Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
AARP is a lobbying group, not a charity. They got Medicare Part D for you guys, the largest expansion of a entitlement program ever.

CEO salaries of lobbyists are based on performance. NFIB CEO makes millions, too.


Medicare might be poorly managed and underfunded, but for those who paid in their entire lives it's anything but an entitlement. You are mistaking medicare with food stamps, government housing, and other "actual" entitlement programs that eat away at this country's ability to meet its obligations to those who are actually productive in society.
quote:
Originally posted by Jobe:
Another reason, as if one is needed, to stay clear of AARP.

I didn't know some AARP executives had seven-figure compensations. Wow! They won't get my money.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/201..._re_us/us_aarp_probe


May I conclude that you are not among those who chide progressives for being critical of the enormous salaries paid to CEOs of big corporations like Exxon, Morgan Stanley, etc.? I hear it all the time from right-wing pseudo economists, who fervently contend that the big bucks paid to these moguls of industry are simply what they are entitled to, that it is the marketplace, the blessed "free market economy" that determines compensation levels.

While not agreeing with this marketplace concept, I must nevertheless ask, could it not be, then, that for a very successful enterprise like AARP, the same principle would apply? Probably not, in the eyes of the warped wingers, who view the AARP as the spawn of Satan because it supported health care reform.
quote:
Originally posted by Fighting Illini:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
AARP is a lobbying group, not a charity. They got Medicare Part D for you guys, the largest expansion of a entitlement program ever.

CEO salaries of lobbyists are based on performance. NFIB CEO makes millions, too.



Medicare might be poorly managed and underfunded, but for those who paid in their entire lives it's anything but an entitlement. You are mistaking medicare with food stamps, government housing, and other "actual" entitlement programs that eat away at this country's ability to meet its obligations to those who are actually productive in society.

I think I disagree with your definition of an entitlement program. It would seem to me that Medicare and Social Security are programs people pay into and are therefore "entitled" to draw from or use them. To me that is the definition of an entitlement program.
Welfare, food stamps, medicade etc are not entitlements , but just giveaways. Welfare was conceived as a way to lessen crime as it is preceived that one would possibally steal in order to obtain food and shelter for his/her family , and that welfare would be cheaper than further overloading the legal system and throwing people in jail or the pen for stealing.
Last I heard it cost about $45000 to house a jailbird for a year, so there may be some merit in that program. BTW, I didn't post that information to argue about, just saying it is something to consider.

Betternu may have to straighten us out on that point though.
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
quote:
Originally posted by Jobe:
Another reason, as if one is needed, to stay clear of AARP.

I didn't know some AARP executives had seven-figure compensations. Wow! They won't get my money.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/201..._re_us/us_aarp_probe


May I conclude that you are not among those who chide progressives for being critical of the enormous salaries paid to CEOs of big corporations like Exxon, Morgan Stanley, etc.? I hear it all the time from right-wing pseudo economists, who fervently contend that the big bucks paid to these moguls of industry are simply what they are entitled to, that it is the marketplace, the blessed "free market economy" that determines compensation levels.

While not agreeing with this marketplace concept, I must nevertheless ask, could it not be, then, that for a very successful enterprise like AARP, the same principle would apply? Probably not, in the eyes of the warped wingers, who view the AARP as the spawn of Satan because it supported health care reform.


Left wing nuts shouldn’t be called progressive and I never reference them this way. They should be called regressive which means, according to the dictionary, Logic . obtained from or characterized by backward reasoning. Fits real well.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/regressive

This is America, AARP can pay their people whatever they want. I don’t have to support them while they pretend to do things that benefit me. The vast majority of AARP members were against BO’s healthcare reform but AARP pushed for it anyway. People and organizations that support the healthcare law have no clue what they’re supporting.
quote:
Originally posted by seeweed:
quote:
Originally posted by Fighting Illini:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
AARP is a lobbying group, not a charity. They got Medicare Part D for you guys, the largest expansion of a entitlement program ever.

CEO salaries of lobbyists are based on performance. NFIB CEO makes millions, too.



Medicare might be poorly managed and underfunded, but for those who paid in their entire lives it's anything but an entitlement. You are mistaking medicare with food stamps, government housing, and other "actual" entitlement programs that eat away at this country's ability to meet its obligations to those who are actually productive in society.

I think I disagree with your definition of an entitlement program. It would seem to me that Medicare and Social Security are programs people pay into and are therefore "entitled" to draw from or use them. To me that is the definition of an entitlement program.
Welfare, food stamps, medicade etc are not entitlements , but just giveaways. Welfare was conceived as a way to lessen crime as it is preceived that one would possibally steal in order to obtain food and shelter for his/her family , and that welfare would be cheaper than further overloading the legal system and throwing people in jail or the pen for stealing.
Last I heard it cost about $45000 to house a jailbird for a year, so there may be some merit in that program. BTW, I didn't post that information to argue about, just saying it is something to consider.

Betternu may have to straighten us out on that point though.


Medicare and social security are "earned" through years of paying in. Entitlement just means to give a "right or claim" to something.
For example, I don't work, but I am entitled to receive food thorugh food stamps.

Either way, both types of programs are abused and underfunded.

As for your opinion that welfare keeps people out of jail. Come on now. How many people in jail are dependent upon welfare when they are out of jail? I would bet the overwhelming majority. I would bet you there is a direct correlation with incarceration rates and the dependence on welfare.
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
Everyone in jail is on welfare. The cost to keep a convicted drug user in jail for possession of a handful of pot for 5 years is $35,000/year, minimum. IF they get sick and need open heart surgery, the state has to pay that in full as the state does not purchase insurance for its inmates.


Perhaps jails should accept Medicaid and food stamps?
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
quote:
Originally posted by Jobe:
Another reason, as if one is needed, to stay clear of AARP.

I didn't know some AARP executives had seven-figure compensations. Wow! They won't get my money.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/201..._re_us/us_aarp_probe


May I conclude that you are not among those who chide progressives for being critical of the enormous salaries paid to CEOs of big corporations like Exxon, Morgan Stanley, etc.? I hear it all the time from right-wing pseudo economists, who fervently contend that the big bucks paid to these moguls of industry are simply what they are entitled to, that it is the marketplace, the blessed "free market economy" that determines compensation levels.

While not agreeing with this marketplace concept, I must nevertheless ask, could it not be, then, that for a very successful enterprise like AARP, the same principle would apply? Probably not, in the eyes of the warped wingers, who view the AARP as the spawn of Satan because it supported health care reform.


AARP is a tax-exemp not for profit organization. Not the same thing as a corporation trying to make money. Debate-fail on this one better.
It says it not for profit, but it acts like a corporation.

quote:
WASHINGTON — U.S. Rep. Charles Boustany and other Republicans said Wednesday they will call on the Internal Revenue Service to investigate whether AARP has abused its tax-exempt status and misled millions of its senior-citizen members.

"The lack of a strong wall between AARP's for-profit and nonprofit side raises serious questions about its tax-exempt status," said Boustany, chairman of the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Oversight.

"AARP enjoys a privileged tax-exempt status, but in many cases, AARP resembles a for-profit entity."

Boustany's panel will hold a hearing Friday focusing on AARP's structure and whether it makes money off an insurance product it endorses that is sold to millions of seniors, including many AARP members.


They make money by licensing their name to a product. Those 'endorsed by the AARP' lines.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×