WELCOME TO OPINIONS BASED ON FACTS (OBOF)
&
THINGS
YOU MAY HAVE MISSED (TYMHM)
YEAR ONE
YEAR TWO
YEAR THREE
YEAR FOUR
|
OBOF YEAR FOUR
INDEX
|
Published
|
|
OVERVIEW
|
|
|
OBOF TYMHM PART
14-01
|
Jan. 02, 2014
|
Agenda
1. As we start the fourth year.
2. Social Security and a new Progressive
Movement
to increase SS.
3. Brand new book "Ronald Reagan and the SS
Heist.
4. NAFTA and 20 years of the great unfulfilled
promises.
5. Stars to watch for 2014 elections.
AS
WE START THE FOURTH YEAR.
Looking
back, over the past three years, it is rather
interesting to review a few statistics.
For example, I have put together 158 postings and you have viewed those
postings 6,374 times. It breaks down as
follows:
|
|
5357
|
|
|
292
|
|
|
258
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
32
|
As
we try to think about year 2014, it looks as though it is going to be a very
important year in many aspects. One of
the most important happenings will be the up coming elections in November. The total House of Representatives, 435, will
be up for election. In addition, there
are 36 State Governors to be elected and 35 U. S.
We
can also expect the same dysfunctional Congress and even though the budget
problem is out of the way, we will have a fight about raising the National Debt
Ceiling. However,
if we all pull together and win back the House of Reps. and keep and strengthen
the Senate, then maybe we can have a working Congress instead and maybe this
country can move forward.
There
will be a lot of mud slinging and lies galore as the big money will be pushing
for the Republicans and the Tea Part Republicans. I think 2014 is going
to be a very interesting and important year for all of us.
~~~
The
Looming Battle
Dave Lindorff
This Can't Be Happening /
Op-Ed
Published:
Thursday 2 January 2014
FROM FLOYD:
This article is a very welcome approach
to Social Security. After you read this
one, you definitely want to read the next one.
It sets you straight as to the reason there is a problem today with the
most successful Government program that has ever been set forth.
~
I don't care if you are 75
and retired, 61 and just about to reach the age when you become eligible for
Social Security, 50 and looking out 15 or 20 years to the time when you’ll need
to retire, or 25 with grandparents collecting retirement benefits and wondering
what will be there when you get old. Whatever your
age, don’t let anyone tell you Social Security is in trouble, or that it “won’t
be around” when you need it.
That’s a hoary
lie that has been pushed by Republicans as far back as 1935 when Social
Security was being established, by leaders like President Ronald Reagan and
George W. Bush, and by corporate lobby groups like the Business Round Table and
the US Chamber of Commerce. It’s also been pushed by Democrats like
President Clinton and President Obama.
Some, like Bush,
have tried to use the lie to convince people to support getting rid of Social
Security and replacing it with private investment funds. Others, like Clinton and Obama, have used the
lie to try to get the public to agree to cutbacks in Social Security benefits,
or to delays in the age of eligibility for benefits. In the most recent iteration of the scam,
President Obama has been calling for a shift in the way the Social Security
Administration calculates inflation in setting new benefit levels each year,
substituting a so-called “chained” Consumer Price Index for the traditional
CPI. (In the chained version, appropriately called the cat-food index, instead
of looking what has happened to a “market basket” of goods and services people
typically use, economists would substitute cheaper or lower-quality goods for
goods whose price had risen too much -- for example chicken for steak, beans for
chicken, Fiats for Fords, bus and subway tokens for commuter rail tickets,
smaller apartments, etc.)
The truth is that
there is not a chance in hell that Social Security is going to go bust, or get
cancelled. There isn’t
even a chance in hell that Social Security benefits will be cut, at least over
the long term. Why? Because there are
78 million Baby Boomers -- one fourth of the entire population of the US -- a
group whose older members, born between 1946 and 1951, are already old enough
to start collecting benefits, and who will increasingly be filing for benefits
(technically the Baby Boom is a wave of babies that were born between 1946 and
1964).
