Re: 2016 Election
 

A Roger Chaple on another forum wrote something interesting and undoubtedly prophetic: "If the next president is a Republican he will get the blame for everything Obama has done. If the next president is a Democrat blame reverts back to Bush."

Re: 2016 Election
 

Yes. The Peruvian fanboy could take lesson from the aging rock'n'rollers and go start his own thread about how Peru is so much more awesome than the US. Because it's got **** all to do with the election.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Sorry, Dad.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Of course!

I was watching Andrew Cuomo a little bit today, doing pressers about the storm, he's much more centrist than his dad but there is something about him that I find appealing. A little bit of a badass thing going on. I wish he would have run, I'd like to know more about him.

I was thinking about Trump and why he's unsuited for the presidency and I guess my biggest issue, now that I'm coming out of denial and realizing this could actually happen, does have to do with temperament. He's been so rich for so long, he has no skills for compromise. I don't think he understands how (mostly) impotent the president is, specially when he has no alliances.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Increasing the minimum wage has been very up front in the election debate. I just added an opinion about an additional way to improve the lot of the poor and middle class. My bad. I should have been debating the musical tastes of the various candidates because that is far more important.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Yeah, it was all about raising the minimum wage in the US.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Yeah and God forbid we talk about ideas from another country like we often do about health care. My bad.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Yes. You bad. Me good. Stop talking shit.

PS - "My bad" went out with the Bush administration (see how I brought that back to the topic at hand).

Re: 2016 Election
 

Yeah, Dakota, you bad, alright. Still haven't answered my question about the Chilean social security system - if you're familiar with it. We could fold that into the debate about how to "improve" or "save" Social Security.

That is an issue somewhere about 17 out of 20 on the list of issues troubling those who are just starting to realize that there is an election "process" underway. Also known as "The Long March"...oh wait, that was the Chicoms in the 1930s.

The other thing you have to keep in mind is that people outside the United States, except in the UK (under Labour) and Scandinavia, do not have any ideas or even a clue as to how to improve the lot of the people. Even in the United States, these ideas are the exclusive province of the upper echelons of the Democratic Party. No others need make suggestions. So anyway, let's hear from you.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Actually I never saw the question. Spent a lot of time in Chile too, soI do know about the Chilean system..which was Ron Pauls big idea for Social Security. He left out a few details. The Chilean system can only work because the government still guarantees your pension. I think there are 3 levels of investment based on risk. The poorer classes are only allowed to select the least risky option. While the investment companies are private, these facts apply.

The Chilean government still guarantees the pensions. They make up the losses if a plan under performs a minimum profit level and assume responsibility for pensions if a fund goes bankrupt. They also pay a form of social assistance to those who do not qualify for a minimum pension. Any other way would leave pensioners destitute in a market crash. They did add a tax funded pension for people over 65 who did not ha e a private pension.

There are other issues as well. When all contributions began going to the new system there were no more contributions to the old but the government still has to pay out those pensions and do so from the general budget in the absence of continuing contributions. It is a financial problem for them

So it is not the total free market type of system the Republicans wanted.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Whose states here have a late primary?

I recall the last late primary I voted in, many on the ballot sent to me were not even running anymore.

I doubt I will even have to send in a primary ballot, by then good chance either Bernie or Clinton will have dropped out and only 1 of them will remain.


Does anyone know if it would just require simple federal legislation to bring in a national primary, or would it require a more difficult process to change?

The primary system is a total waste of time if your not in a early primary state.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Waste of time for sure. I suspect there would be constitutional issues trying to mandate a single national primary. A lot of latitude is granted to the states when it comes to voting. States even distribute the delegates differently. It is quite an odd setup.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Thanks for the input. If we adopted a similar system here, the government would also have to step in or set up something like the present Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation to protect against market risk. The new system would allow the decedent's spouse or heirs to receive the value of his/her account. At present, the system only pays a lump sum benefit of $255.00 and the possibility of getting the deceased's rate of SS payment if that is higher than the survivor's. The current system is a vast Ponzi scheme that is in a demographic death spiral. But a new system would have to be phased in so that those over a certain age, say 50, could stay in the SS system and those younger could opt in or out.

The new/replacement system would also have to take in an additional premium to cover benefits to the deceased's dependent children, as well as to continue the current SSD programme and pay benefits to the current class of recipients and those over 50 who stay in - until they've all assumed room temperature.

But any suggestion of replacing the current system with something incorporating the Chilean system (which, by the way, was developed by Milton Friedman and the boys at the Chicago school of economics - given a free hand by the dictator, Pinochet) would be demagogued to death by those who politically benefit from the current system via scaring the old folks.

Re: 2016 Election
 

We opponents of the current President need to rethink how successful he has been with respect to foreign affairs. This just in from Iran: We've been downgraded from "Great Satan" status to merely "Great False Idol." That's progress in the right direction, I think. I'll miss being a citizen of the country of the "Great Satan."

Iran's Supreme Leader Downgrades US from 'Great Satan' to 'Great False Idol'

Re: 2016 Election
 

The problem for Chile is the huge cost they have incurred with the new system which has to be paid for out of general tax revenue. Compare the population base and imagine the cost to the tax base in the U.S. There is also the issue of fees charged by pension plans in Chile.

Whatever we may think of it, the safest investment is U.S. treasury bonds (very low returns, but safe) which is where all S.S. contributions must go by law. The problem is keeping the politicians hands off using the money to shore up other budget items. Lock box my ass. They broke that lock. S.S. could be fixed with some common sense effort.