Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

badtoworse

(5,957 posts)
72. Everyone has their own view about investment prudence and expectations for the future
Wed May 8, 2013, 04:46 PM
May 2013

As I see it, significant inflation is inevitable in the future, but we obviously see things very differently. I'm very happy with my investment results; good luck with yours.

We're not going to agree about Social Security and the larger question about trusting the government. Good discussion, though.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Yet once its an electronic record it will always exist. dkf May 2013 #1
Frankly ... GeorgeGist May 2013 #2
I do. nt Mojorabbit May 2013 #82
The ACLU gives a damn. LAGC May 2013 #89
+100. n/t Skip Intro May 2013 #86
If the intent is to determine who should not have a gun... badtoworse May 2013 #3
I'm a fan of that idea Recursion May 2013 #5
This is what my concealed carry permit allows. rl6214 May 2013 #49
yup this, it would go a long way to strengthen support for background checks loli phabay May 2013 #57
because DonCoquixote May 2013 #98
I ask again: what are you willing to offer? Recursion May 2013 #4
How about this for an offer - Fewer of our kids will be killed by gun violence el_bryanto May 2013 #18
but they won't. thats the point. nt galileoreloaded May 2013 #21
Nonsense -sensible gun registration laws, with a real background check el_bryanto May 2013 #23
Yes, which is why *we would like to pass them* Recursion May 2013 #30
This is such an idiotic question - the truth is the people you represent will accept no compromise el_bryanto May 2013 #36
WTF? I'm not a representative of anybody Recursion May 2013 #37
When you come into this discussion and say "Look you have to give them something" el_bryanto May 2013 #38
In my experience, a deal where both sides come away with something... badtoworse May 2013 #93
A compromise means something needs to be given up in return. rl6214 May 2013 #50
Most gun rights advocates can accept the current restrictions... Pelican May 2013 #100
That dog won't hunt Major Nikon May 2013 #76
sure thing bro. galileoreloaded May 2013 #84
Not sure who you mean by "we" Major Nikon May 2013 #87
i meant you. nt galileoreloaded May 2013 #91
It's interesting you would think so Major Nikon May 2013 #96
ok galileoreloaded May 2013 #97
Not if nothing passes. Recursion May 2013 #24
True, but it's a distrust by a small fraction of Americans that leveraged their power to 54 senators reformist2 May 2013 #6
So you actually trust the government? badtoworse May 2013 #7
My point is that the majority of Americans are fine with background checks. reformist2 May 2013 #8
Actually it's almost half... dkf May 2013 #12
48% said background checks may lead to confiscation - and then most said that's fine with them! reformist2 May 2013 #15
It's not about the background checks; it's about trusting the government with information badtoworse May 2013 #17
Look at the polls, 90% support background checks. You might be happy, but you're not in the majority reformist2 May 2013 #19
Do you trust the government to keep track of your Social Security? DanTex May 2013 #29
If I had my druthers, I would have opted out of Social Security and invested the money myself badtoworse May 2013 #32
So do you actually think people should be able to opt out of Social Security? DanTex May 2013 #34
I like the Australian model where you have to invest a portion of your wages in a qualified fund. badtoworse May 2013 #44
So let's see. You want to privatize social security. You oppose gun control. DanTex May 2013 #48
Social Security TnDem May 2013 #52
Social security is not destined for eventual failure. DanTex May 2013 #59
Your point about the Fed raises a glaring conflict of interest issue badtoworse May 2013 #66
"the inevitable consequences of the Fed's non-stop printing presses (i.e inflation)" DanTex May 2013 #70
Everyone has their own view about investment prudence and expectations for the future badtoworse May 2013 #72
That's why it's good that SS funds are invested conservatively, not based on speculation or opinion. DanTex May 2013 #73
The discussion is about trust in the government badtoworse May 2013 #54
Just pointing out that you seem to agree with Rand Paul about everything. DanTex May 2013 #56