Today, there are
some 40 million people in the US US
The answer, even
if the Baby Boomers of 2030 were to prove as relatively politically passive as
today's retirees, is “no.” But I think it’s
safe to say that the population that came of age politically in the 1960s and
1970s is not going to be as passive and submissive as the generation that
preceded it, i.e. their parents. Remember, we’re talking about a generation
that marched and fought for civil rights, to end the Indochina War, and to
demand women’s rights, that shut down schools and universities across the
nation in 1970 after the Kent State massacre (and that made marijuana
essentially a household product in the face of massive official repression!).
Critics may say
that the Baby Boomer opposition to the Vietnam War was motivated by
selfishness. As a
participant and a draft resister, I know that is not true. For one thing, half
the protesters against the war were women, who were exempt from the draft, and
besides, there were just as many men marching on Washington
The main
difference I see between this struggle and ones that came before is that when
these new protests begin in earnest - and they will - these new grey-haired and
hirsute marchers and sit-in protesters will not be unarmed and unprotected
against the inevitable police assaults as were protesters of yore.
Many will be
equipped with metal walkers that will entangle the steeds of mounted police,
and metal canes that will provide protection against police clubs.
Significantly, our numbers will also include
many veterans of America ’s
years of protest in the '60s and '70s, as well as many veterans of America
The enemies of
Social Security will not be able to demonize these protesters as “Commies” or
as traitors to America
My usually
spot-on Counterpunch magazine colleague Mike Whitney
recently wrote a piece in that publication warning
that no one can count on being able to retire anymore, but while I usually
agree with Mike’s analyses, I think he’s dead wrong on this one.
The desperation
that the enemies of Social Security are showing lately is because they realize
that the tidal wave of Baby Boom retirees has already started to hit the beach,
and will soon wash them away like the flotsam of Fukushima
Inevitably,
Americans will start to look abroad and discover that in European
countries, employers are paying into those nations’ social security schemes
taxes equal to 17-30% of payroll, compared to the measly 6.2% FICA tax paid by
US employers. They will also see that in European countries, public social
security typically is the only retirement funding people have, and that it
doesn’t leave them in or on the edge of poverty, but rather allows them to
continue their pre-retirement standard of living. They will also notice that
this is being accomplished without making these countries “uncompetitive in
world markets” -- the common cautionary cry of the corporate leadership in America
The battle to
defend and to expand Social Security and to put an end to the fraud of 401(k)
do-it-yourself retirement is at hand, and it will surely be bitter, but the
working and retiring public has the upper hand. The more the
politicians and their corporate paymasters seek to attack Social Security, the
broader and more powerful the progressive defenders will become, for this is a
battle that affects every worker in America
In fact, I see
the looming struggle for real social security as the key to
the birth of a new American progressive movement - one that can finally erase
all the artificial divisions of religion, sex, sexual orientation, race, region
and class that have been used over the past few decades by the ruling classes
to defeat progressive change.
And as those
artificial divisions fall away, there will inevitably be an opening to
introduce other progressive issues that also concern most people - the need for
Medicare for all, for quality education for all, for an end to tax breaks for
corporations and the rich, for dramatic cuts in the military budget and for an
end to US Empire, to militarized police and to the National Security State, and
finally, the need for real action to combat that terrible threat to our
children and children’s children: catastrophic climate change.
A battle over
Social Security? Bring it on!
ABOUT Dave
Lindorff
Dave Lindorff is an investigative
reporter, a columnist for CounterPunch, and a contributor to Businessweek, The Nation, Extra! and Salon.com. He received a Project Censored award in 2004. Dave is
also a founding member of the online newspaper ThisCantBeHappening! at www.thiscantbehappening.net
~~~
Ronald Reagan & The Great Social Security Heist: How Reagan Gave
Birth to the Looting of Social Security
by
(Author)
FROM FLOYD:
I have known Dr
Smith for the past 8 or 9 years. He is
an extremely dedicated man. He has
written five books on the subject of Social Security. This is his latest and wasw just available in
December 2013. It can be purchase, at a
very reasonable price, on Amason. This
below, is a summary opening of the book followed by two reviews who have given
the book a * * * * * five star rating.
~
The
money’s gone! Social Security doesn’t
have $2.7 trillion stashed away for paying benefits, as so many people believe.
It cannot pay benefits for another 20 years, as is often claimed. In fact, Social Security does not have enough
money to pay full benefits, even for 2014, without borrowing money from China America
But,
instead of being a proud day for America ,
as Reagan implied, the day the new legislation was signed into law, turned out
to be a day of shame for the United
States
This
surplus revenue was supposed to be saved and invested in marketable U.S.
