WELCOME TO OPINIONS BASED ON FACTS (OBOF)
Name | Published |
OVERVIEW | Dec. 28, 2010 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 1 | Dec. 30, 2010 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 2 | Jan. 10, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 3 | Jan. 17, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 4 | Jan. 24, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 5 | Jan. 31, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 6 | Feb. 07, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 7 | Feb. 14, 2011 |
SPECIAL ISSUE | Feb. 18, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 8 | Feb. 21, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 9 | Mar. 01, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 10 | Mar. 07, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 1 | Mar. 14, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 1A | Mar. 21, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 2 | Mar. 25, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 3 | Mar. 29, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 4 | Apr. 04, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 5 | Apr. 11, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 6 | Apr. 18, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 7 | Apr. 25, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 7A | Apr. 29, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 8 | May 02, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 9 | May 09, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 10 | May 16, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY & MORE PART 10
IN THIS ISSUE
1. What a week.
2. Boehner's awe-inspiring hypocrisy on the debt ceiling.
3. Boehner demands "trillions" in spending cuts.
4. Debt ceiling mis-understood.
5. Rescuing Detroit
WHAT A WEEK
This has been a week filled with important actions. Some Government business and some Government scandal. I'm not going to spend any time on the scandal. It makes for interesting reading I guess, but from a serious standpoint and things that matter to all our lives, I think it's best to let it alone.
I haven't even been able to review all of my sources this week. I'm going to list the choices that I have from just one source. I can't possibly cover them all, let alone what might be on the other sources. I could probably fill this entire message, this week, with any one of these listed.
1. DIGGING INTO BOEHNER'S ANTI-TAX PHILOSOPHY.
2. WHY DOES THE GOP HATE TAXES SO MUCH?
3. A BILL THAT COULD FORCE RAPE & INCEST SURVIVORS TO PROVE TO THE IRS THAT THEY WERE ASSAULTED.
4. BOEHNER'S AWE-INSPIRING HYPOCRISY ON THE DEBT LIMIT.
5. BOEHNER'S UNREALITY CHECK ON THE DEFICIT.
6. WHY AREN'T THE POWERS THAT BE TACKLING THE JOBS CRISIS?
7. CHINA 'S BAD ECONOMIC NEWS IS NOT NECESSARILY GOOD FOR THE U.S.
8. SOCIAL SECURITY NEEDS UNCLE SAM'S IOUs - - NOW.
9. GOVERNMENT STAYS SILENT ABOUT SOCIAL SECURITY.
10. REVISITING THE COST OF THE BUSH TAX CUTS.
11. BOEHNER DECLARES TAX HIKES "OFF THE TABLE," DRAWING WHITE HOUSE REBUKE.
12. RESCUING DETROIT
13. MUSKETS IN HAND, TEA PARTY BLASTS HOUSE REPUBLICANS.
14. U.S.
15. HOW AMERICA
16. RECOVERY EFFORTS COULD SPEED DOLLAR'S DECLINE.
17. BOEHNER DEMANDS "TRILLIONS" IN SPENDING CUTS IN EXCHANGE FOR LIFTING DEBT CEILING.
18. THE DEFICIT SPENDING STORM WE CANNOT AVOID.
19. THE GOVERNMENT ONLY HAS THE MONEY THAT THE PEOPLE GIVE IT. IT HAS NO OTHER RESOURCE, EXCEPT TO BORROW.
Looking back at this list, I think it is just interesting reading the list. Any item on the list brings up questions. SO WHERE DO WE START? (time passes and thought develops.) I think we'll start with the two items listed that refer to Speaker Boehner.
BOEHNER'S AWE-INSPIRING HYPOCRISY ON THE DEBT CEILING
BOEHNER DEMANDS "TRILLIONS" IN SPENDING CUTS
Last Monday, Speaker Boehner told the Economic Club of New York
He added, "We're not talking about billions here. We should be talking about cuts in the trillions, if we're serious about addressing America
It's interesting to note that, the House just passed the Ryan budget bill with only 4 Republicans voting no. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has determined that the Ryan budget would add between $5 trillion and $6 trillion to the national debt in the next decade. That is more debt than has ever been incurred in any 10 yr. period in our history.