Remember the famous quote from Alan Greenspan TnDem May 2013 #60
The government has not managed social security for the sole benefit of its beneficiaries badtoworse May 2013 #64
What exactly has it done that you object to? DanTex May 2013 #65
See Post 66 badtoworse May 2013 #67
Post 66 doesn't answer the question at all. DanTex May 2013 #68
A private company has to prudently invest retirment contributions badtoworse May 2013 #69
The SS funds are invested prudently. Treasuries are the safest investment vehicle out there. DanTex May 2013 #71
That whole statement is boneheaded-wrong bhikkhu May 2013 #42
See No. 44 badtoworse May 2013 #45
Bad example, social security is broke and my three sons will never see a penny from it. rl6214 May 2013 #51
Gee, what a surprise, "pro-gun progressives" repeating right-wing talking points... DanTex May 2013 #53
Do you deny that the social security fund has been raided for years rl6214 May 2013 #55
Social security has not defaulted on any of its obligations. DanTex May 2013 #58
I trust the government all the time bhikkhu May 2013 #40
I thonk you are very naive badtoworse May 2013 #46
You're welcome to bhikkhu May 2013 #88
How much screaming have you heard on this board when Obama offered up Social Security cuts... badtoworse May 2013 #90
Because...they want to take your guns away? bhikkhu May 2013 #92
I keep my guns safe - it's called being a responsible gun owner badtoworse May 2013 #94
Because the alternative is to trust every single gun owner bhikkhu May 2013 #95
I think you missed the point. badtoworse May 2013 #99
Well, that would be a decent compromise bhikkhu May 2013 #101
54 Senators voted for it nadinbrzezinski May 2013 #39
Oops! So it's even worse! (I'll let my error stand, so your post makes sense.) reformist2 May 2013 #81
Thing is, it wasn't people who voted down M-T it was CONGRESS HereSince1628 May 2013 #9
Worse -- it was the Senate. This was never going anywhere in the House Recursion May 2013 #31
Oh come on... I call BS to that! ananda May 2013 #10
Quinnipiac polls says 48% believe background checks will lead to confiscation. dkf May 2013 #13
And then most said that background checks are fine with them anyway! reformist2 May 2013 #16
It proves the OPs point. This isn't a small extremist minority. It's half the population. dkf May 2013 #61
We have voter registration databases so why not gun registration databases, too? LonePirate May 2013 #11
Could it be, Bazinga May 2013 #25
That's all nonsense. Voter registration banks contain party affiliation which correlates highly ... LonePirate May 2013 #27
what sunk gun control is money from right wing lunatics bowens43 May 2013 #14
The bigger point is that distrust of government is the foundation of ALL opposition to gun control Demo_Chris May 2013 #20
Yes, all is lost, all is lost! Pholus May 2013 #28
The distrust is earned every day, every year, probably as long as governments have existed Demo_Chris May 2013 #74
I believe you when you say guns aren't your issue. Pholus May 2013 #79
I believe government exists for government, and it is our job to make it serve us... Demo_Chris May 2013 #80
Only insofar as you're saying you need to be active in the process. Pholus May 2013 #83
The interesting idea here is not "gun control" melm00se May 2013 #22
Well maybe if governments would obey the rules they claim to follow there would be more trust. JVS May 2013 #33
you mean like operating melm00se May 2013 #43
That's my feeling as well. We just watched the Calif. State Legislature pass truedelphi May 2013 #78
Yeah, that and ignorance gopiscrap May 2013 #26
Patch-able holes in a boat rather than sunk... LanternWaste May 2013 #35
The majority of the senate voted nadinbrzezinski May 2013 #41
The problem with every gun control compromise is that rl6214 May 2013 #47
What would you like in return for Universal Background Checks? jmg257 May 2013 #62
Just look at the shear number of laws being put forth rl6214 May 2013 #75
Why should we trust the Government? Savannahmann May 2013 #63
What really sank gun control was: Zoeisright May 2013 #77
The government has been losing trust rapidly since the 60s and 70s davidn3600 May 2013 #85
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»What Really Sank Gun Cont...»Reply #72