The 1983
legislation was sold to the public, and to Congress, as a long-term fix for
Social Security. With the help of Alan Greenspan, Reagan was a super salesman,
who could have sold almost anything to the public—even a scam. And that’s exactly what he was selling. Reagan intended to use the surplus Social Security
revenue to replace revenue lost because of his unaffordable income tax cuts. Instead of being set aside for the retirement
of the baby boomers, as was the intent of the legislation, the extra Social
Security revenue was deposited directly into the general fund just like income
tax revenue.
From the
very beginning, Reagan and his advisors had no intention of saving and
investing the new revenue for the retirement of the baby boomers. They needed additional general tax revenue,
and an increase in the payroll tax would be much easier to enact than higher
income taxes. Also, the potential to get
vast amounts of revenue was much greater with a payroll tax increase than from
an income tax increase.
The baby
boomers, the largest generation of Americans who ever lived, were already
making large contributions to the Social Security fund. Like all previous
generations, prior to 1983, the boomers were being required to pay the full
cost of benefits paid to the previous generation. But, the proposed new legislation would hit
the boomers with a double whammy. In
addition to paying for their parents’ benefits, the new law would require the
baby boomers to also pay enough additional taxes to prepay the cost of their
own benefits. This would generate a potential
gold mine of surplus revenue that could be tapped and used for other purposes.
But none of the $2.7 trillion in additional Social Security revenue was ever
saved or invested in anything.
The
actual surplus money was replaced with nonmarketable government IOUs, which
cannot be converted into cash or used to pay Social Security benefits. It would
have been bad enough if only Reagan had looted Social Security money. But George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George
W. Bush all followed in Reagan’s footsteps and spent all of the Social Security
surplus revenue for non-Social Security purposes, just like Reagan.
This book
is a must read for all who care about the future of Social Security and the
integrity of their government. The
money’s gone! Social Security doesn’t
have $2.7 trillion stashed away for paying benefits, as so many people believe.
It cannot pay benefits for another 20
years, as is often claimed. In fact,
Social Security does not have enough money to pay full benefits, even for 2014,
without borrowing money from China
How can
this be? Wasn’t Social Security fixed by the Social Security Amendments of
1983, which included a large increase in payroll taxes? That’s what we were told at the time. President Reagan signed that legislation into
law with great fanfare on April 20, 1983. With his comments at the signing ceremony,
Reagan gave the impression that it was a proud day for America America , as Reagan implied, the day the new
legislation was signed into law, turned out to be a day of shame for the United States
~~~
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
All five star ratings
Format: Paperback Amazon Verified Purchase
A heartless scam! That’s what Ronald Reagan and Alan Greenspan’s
Social Security reforms of 1983 are. Their
planned payroll tax surpluses were sold to the public under false pretenses.
Instead of being saved and invested for the retirement of the baby boomers, as
was the intent of the legislation, the surplus revenue was used to fund income
tax cuts for the wealthy, wars and other government programs.
Don’t just believe Dr. Smith’s charges; they are easy to verify if you know where to look. Start with the contents of the Trust Fund accounts. They are not previous issue treasury securities but non-marketable special issues, in other words new borrowings as opposed to old borrowings of the Treasury. They increase the national debt, which Reagan promised us his reforms would avoid.
This is the core message of all of Dr. Smith’s previous books, but each has added flesh to that skeleton. Read this one, if you want to know the how and the why of this theft, who perpetrated it and for whose benefit, and how it should be repaid.
These are not unimportant details, because ignorance and misinformation are both widespread and dangerous to the health of Social Security. We cannot solve its funding problem unless we properly understand it. A quick test of the state of your own understanding can be had by the way you answer the two following yes or no questions. Here is a hint: they cannot be answered adequately by a simple yes or no.
Does Social Security increase the national debt? Yes, the theft of its funds increases the national debt; but no, Social Security is not responsible for that theft. It never received the surpluses because they were intercepted by the Treasury.