Considering that, it is suggested that when the President sits down with the Republican leadership for further discussions, he should simply say, "Let's just increase the debt limit by the amount of debt it would take to accommodate Paul Ryan's budget in the next decade." That, of course, would be ridiculous and is not realistic. It does make about as much sense as Ryan's budget does.
Ryan's budget increases spending on Medicare from $563 billion in 2011 to $953 billion in 2021, a 69% increase. Ryan's real cuts in Medicare would begin after 2021. How can a Party, that just passed a budget that would incur $5 to $6 trillion debt increase, with a straight face, pin the blame for a debt limit increase on the President. Talk about hypocrisy, this takes the cake!
DEBT CEILING MIS-UNDERSTOOD
RECENT POLLS SHOW THAT TWO-THIRDS OF OUR PEOPLE DO NOT WANT THE DEBT LIMIT RAISED. I THINK IT IS DUE TO THE FACT THAT THEY DON'T KNOW OR UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DEBT LIMIT IS AND WHY IT IS NEEDED. MANY THINK THAT RAISING THE DEBT LIMIT MEANS THAT YOU CAN SPEND THAT MUCH MORE MONEY, NOT TRUE.
IT MEANS THAT WE CAN PAY DEBTS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN INCURRED. WITHOUT RAISING THE DEBT LIMIT, WE CAN'T PAY THE INTEREST ON THE BONDS THAT HAVE BEEN SOLD ON THE OPEN MARKET. IT PUTS THE UNITED STATES IN DEFAULT ON OUR WORLDWIDE OBLIGATIONS, SOMETHING THAT HAS NEVER HAPPENED IN THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY. IT WILL REDUCE OUR TRIPLE A INVESTMENT RATING AND IT WILL SEND FINANCIAL SHOCK WAVES AROUND THE WORLD. THE VALUE OF THE DOLLAR WILL DECLINE.
Consider this, you have incurred a debt, when you buy a house that you are going to pay for in the future with interest payments. You had a debt limit, based on the revenue you were receiving. Now you need to buy a new car, the old one is on it's last leg, but you reached your debt limit when you bought the house. To buy this car you either have to have more revenue or raise your debt limit, maybe by changing the period for which you were going to pay for the house from 15 years to 30 years. Now you have been able to raise your debt limit, because of debt that you had already incurred with the house.
Now, suppose you couldn't get your house refinanced, but you had to get a new car or a good used one. You find that you can't make these payments as you thought you could. Some way you have to get your debt limit raised or you are going to default on either the car or the house. What happens to your credit standing, if you default even on just one of these?
At the same time, after working for one company for 28 years, you are dismissed. Not because of your work, but because the company thinks, right or wrong, they can get the job done that you are doing, with a new entry level employee at a much lower cost to the company.
This now puts you in a disastrous and catastrophic situation, the same as our Government would be if it defaults on it's obligations.
The debt limit was first set in 1917, so the government could fund military operations in World War 1 without, repeatedly, having to ask Congress for appropriations. Since 1960, the debt limit has been raised 78 times, according to the Treasury Dept.
During the Presidency of Geo. W. Bush, the debt limit was raised seven times. There was no reduction in spending required then, as now and he cut revenue by cutting taxes for the wealthy, without any offsetting reduction in spending. At the same time, he started two wars.
Basically, that was a perfect formula for the WORST RECESSION, SINCE THE 1929 DEPRESSION. THERE IS JUST ONE FACTOR THAT HAS CREATED EVERY PROBLEM WE HAVE - - GREEDY PEOPLE FOR MONEY AND POWER. MONEY IS POWER.
THE FOLLOWING NEEDS NO MORE COMMENT FROM ME
Rescuing Detroit
By E.J. Dionne Jr.,
Don’t expect to see a lot of newspapers and Web sites with this headline: “Big Government Bailout Worked.” But it would be entirely accurate.
