39 total posts
(Page 1 of 2)
I think I like...
I think I like the idea of having the option to invest some of my Social Security in the stock market. Of course, having an option, I might chose not to do it with part or any of it.
I'm not sure he's wrong...in a figurative sense
lol... I never said he was wrong.
I was just reminding people of what the guy said then... versus what he had to say now.
You never said he was wrong, but still poke with a stick
Not at all relevant how the market is today,yesterday or tomorrow as far as someone's LONG TERM goals are.
Some idiot wants to day trade their retirement away, have at it. People should have choices.
You also have that attitude about saving the banks...
... Right ?
The freddie / fannie maes wanted to make a bunch of risky investments so they should be left to sink on their own too, right ?
Thanks for the link, Torey
I saw this on TV
The reporter's intro made it sound like a stealth capture of a presidential guffaw caught off mike. But, it's plain he did this in front of a large crowd and in a jocular manner. Any one of these folks could have "leaked" this to the press. When listened to in it's full context, I find the remark quite candid and innocent. I don't expect our leaders to tighten up and and always use carefully scripted language. We need to know what they really think and not just what their handlers allow to be released to the public. Why do you think candidates spend more time explaining remarks than getting out a true message that's helpful to voters? Surely there are folks out there who already know who they're going to vote for just by knowing the candidates party...it wouldn't matter who...it's the party or perceived distance between another one or another person.
Just another opportunity to Bash Bush
Very mild stuff and on the money. I wonder if any of these critics ever watch the financial shows. Much stronger language is often used.
Note the snide commentary that accompanies the video.
I don't expect our leaders to be sticks in the mud. I do expect them to give a "true message" though. That is why I feel it is important to point out when a leader has gone off message. Especially when the deviation is so far off from what they were preaching just a short time ago. That is why I think verbal gaffes such as the one Jesse Jackson made a few weeks ago are so telling... and why this exchange was important too.
People like Bush (aided by Karl Rove for all those years) build whole attack campaigns on one verbal slip up or a reversal of thought by their opponents. To have someone do the very same service for them is entirely appropriate. Especially when their gaffe reveals they did not have the unwavering faith in what they were trying to commit someone else to.
It wasn't a gaffe...
or a slipup or a reversal or anything like that. You are really making way way too much of it.
No, you are making too much of it.
My original post, if you are willing to go back and read it... stated Bush makes fun of wall street. I then ask if this was not the same guy who wanted to turn SS into a 401-k.
Now ever since then. You have been trying to make the case that I am some how bad mouthing the prez. How can that be ? All I did was state the facts. I did not editorialize... I did not make snide comments.
No sir, YOU are out off line with your accusations. Furthermore, you are a blatant hypocrite for accusing me of all sorts of ulterior motives. As you have said so many times to me in the past... do not ASSUME to know my thoughts and motivations. However, in the clean little double standard of a world that you live in... you will always accuse other people, and harass them, and then go crying home to whine with your friends, or punch the "Oh he was mean to me" button that the forum gladly provides to you for your petty little temper tantrums.
My god Ed, Cowboy up, for once in your life and drop the BS games. Everyone know you for who you are. Only your friends tell you your doing something righteous and socially acceptable. I know I'm an a-hole at times but at least I don't pretend to be justified all the time.
I did not make snide comments.
No no, not at all.
Maybe you meant, "I did not not make snide comments."
And you didn't claim I said things I didn't either, did you?
(grin and shaking my head)
Speaking of being a "blatant hypocrite", how about
the little gambit when you claimed that people who you like do no wrong when they steal things from law abiding organizations, but people that you don't like who steal stuff from a criminal enterprise must be condemned?
You seem to excel at attempting to hold others to standards that you do not meet, while inventing "quotes" so that you can divert attention from your inability to formulate a cogent argument.
yada, yada, yada
"Now let me get this straight... wasn't this the guy that just a few short years ago, said that he had so much confidence in the stock exchange that we should essential convert the US Social Security system over to a federal version of a 401-k ??????"
Has he changed his position?
Well, look at it this way.
SS has a negative rate of return.
Whole attack campaigns
To have someone do the very same service for them is entirely appropriate.
Right, because God knows Bush has never been subject to unfair attacks or lies.
Much doo-doo about nothing.
Wait a minute. I think you're stretching your
then versus now comparison far out of reasonable proportion. First off, he didn't say Wall Street "was drunk". He said it "got drunk". As well, his Social Security alternative had nothing to do with turning this government entity over to money brokers or revamping it to emulate Wall Street. It was to allow younger workers the option to divert some of their payroll deduction into personally managed accounts similar to IRAs. An article here even suggests his proposal was rather limited when compared to what others had suggested. I'm not saying I agree with any editorial type remarks in the article but it does give a better outline of the plan than does yours.
I'd think getting drunk, though not a good thing, is less damaging than being completely addicted. And our Social Security system certainly is. It's addicted to gathering all the money it can from today's workers to pay benefits to today's retirees. It doesn't need sobering up...it needs extensive rehab but is being kept in a state of denial instead.
In any event, I'm thinking any further stretching of your arms left and right to show the distance between the president's proposal and his candid remark are going to make your hands snap back and smack you on both cheeks.
--pssst--- it was....
What is a "reasonable proportion" ?
I did not editorialize. I did not give my own opinions about the subject. I did not suggest that his idea's were too extreme, nor not extreme enough. I did not even say that he did anything. Indeed I asked only if he was the guy who wanted to do something a few years ago.
Now you can think I'm playing a game of what the meaning of "is" is... but I could say you were doing the same thing questioning the difference between "was drunk" and "got drunk".
I am greatly surprised by just how much of a reaction that this post has received. Actually, I should say just how many have come to the defense of the prez. I personally did not find his comments offensive or outrageous. I was amused by his public show of mild approbation towards an institution he had formerly supported whole heartedly. I personally think he would have been a better president if he had, indeed, publicly shown a little more consideration of the realities of the world, rather than the slogan driven cheer leading he has done in presenting the bulk of his initiatives.
Well, people could do an advanced search on the term "Bush", you as the author, and Speakeasy Forum.
I think that some folks,
if they read that this president at corn flakes for breakfast, would run to their pantries and purge it of all traces of the product so their friends wouldn't find it there. This has become purely ridiculous.
Ok, you asked this question
"wasn't this the guy that just a few short years ago, said that he had so much confidence in the stock exchange that we should essential convert the US Social Security system over to a federal version of a 401-k ??????
Well...you answer it....did he say that???...or did you make it up thinking no one would remember or call you to task for the remark??
Did he say it word for word ? No. He did not.
Was that idea not at the heart of his proposed reforms, Steven? Privatizing Social Security by allowing for citizen controlled investment ?
Here is your quote:
?Now let me get this straight... wasn't this the guy that just a few short years ago, said that he had so much confidence in the stock exchange that we should essential convert the US Social Security system over to a federal version of a 401-k ???????
Is there anything in your link that would support that?
I am expected to support asking a question ?
Yeah ! With all the trolling posts you have laid on us since you popped onto the SE scene, your gonna lay this expectation at my feet ?
I expect you know where to place this double standard of yours...
You can't support it ,eh?
Back to Speakeasy forum
(Page 1 of 2)