Don’t just believe Dr. Smith’s charges; they are easy to verify if you know where to look. Start with the contents of the Trust Fund accounts. They are not previous issue treasury securities but non-marketable special issues, in other words new borrowings as opposed to old borrowings of the Treasury. They increase the national debt, which Reagan promised us his reforms would avoid.
This is the core message of all of Dr. Smith’s previous books, but each has added flesh to that skeleton. Read this one, if you want to know the how and the why of this theft, who perpetrated it and for whose benefit, and how it should be repaid.
These are not unimportant details, because ignorance and misinformation are both widespread and dangerous to the health of Social Security. We cannot solve its funding problem unless we properly understand it. A quick test of the state of your own understanding can be had by the way you answer the two following yes or no questions. Here is a hint: they cannot be answered adequately by a simple yes or no.
Does Social Security increase the national debt? Yes, the theft of its funds increases the national debt; but no, Social Security is not responsible for that theft. It never received the surpluses because they were intercepted by the Treasury.
~
Format: Kindle Edition Amazon Verified Purchase
I stumbled upon the Social Security scam while doing some
research on the Federal Reserve System and have followed it ever since. This is how I came to read Dr. Smith’s first
book, "The Alleged Budget Surplus, Social Security & Voodoo
Economics," which was very detailed with an abundance of references to
back up the data he presented.
Dr. Smith is a professional Economist and also a truth
seeker trying to correct an obscene injustice that the has been perpetrated by
every Congress and every President of the United States since Ronald Reagan
tried to “starve the beast” so that social programs would be cut or eliminated
completely.
This is not isolated to just one party, it was carried through by both Democratic and Republican parties despite laws that were passed to prevent the use of Social Security funds from being used for general expenses.
This is not isolated to just one party, it was carried through by both Democratic and Republican parties despite laws that were passed to prevent the use of Social Security funds from being used for general expenses.
This book also outlines just how and why our economy has
ended up the way it has, by pushing an untested, unheard of economic plan that
promised to resolve the ever increasing annual deficits as well as a mounting
national debt.
The bottom line is this, we have been lied to by our own government. The FICA tax was increased in 1983 to plan for the baby boomers that would start retiring in 2010 so that full benefits could be paid. That extra tax was supposed to be invested and accumulating interest but instead the money was siphoned off mostly to pay for tax cuts that were aimed to make the wealthy even wealthier.
The bottom line is this, we have been lied to by our own government. The FICA tax was increased in 1983 to plan for the baby boomers that would start retiring in 2010 so that full benefits could be paid. That extra tax was supposed to be invested and accumulating interest but instead the money was siphoned off mostly to pay for tax cuts that were aimed to make the wealthy even wealthier.
Now one party in particular is trying to point the blame at
a program that did not even contribute one penny to the deficit. The idea is to
convince the public it is broken because it doesn’t work so that cuts will be
made to decrease the deficit. A deficit
created as a result of this same party pursuing their own political interests
instead of the interests of the United States by force feeding us an economic
plan that caused unemployment, inflation, and deficits never before seen, not
to mention the untold human suffering that resulted.
Social Security has worked and would still be working today
had the government not raided the Trust Fund piggy bank and left it full of
IOU’s. Don’t take my word for it, read
the book, it is full of facts not supposition or theory and if you want even
greater detail then read his first book.
~~~
NAFTA’s 20 Years of Unfulfilled
Promises
Manuel
Perez-RochaOther Words / Op-Ed
Published:
Sunday 29 December 2013
FROM FLOYD:
In OBOF PART 60 I provided you the released text of the Trans Pacific
Partnership (TPP). It is the same type
of free trade agreement as NAFTA, only worse.
Take a look, at what NAFTA has accomplished, or not accomplished, and
you can get an idea as to how bad this TPP would be for us. I am certainly on the other side of the fence
with the President on this. He is
pushing hard to get it passed without any debate or even letting Congress know
what is in it. BAD
NEWS.
~
Twenty years
after it took effect, NAFTA has failed the vast majority of Mexicans.
Of course, hundreds of thousands of U.S.
This was supposed
to boost employment in Mexico United States
Why?
