Irony

[WATU2]

There have been lots of posts about how its ironic that many of those who most oppose Obamacare or government spending are dependent on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, especially in the Southeast and Southwest.

Irony, early onset dementia...something else?

Lindsey Graham, seeking aid for home state, says he can't remember why he voted against Sandy relief

Graham was among the Republican senators who opposed a federal aid package in January 2013 to assist states hit by Hurricane Sandy, but now he doesn't remember why.

"I'm all for helping the people in New Jersey. I don't really remember me voting that way," Graham said.

Pressed further, he said: "Anyway, I don't really recall that, but I'd be glad to look and tell you why I did vote no, if I did."

 

[lawpoke87]

I likely would have voted for the bill even with all the extra add-on non Sandy related spending due to public perception. However, the practice of politicians (both parties) adding their pet pork projects to popular spending bills is just one of the many things wrong with our current system.

 

[TUMe]

Just one little tiny detail about Social Security and Medicare. You paid into it out of every paycheck you ever earned. They gave you an account number and every year they sent you a statement of what you would get. You had no choice but to pay into it. Also, many of the Sandy and North Carolina victims received SS and Medicare.

If you were in a non-government plan and paid into it for 40 years, no one would think that you shouldn't draw out of it when you retired and that it was some sort of a gift. J. Morgan, Vanguard, or Fidelity didn't pay up someone would go to prison.

I don't understand why this keeps coming up. These programs aren't some sort of a welfare or something, they are giving you back your own money. If you don't agree you should get a medium or the like to take it up with Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

 

[lawpoke87]

If Vanguard, Fidelity, etc..."borrowed" the money coming into their funds for expenses and outlays and didn't show that obligation on their books they would certainly be in prison. Imagine if Vanguard spent every dime it had collected over the last 50 years, had zero current funds, and were relying solely on incoming deposits to fund its obligations all the while knowing future deposits will be insufficient to cover outlays.

Crazy no one is willing to address the future shortcomings of these three programs.

 

[WATU2]

It's interesting that so many people think government is broken that we could get together and fix it. My libertarian friends and I see eye to eye on the fact there's too much money in the electoral and lobbying process which if we could get rid of that, government would improve by eliminating waste, corruption and becoming smaller. Other areas, not so much. One keeps insisting that what passes as lobbying here is considered corruption in other countries.

There is no hope that incumbents in Congress will reduce access to the money that keeps them in office, and since donations from the top 200 donors to federal campaigns equal those from everyone else, the people's influence is diminished, especially after the election is over.