The actual headlines make the point. “Demand for fuel-efficient cars helps GM to $3.2 billion profit,” declared The Post. “GM Reports Earnings Tripled in First Quarter, as Revenue Jumped 15%,” reported the New York Times.
Far too little attention has been paid to the success of the government’s rescue of the Detroit-based auto companies, and almost no attention has been paid to how completely and utterly wrong bailout opponents were when they insisted it was doomed to failure.
“Having the federal government involved in every aspect of the private sector is very dangerous,” Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) told Fox News in December 2008. “In the long term it could cause us to become a quasi-socialist country.” I don’t see any evidence that we have become a “quasi-socialist country,” just big profits.
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) called the bailout “the leading edge of the Obama administration’s war on capitalism,” while other members of Congress derided the president’s auto industry task force. “Of course we know that nobody on the task force has any experience in the auto business, and we heard at the hearing many of them don’t even own cars,” declared Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Tex.) after a hearing on the bailout in May 2009. “And they’re dictating the auto industry for our future?
What’s wrong, sorry to say, is that you won’t see a news conference where the bailout’s foes candidly acknowledge how mistaken they were.
The lack of accountability is stunning but not surprising. It reflects a deep bias in the way our political debate is carried out. The unexamined assumption of so much political reporting is that attacks on government’s capacity to do anything right make intuitive sense because “everybody knows” that government is basically inefficient and incompetent, especially when compared with the private sector.
Government failure gets a lot of coverage. That’s useful because government should be held accountable for its mistakes. What’s not okay is that we hear very little when government acts competently and even creatively. For if mistakes teach lessons, successes teach lessons, too.
In the case of the car industry, allowing the market to operate without any intervention by government would have wiped out a large part of the business that is based in Midwestern states. This irreversible decision would have damaged the economy, many communities and tens of thousands of families.
And contrary to critics’ predictions, government officials were quite capable of working with the market to restructure the industry. Government didn’t overturn capitalism. It tempered the market at a moment when its “natural” forces were pushing toward catastrophe. Government had the resources to buy the industry time.
What’s heartening is that average voters understand that broad assaults on government provide better guidance for the production of sound bites than for the creation of sensible public policy. That’s why House Republicans are backpedaling like crazy on their plans to privatize Medicare — even as they pretend not to.
Conservatives really believed that voters mistrusted government so much that they’d welcome a chance to scrap Big Government Medicare and have the opportunity to purchase policies in the wondrous health insurance marketplace. Don’t people assume that anything is better than government?
But there were deep potholes on the road to a market utopia. Put aside that the Republican budget wouldn’t provide enough money in the long term for the elderly to afford decent private coverage. The truth is that most consumers don’t have great confidence in the private insurance companies, with which they have rather a lot of experience.
When it comes to guaranteeing their access to health care in old age, most citizens trust government more than they trust the marketplace. This doesn’t mean they think Medicare is without flaws. What they do know is that Medicare does not cut people off in mid-illness and that its coverage is affordable because government subsidizes it.
It’s axiomatic that government isn’t perfect and that we’re better off having a large private sector. It ought to be axiomatic that the private sector isn’t perfect, either, and that we need government to step in when the market fails. The success of the auto bailout and the failure of the Republicans’ anti-Medicare campaign both teach the same lesson: The era of anti-government extremism is ending.
Talk with you next week.
Floyd
Floyd.
ReplyDeleteI have read and re-read this weeks post and concede that you have done great again. On the other hand is it possible to get a group in
Washington that will lay aside the partisan feud, take a balanced look at all the problems that have been created for us by both sides if the isle. If and when they see the terrible mess we are, if they have one honest principle they will get serious about doing something to correct the what is wrong and search for a way out of this jungle. As long as the goal of both sides are only to defeat the opposition by blaming the other side for what is not right we are doomed.
I have waited till now trying to think of some positive comment to post and that did not happen What can we do to get this thing turned around?