Under NAFTA,
cheap subsidized corn from the United States
flooded Mexico
“Before NAFTA, Mexico
Still, even with
hard times in the countryside, the trade deal’s architects promised that Mexico
Unfortunately,
most factories that opened in Mexico
Parts arrive from
the United States , China
Adán Rivera, who leads an association of small
and medium-sized companies in Mexico
NAFTA not only
decimated many Mexican small businesses, it also helped to destroy entire
national industries. Before NAFTA, Mexico
Many of these
industries have wasted away. During the 2008 financial crisis, Mexico ’s economy shrank
6.6 percent — Latin America’s steepest
decline — because of its chronic dependence on the U.S.
Meanwhile,
Mexican consumption of U.S. Mexico like
tortilla chips and salsa are brought in from the United States
The result, millions
of small-scale producers, mom and pop shops, and other traditional Mexican
employers were scrapped, and the national diet went downhill. The gusher of processed foods and beverages
from the North has made Mexico the world’s most obese nation, with diabetes its top cause of death.
Not everyone is a
loser, of course. Mexico boasts the
richest man in the world, Carlos Slim — who amassed his fortune from
privatization schemes related to NAFTA. Mexico’s economic elite, with its wealth
securely deposited in banks in the United States and elsewhere, finds a lot to
like in NAFTA.
But for the rest
of the population, Mexico’s experience with NAFTA shows why free trade and
investment deals are bad not only for America’s working families, but for
working families all over the world.
That’s why the
wide-ranging Trans-Pacific
Partnership, President Barack Obama is now championing, faces
growing global resistance. After 20
years of NAFTA, the predictions we made that the agreement would cause massive
social problems have proven true. It’s become clear that these pacts can hurt people
in every possible way.
~~~
Political stars to watch in 2014
By Andrew
Rafferty, NBC News
With 35 senate races, 435 House races and 36
contests for governor on the ballot next fall, 2014 is certain to bring forward
a new cast of political stars.
Look no further than last year for proof.
Even though it was a non-election year, 2013 saw several politicians leap
from relative obscurity to national prominence. Chief among them was
Texas Senator Ted Cruz, whose 21-hour talk-a-thon on the Senate floor made him
the face of the Republican Party’s opposition to Obamacare as Congress barreled
into the government shutdown in October.
Others who raised their profiles included Sen.
Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and New York City Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio, who
touted the issue of income inequality to become stars for progressive Democrats
seeking to address the topic.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., used 2013 to
burnish her bipartisan credentials with her work to curb sexual assaults in the
United States
Some of those who splashed into the national
spotlight aren’t done yet and even some familiar names are poised to make a big
impact in 2014 as the midterm elections ushers in a new class of politicians
with the potential to shape statehouses and Congress for years to come.
Here is a look at some of the candidates who will
shape 2014 and, potentially, beyond:
Liz Cheney
Reuters Staff / Reuters
U.S.
Senate candidate Liz Cheney speaks to voters during a Republican and Tea Party
gathering in Emblem, Wyoming August 24, 2013.
The daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney
made Wyoming Wyoming
The race has already proven to be personal and
bitter, a political rarity in the sparsely populated state. Enzy said
he felt blind-sided by the challenge and Dick Cheney refuted the senator's
claim that the two were ever "fishing buddies."
On top of sparring with Enzi, the Cheneys have also sparred with themselves. Liz
Cheney's campaign stumbled out of the gate when her sister, who is married to a
woman, posted on Facebook that her sibling is "on the wrong side of
history" on the issue of same-sex marriage. Though gay marriage will
unlikely be a defining issue in the race, a feud within the Cheney
family could be a big distraction.
If polling shows an even somewhat close race, the
Cheney/Enzi duel will suck up much of the political media's attention ahead of
the August primary.
Wendy Davis ignited an often ignored
political contingent -- Texas Davis and the pink tennis shoes she wore during her
stand catapulted the Fort Worth
Danny Johnston / AP file
U.S.
Rep. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., speaks to members of the Political Animals Club in
Little Rock, Ark., Friday, Nov. 22, 2013. Cotton will face incumbent Democrat
Mark Pryor in the race for U.S.
Republicans have been eying Democratic
Sen. Mark Pryor's seat in Arkansas for a while now, and Rep. Tom Cotton will
give the GOP a fighting chance to take it. The two have been campaigning for
more than a year in a state where Obama won just 37 percent of the vote in
2012. The 36-year-old Bronze Star recipient has already received major
help from Florida Sen. Marco Rubio's Reclaim America PAC, which made a big
TV ad buy that emphasized Cotton's military background and promise to fight big
spending.
