Let's balance the budget; what would you cut?

[Dinner]

Go do your research and then come back and explain how I'm wrong.

From the OP:

$608 billion (+4.5%) - Social Security
$386 billion (+5.2%) - Medicare

Unless you totally eliminate both programs you will not get close to saving $1 trillion. If you eliminate both then you will save $994 billion but you said you wanted to means test, meaning cut rich people off from these benefits, so that implies some people (most people?) continue to receive these benefits there for you will not save the whole amount.

[Dinner]

Rich people in CA relocate to NV.

Nope. The population keeps going up.

[Ben Kenobi]

Unless you totally eliminate both programs you will not get close to saving $1 trillion.

I cut both by 15 percent and managed to save 1 trillion exactly. Stop lying.

[Ben Kenobi]

Nope. The population keeps going up.

The population? What's that have to do with the migration of rich people out of CA? The fastest growing city of over a million is in Vegas. Look at Phoenix too. Are you telling me that a significant number of these folks are not former CA residents?

[Dinner]

Prove the rich are leaving even as the total population goes up or piss off. You, as usual, are making wild claims without any supporting evidence and given your track record I am not inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt.

[Wezil]

Ben telling someone to "be honest".



It was worth stopping in this morning.

[Ben Kenobi]

Unless you totally eliminate both programs you will not get close to saving $1 trillion.

Wow why don't you admit I proved you wrong. You don't need to totally eliminate either program, let alone both of them.

Why don't you stop fearmongering.

As for "the rich" leaving CA

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2008/05/05/california-boasts-most-millionaires/

"Yet Los Angeles County, while still in the lead, lost about 7,000 millionaire households."

Which is about 2.68 percent of their total.

The big gainers included Maricopa County in Arizona (which houses Phoenix) with an additional 23,000 new millionaire households

Yeah, I just bet that none of those 23 thousand are Californians fleeing the state.

[Ben Kenobi]

Wezil, it's Oerdin, what do you expect?

He has to have one inaccuracy in every post.

[Wezil]

It's a pretty rich comment coming from you Ben.

You're so twisted I'm sure you screw your pants on in the morning.

[Dinner]

Wow why don't you admit I proved you wrong. You don't need to totally eliminate either program, let alone both of them.

Why don't you stop fearmongering.

As for "the rich" leaving CA

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2008/05/...-millionaires/

Ben, you're so stupid it is painful.

What most interests me is the shift in millionaire populations since last year. The total population of millionaire households grew 5.9% in 2007, a slight pick-up from the 2006 growth rate of 5%. Yet Los Angeles County, while still in the lead, lost about 7,000 millionaire households. Cook County in Illinois (which includes Chicago) also lost about 7,000, while Orange County and San Diego’s millionaire populations dipped slightly.

Wow, you mean the state which was most effected by the real estate bubble where a very large percentage of paper millionaires' fortunes were based on real estate assets decreased when the real estate market imploded? Who would have guessed?!

The decrease in total numbers doesn't mean millionaires gave up their beach houses in Malibu and decided to set up house in some **** hole in Alabama and instead mostly just reflects the decreases in asset values due to the financial crisis and deep recession. Now, start posting on topic or I'll be forced to put you on ignore for stupidity the way half the forum already has.

Edit: The conclusion from your own link, you numbnut:

It means millionaires are still multiplying, but housing is taking its toll. Even though the millionaire stats don’t include primary homes, real estate is still an important wealth creator, and areas that are most dependent on the real-estate boom (California and Florida) have taken the hardest hit.

Learn to read.

[Ben Kenobi]

The decrease in total numbers doesn't mean millionaires gave up their beach houses in Malibu and decided to set up house in some **** hole in Alabama and instead mostly just reflects the decreases in asset values due to the financial crisis and deep recession. Now, start posting on topic or I'll be forced to put you on ignore for stupidity the way half the forum already has.

Perhaps perusal of the date would be informative?

[Dinner]

Alright Ben. You're so stupid I am no longer wasting time on you. For the third time in nearly a decade on poly I am putting someone on ignore.

[Ben Kenobi]

decreases in asset values due to the financial crisis and deep recession.

As evidenced by the date of May 5th, 2008.

I love knee-jerk responses.

[realpolitic]

Wezil, it's Oerdin, what do you expect?

He has to have one inaccuracy in every post.

Oh, don't be so hard on Oerdin, he got his education at FoxMath.com




(That adds up to a 120% response.)

[Kitschum]

Honestly, what's with Fox and stupid math?