the public school model. There's a limit to what society really needs and to what we really need to be paying for. Being against collectivism, especially into adulthood, is not automatically elitism.

He does. It is what I like about him.

My only issue with public schools is on a case by case basis. I am also a public school kid (at least for a few years) and it works good for the most part (referencing my local case basis, but that needs to be fixed at the local level not by anybody else).

[Winterborn]

And after such a hopeful previous post from you.

I disagree with you as much here as I agree with Ganny on this topic.

What part do you disagree with?

Providing free tuition supports the entire society and helps build the middle class.

Pretty much your last sentence. Like I mentioned above, I have no issue with k-12 being public, anything outside of that it is a hard no.

I also like the idea of making the public side a bit more accountable ( I have seen, voted, and dealt with hugely over budgeted school referendums) and I think letting the parents decided where the tax money goes for their kids is a good compromise.

[kalm]

What part do you disagree with?

Providing free tuition supports the entire society and helps build the middle class.

Pretty much your last sentence. Like I mentioned above, I have no issue with k-12 being public, anything outside of that it is a hard no.

I also like the idea of making the public side a bit more accountable ( I have seen, voted, and dealt with hugely over budgeted school referendums) and I think letting the parents decided where the tax money goes for their kids is a good compromise.

Ok. Viva la deference.

But you’ll agree that free college tuition benefits the entire society and helps build the middle class, no?

[Winterborn]

Pretty much your last sentence. Like I mentioned above, I have no issue with k-12 being public, anything outside of that it is a hard no.

I also like the idea of making the public side a bit more accountable ( I have seen, voted, and dealt with hugely over budgeted school referendums) and I think letting the parents decided where the tax money goes for their kids is a good compromise.

Ok. Viva la deference.

But you’ll agree that free college tuition benefits the entire society and helps build the middle class, no?

Nope.

I think it will both be a hindrance to a college graduate of that system (lowest common denominator type of education) and will cheapen what college is meant to do. Which is to actually educate those that want to learn more in depth. I want a smaller government, not a larger one. This is just part of the process.

In fact I think the government should not be involved in the student loans side of thing at all. I would also like to see an overhaul of the entire federal grant system as well. Not eliminate it, but cut the flow a bit and add more check and balances to it.

[BDKJMU]

Ok. Viva la deference.

But you’ll agree that free college tuition benefits the entire society and helps build the middle class, no?

Nope.

I think it will both be a hindrance to a college graduate of that system (lowest common denominator type of education) and will cheapen what college is meant to do. Which is to actually educate those that want to learn more in depth. I want a smaller government, not a larger one. This is just part of the process.

In fact I think the government should not be involved in the student loans side of thing at all. I would also like to see an overhaul of the entire federal grant system as well. Not eliminate it, but cut the flow a bit and add more check and balances to it.

Yep. All the govt has done is drive up costs. Every time they raise student loan amounts, universities raise tuitions accordingly.

[kalm]

Ok. Viva la deference.

But you’ll agree that free college tuition benefits the entire society and helps build the middle class, no?

Nope.

I think it will both be a hindrance to a college graduate of that system (lowest common denominator type of education) and will cheapen what college is meant to do. Which is to actually educate those that want to learn more in depth. I want a smaller government, not a larger one. This is just part of the process.

In fact I think the government should not be involved in the student loans side of thing at all. I would also like to see an overhaul of the entire federal grant system as well. Not eliminate it, but cut the flow a bit and add more check and balances to it.

Agree on the student loan problem. Disagree on the rest. The compromise is more targeted education for those willing to do the work, thin out the undecideds, and include the trades for those uninterested in academics.

Thin out the inefficiencies if you will AND remove the profit motive from the lending.

Historically, an educated workforce increases productivity and innovation for the private sector. It’s not just cost. EG: a massive ROI for the people associated with the GI Bill which benefitted the entire economy.

We’ve had 40 years of privatization and deregulation where the “free market” got to decide what was profitable from a social spending standpoint. The answer? Grease the skids via campaign donations and make private profits off of social spending…be it tuition or healthcare administration and insurance.

So subsidized tuition sans the middleman can also be a catalyst to higher wages and lower poverty while INCLUDING a ROI to the tax payers. If you’re a developer or home builder you need those higher wages.

[UNI88]

Nope.

I think it will both be a hindrance to a college graduate of that system (lowest common denominator type of education) and will cheapen what college is meant to do. Which is to actually educate those that want to learn more in depth. I want a smaller government, not a larger one. This is just part of the process.

In fact I think the government should not be involved in the student loans side of thing at all. I would also like to see an overhaul of the entire federal grant system as well. Not eliminate it, but cut the flow a bit and add more check and balances to it.

Agree on the student loan problem. Disagree on the rest. The compromise is more targeted education for those willing to do the work, thin out the undecideds, and include the trades for those uninterested in academics.

Thin out the inefficiencies if you will AND remove the profit motive from the lending.

Historically, an educated workforce increases productivity and innovation for the private sector. It’s not just cost. EG: a massive ROI for the people associated with the GI Bill which benefitted the entire economy.

We’ve had 40 years of privatization and deregulation where the “free market” got to decide what was profitable from a social spending standpoint. The answer? Grease the skids via campaign donations and make private profits off of social spending…be it tuition or healthcare administration and insurance.

So subsidized tuition sans the middleman can also be a catalyst to higher wages and lower poverty while INCLUDING a ROI to the tax payers. If you’re a developer or home builder you need those higher wages.

The majority of college students go to public institutions so we haven't had "40 years of privatization and deregulation" in higher education. We have had heavy government involvement in financing higher education and what have been the results? Costs have gone up way faster than inflation and it isn't the evil capitalists/private sector's fault. Government involvement exacerbated a problem but more government involvement will fix it?

The GI Bill was in exchange for service. Free college tuition with no skin in the game on the part of the students is a recipe for exacerbating the problems even more. I'm all for expanding the GI Bill, Americorps and similar programs. I'm against free college without a corresponding service commitment.

[kalm]

Agree on the student loan problem. Disagree on the rest. The compromise is more targeted education for those willing to do the work, thin out the undecideds, and include the trades for those uninterested in academics.

Thin out the inefficiencies if you will AND remove the profit motive from the lending.

Historically, an educated workforce increases productivity and innovation for the private sector. It’s not just cost. EG: a massive ROI for the people associated with the GI Bill which benefitted the entire economy.

We’ve had 40 years of privatization and deregulation where the “free market” got to decide what was profitable from a social spending standpoint. The answer? Grease the skids via campaign donations and make private profits off of social spending…be it tuition or healthcare administration and insurance.

So subsidized tuition sans the middleman can also be a catalyst to higher wages and lower poverty while INCLUDING a ROI to the tax payers. If you’re a developer or home builder you need those higher wages.

The majority of college students go to public institutions so we haven't had "40 years of privatization and deregulation" in higher education. We have had heavy government involvement in financing higher education and what have been the results? Costs have gone up way faster than inflation and it isn't the evil capitalists/private sector's fault. Government involvement exacerbated a problem but more government involvement will fix it?

The GI Bill was in exchange for service. Free college tuition with no skin in the game on the part of the students is a recipe for exacerbating the problems even more. I'm all for expanding the GI Bill, Americorps and similar programs. I'm against free college without a corresponding service commitment.

To clarify…I was speaking of the private profit from lending.

It’s substantial.

https://protectborrowers.org/130-billion-psl-market/

As mentioned, I’m not a fan of the current system for the same reasons as you.

Not more but better government can help.