Look for other GOP heavyweights to get involved in
a race that is one of Republicans best shots at snagging back a Senate seat
from Democrats.
Alison Lundergan
Grimes
Democrats hope Alison Lundergan Grimes can mount a
serious challenge to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who first needs to
get past conservative Matt Bevin running to his right. The 35-year-old Kentucky
Still expect Democrats to go all-in, attempting to
make the Republican leader in the Senate look vulnerable.
Michelle Nunn
The daughter of former Georgia Sen. Sam Nunn is
running against a crowded Republican field that could produce a highly
conservative candidate that would struggle in a general election. Though she
has never run for public office, Michelle Nunn had an impressive $1.7 million
fundraising haul last quarter. She currently serves as the CEO of Points of
Light, a group dedicated to promoting volunteer service.
To win in Georgia
Scott Walker
Yes, Walker is a
known commodity by now after taking on Wisconsin
But before he can go fishing for votes in Iowa , New Hampshire
and beyond, he needs to win again in Wisconsin Badger State race is close, and Walker
If Walker
Scott Brown
Steven Senne / AP
U.S.
Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., center left, gives a concession speech as his wife
Gail Huff, right, watches on at an election night watch party in a hotel in
Boston, Tuesday, Nov. 6, 2012.
After losing his tough-fought Senate re-election
campaign in Massachusetts to Elizabeth Warren,
Scott Brown may be preparing for another run -- in New Hampshire Bay State
senator has been traveling around New Hampshire
talking to voters and fueling speculation that he may mount a challenge to Granite State New
Hampshire in his truck with Massachusetts
~~~
If the
good Lord is willing and the creek don't rise, I'll talk with you next
Wednesday, January 8, 2014.
God
Bless You All
&
Floyd
WELCOME TO OPINIONS BASED ON FACTS (OBOF)
&
THINGS
YOU MAY HAVE MISSED (TYMHM)
YEAR ONE
YEAR TWO
YEAR THREE
YEAR FOUR
|
OBOF YEAR FOUR
INDEX
|
Published
|
|
OVERVIEW
|
|
|
OBOF TYMHM PART
14-01
|
Jan. 02, 2014
|
Agenda
1. As we start the fourth year.
2. Social Security and a new Progressive
Movement
to increase SS.
3. Brand new book "Ronald Reagan and the SS
Heist.
4. NAFTA and 20 years of the great unfulfilled
promises.
5. Stars to watch for 2014 elections.
AS
WE START THE FOURTH YEAR.
We are off to a very bad start for our fourth year. The internet explorer is all screwed up. It has done all kinds of things with the format, color, and underlining. The things I have for you are important ant I have decided to go ahead and see if I can send it as is. It is beyond my control at this time. Hopefully, I can get if fixed by next week. I thank you for your understanding.
Looking
back, over the past three years, it is rather
interesting to review a few statistics.
For example, I have put together 158 postings and you have viewed those
postings 6,374 times. It breaks down as
follows:
|
|
5357
|
|
|
292
|
|
|
258
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
32
|
As
we try to think about year 2014, it looks as though it is going to be a very
important year in many aspects. One of
the most important happenings will be the up coming elections in November. The total House of Representatives, 435, will
be up for election. In addition, there
are 36 State Governors to be elected and 35 U. S.
We
can also expect the same dysfunctional Congress and even though the budget
problem is out of the way, we will have a fight about raising the National Debt
Ceiling. However,
if we all pull together and win back the House of Reps. and keep and strengthen
the Senate, then maybe we can have a working Congress instead and maybe this
country can move forward.
There
will be a lot of mud slinging and lies galore as the big money will be pushing
for the Republicans and the Tea Part Republicans. I think 2014 is going
to be a very interesting and important year for all of us.
~~~
The
Looming Battle
Dave Lindorff
This Can't Be Happening /
Op-Ed
Published:
Thursday 2 January 2014
FROM FLOYD:
This article is a very welcome approach
to Social Security. After you read this
one, you definitely want to read the next one.
It sets you straight as to the reason there is a problem today with the
most successful Government program that has ever been set forth.
