Archive for the ‘Social Security’ Category
As the Republicans feverishly work to eliminate the last bastions of the American People’s investments, their homes, their pensions, their Social Security, Health Security-Medicare and Medicaid, they collude with the Democrats and the Independents to finish the looting. Take away Social Security and Medicare and people will be forced to survive on what little value is left in the homes and property that has not already been devalued through the corrupt banking and money printing used to prop up the fraud. So, what’s left? If Europe is a pre-cursor to what’s coming to America, they just outright steal it — all legal and justified.
Democracy Now’s interview with Richard Wolff, “A People’s Revolt in Cyprus: Richard Wolff on Protests Against EU Plan to Seize Bank Savings A People’s Revolt in Cyprus: Richard Wolff on Protests Against EU Plan to Seize Bank Savings” lays out what we can all expect in the near future and what people will need to do to try to protect their investments — MONEY.
Anyone interested in another point of view might find this article of interest:
By Pete Kasperowicz – 07/19/11 11:20 AM ET
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) on Tuesday predicted that the U.S. would default on its debt.
“When a country is indebted to the degree that we’re indebted, the country always defaults,” the 2012 GOP presidential candidate said on the House floor. “We will default because the debt is unsustainable.”
Paul predicted that the U.S. government would dodge the best solution, which is to impose real spending cuts.
“The reason we don’t cut spending is, one side loves entitlements and one side loves war,” he said.
But he warned against the temptation of simply continuing to send out government checks backed with more borrowed money. He said choosing this course would mean default would come in the form of significant inflation and a further erosion of the dollar.
“If we don’t understand this, this default will not be because we don’t send out the checks,” Paul said. “We will send out the checks. It will be defaulted on because people will get their money back, or they will get their Social Security checks, and it won’t buy anything.”
He warned this is a “much, much worse” solution.
Paul was one of several Republicans who spoke Tuesday morning on the House floor in anticipation of the GOP’s “Cut, Cap and Balance”
bill. Rep. Wally Herger (R-Calif.) was one who spoke in favor of the bill, and said higher spending under the Obama administration was a proven failure.
“The tragic reality is that the president’s big spending policies only made things worse,” Herger said. “Now, with the national debt at crisis levels, he is standing in the way of common sense solutions, offering only lectures, not leadership.
“As a matter of conscience, this Congress cannot support allowing President Obama to continue to steer America’s debt past a point of no return,” he added.
Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) said Democrats have no plan for handling the debt crisis, citing the Senate’s rejection earlier this year of the Obama administration’s proposed 2012 budget.
“There is no leadership on the part of the Democrats,” she said.
Rep. Mike Quigley (Ill.) was one of the few Democrats who spoke on the debt ceiling Tuesday morning. He argued that Republicans were using the myth of former President Reagan to justify efforts to tie the debt-ceiling increase to spending cuts.
Quigley said that if Reagan could see the current debate, “he’d see his most dedicated followers using his name as justification for saying no to honoring our debts. He’d see his legacy used to play chicken with the world’s greatest economic engine.”Source:
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/172203-ron-paul-says-us-debt-default-unavoidableThe contents of this site are © 2011 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc.
The Truth Squad
The fact that scare tactics used since Social Security’s creation has left many Americans worried about it’s future says more about the effectiveness of political propaganda than the true conditions of Social Security’s finances. As Franklin Delano Roosevelt famously said: “Repetition does not transform a lie into truth”; however, it certainly can misinform. Contrary to Senator Rand’s assertion, Social Security is NOT broke or broken and young people do not support cutting the program’s benefits. In fact, the Recession Generation understands all too well the need for the stable and reliable income Social Security provides for millions of Americans who’ve contributed to the system.
The following is an excerpt from an interview on Democracy Now Thursday, December 16, 2010 with Representative Rush Holt. Here he explains in simple understandable language how the enemies of the American people finally win the war.
Here’s the link for the complete interview:
REP. RUSH HOLT: But you heard the President say, well, in a compromise, we have to sacrifice some things we care about. I’m not willing to sacrifice Social Security. And I’m concerned that this does real damage, does violence, to the rationale for Social Security. Apart from what it does to the financing of Social Security, which can be made up in future years, it does, I think, irreparable damage to the very idea of Social Security. It puts Social Security on the table as a bargaining chip along with the alternative minimum tax, the debate over whether the Bush tax cuts should end at $250,000 or a million dollars income, and with business expensing and estate tax rate. In other words, it’s just a bargaining chip, it’s just another item. And, you know, ever since 1935, Social Security has had its enemies, but it has withstood those enemies because of really the ingenious, the shrewd rationale that FDR assigned to Social Security. And this undermines that. It makes Social Security just another program, not—it does away with the idea that Treasury funds, that general funds, are not fed in to Social Security to support it. And I think a year or two in the future, the political support for Social Security will just unravel.
QUESTION: […] Obviously, every working American will next year see, for one year, their pay—this is a sizable reduction in what they have to pay out in Social Security taxes. So then, at the end of next year, as you’re beginning a presidential election year, the Obama administration will be forced to having to increase those taxes again or may end up bending to Republican pressures to begin creating private retirement accounts as part of that two percent return, and something that Obama’s own economic adviser, Austan Goolsbee, has often advocated. Do you have any concerns about that? What will happen at the end of this one-year period?
REP. RUSH HOLT: Well, in January 2012, workers—under this proposal, under this scheme, workers would see their take-home pay go down. I’m not sure who wants to be responsible for that. So, this is called a one-year change. And any lost revenue will be replenished from the general fund, and then the tax rates would be restored to the full 6.2 percent in 2012. I’m not so sure. I mean, it—but my point is, even if you lose that revenue for one, two or three years, it could be made up. But the damage done to the idea, the political underpinning of Social Security, will be, I’m afraid, irreparable.
By the time of this posting tax bill will already be signed – the beginning of the end. On Yahoo News: Bill preventing big tax hikes heads to Obama Fri.
Obama Signs (Republican) Tax Deal, Hails Bipartisan Effort to Grow Jobs
and calls it “COMPROMISE.” I wonder how he defines surrender.