~
I don't care if you are 75
and retired, 61 and just about to reach the age when you become eligible for
Social Security, 50 and looking out 15 or 20 years to the time when you’ll need
to retire, or 25 with grandparents collecting retirement benefits and wondering
what will be there when you get old. Whatever your
age, don’t let anyone tell you Social Security is in trouble, or that it “won’t
be around” when you need it.
That’s a hoary
lie that has been pushed by Republicans as far back as 1935 when Social
Security was being established, by leaders like President Ronald Reagan and
George W. Bush, and by corporate lobby groups like the Business Round Table and
the US Chamber of Commerce. It’s also been pushed by Democrats like
President Clinton and President Obama.
Some, like Bush,
have tried to use the lie to convince people to support getting rid of Social
Security and replacing it with private investment funds. Others, like Clinton and Obama, have used the
lie to try to get the public to agree to cutbacks in Social Security benefits,
or to delays in the age of eligibility for benefits. In the most recent iteration of the scam,
President Obama has been calling for a shift in the way the Social Security
Administration calculates inflation in setting new benefit levels each year,
substituting a so-called “chained” Consumer Price Index for the traditional
CPI. (In the chained version, appropriately called the cat-food index, instead
of looking what has happened to a “market basket” of goods and services people
typically use, economists would substitute cheaper or lower-quality goods for
goods whose price had risen too much -- for example chicken for steak, beans for
chicken, Fiats for Fords, bus and subway tokens for commuter rail tickets,
smaller apartments, etc.)
The truth is that
there is not a chance in hell that Social Security is going to go bust, or get
cancelled. There isn’t
even a chance in hell that Social Security benefits will be cut, at least over
the long term. Why? Because there are
78 million Baby Boomers -- one fourth of the entire population of the US -- a
group whose older members, born between 1946 and 1951, are already old enough
to start collecting benefits, and who will increasingly be filing for benefits
(technically the Baby Boom is a wave of babies that were born between 1946 and
1964).
Today, there are
some 40 million people in the US US
The answer, even
if the Baby Boomers of 2030 were to prove as relatively politically passive as
today's retirees, is “no.” But I think it’s
safe to say that the population that came of age politically in the 1960s and
1970s is not going to be as passive and submissive as the generation that
preceded it, i.e. their parents. Remember, we’re talking about a generation
that marched and fought for civil rights, to end the Indochina War, and to
demand women’s rights, that shut down schools and universities across the
nation in 1970 after the Kent State massacre (and that made marijuana
essentially a household product in the face of massive official repression!).
Critics may say
that the Baby Boomer opposition to the Vietnam War was motivated by
selfishness. As a
participant and a draft resister, I know that is not true. For one thing, half
the protesters against the war were women, who were exempt from the draft, and
besides, there were just as many men marching on Washington
The main
difference I see between this struggle and ones that came before is that when
these new protests begin in earnest - and they will - these new grey-haired and
hirsute marchers and sit-in protesters will not be unarmed and unprotected
against the inevitable police assaults as were protesters of yore.
Many will be
equipped with metal walkers that will entangle the steeds of mounted police,
and metal canes that will provide protection against police clubs.
Significantly, our numbers will also include
many veterans of America ’s
years of protest in the '60s and '70s, as well as many veterans of America
The enemies of
Social Security will not be able to demonize these protesters as “Commies” or
as traitors to America
My usually
spot-on Counterpunch magazine colleague Mike Whitney
recently wrote a piece in that publication warning
that no one can count on being able to retire anymore, but while I usually
agree with Mike’s analyses, I think he’s dead wrong on this one.
The desperation
that the enemies of Social Security are showing lately is because they realize
that the tidal wave of Baby Boom retirees has already started to hit the beach,
and will soon wash them away like the flotsam of Fukushima
Inevitably,
Americans will start to look abroad and discover that in European
countries, employers are paying into those nations’ social security schemes
taxes equal to 17-30% of payroll, compared to the measly 6.2% FICA tax paid by
US employers. They will also see that in European countries, public social
security typically is the only retirement funding people have, and that it
doesn’t leave them in or on the edge of poverty, but rather allows them to
continue their pre-retirement standard of living. They will also notice that
this is being accomplished without making these countries “uncompetitive in
world markets” -- the common cautionary cry of the corporate leadership in America
The battle to
defend and to expand Social Security and to put an end to the fraud of 401(k)
do-it-yourself retirement is at hand, and it will surely be bitter, but the
working and retiring public has the upper hand. The more the
politicians and their corporate paymasters seek to attack Social Security, the
broader and more powerful the progressive defenders will become, for this is a
battle that affects every worker in America
In fact, I see
the looming struggle for real social security as the key to
the birth of a new American progressive movement - one that can finally erase
all the artificial divisions of religion, sex, sexual orientation, race, region
and class that have been used over the past few decades by the ruling classes
to defeat progressive change.
And as those
artificial divisions fall away, there will inevitably be an opening to
introduce other progressive issues that also concern most people - the need for
Medicare for all, for quality education for all, for an end to tax breaks for
corporations and the rich, for dramatic cuts in the military budget and for an
end to US Empire, to militarized police and to the National Security State, and
finally, the need for real action to combat that terrible threat to our
children and children’s children: catastrophic climate change.
A battle over
Social Security? Bring it on!
ABOUT Dave
Lindorff
Dave Lindorff is an investigative
reporter, a columnist for CounterPunch, and a contributor to Businessweek, The Nation, Extra! and Salon.com. He received a Project Censored award in 2004. Dave is
also a founding member of the online newspaper ThisCantBeHappening! at www.thiscantbehappening.net
~~~
Ronald Reagan & The Great Social Security Heist: How Reagan Gave
Birth to the Looting of Social Security
by
(Author)
FROM FLOYD:
I have known Dr
Smith for the past 8 or 9 years. He is
an extremely dedicated man. He has
written five books on the subject of Social Security. This is his latest and wasw just available in
December 2013. It can be purchase, at a
very reasonable price, on Amason. This
below, is a summary opening of the book followed by two reviews who have given
the book a * * * * * five star rating.
~
The
money’s gone! Social Security doesn’t
have $2.7 trillion stashed away for paying benefits, as so many people believe.
It cannot pay benefits for another 20 years, as is often claimed. In fact, Social Security does not have enough
money to pay full benefits, even for 2014, without borrowing money from China America
But,
instead of being a proud day for America ,
as Reagan implied, the day the new legislation was signed into law, turned out
to be a day of shame for the United
States
This
surplus revenue was supposed to be saved and invested in marketable U.S.
The 1983
legislation was sold to the public, and to Congress, as a long-term fix for
Social Security. With the help of Alan Greenspan, Reagan was a super salesman,
who could have sold almost anything to the public—even a scam. And that’s exactly what he was selling. Reagan intended to use the surplus Social Security
revenue to replace revenue lost because of his unaffordable income tax cuts. Instead of being set aside for the retirement
of the baby boomers, as was the intent of the legislation, the extra Social
Security revenue was deposited directly into the general fund just like income
tax revenue.
From the
very beginning, Reagan and his advisors had no intention of saving and
investing the new revenue for the retirement of the baby boomers. They needed additional general tax revenue,
and an increase in the payroll tax would be much easier to enact than higher
income taxes. Also, the potential to get
vast amounts of revenue was much greater with a payroll tax increase than from
an income tax increase.
The baby
boomers, the largest generation of Americans who ever lived, were already
making large contributions to the Social Security fund. Like all previous
generations, prior to 1983, the boomers were being required to pay the full
cost of benefits paid to the previous generation. But, the proposed new legislation would hit
the boomers with a double whammy. In
addition to paying for their parents’ benefits, the new law would require the
baby boomers to also pay enough additional taxes to prepay the cost of their
own benefits. This would generate a potential
gold mine of surplus revenue that could be tapped and used for other purposes.
But none of the $2.7 trillion in additional Social Security revenue was ever
saved or invested in anything.
The
actual surplus money was replaced with nonmarketable government IOUs, which
cannot be converted into cash or used to pay Social Security benefits. It would
have been bad enough if only Reagan had looted Social Security money. But George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George
W. Bush all followed in Reagan’s footsteps and spent all of the Social Security
surplus revenue for non-Social Security purposes, just like Reagan.
This book
is a must read for all who care about the future of Social Security and the
integrity of their government. The
money’s gone! Social Security doesn’t
have $2.7 trillion stashed away for paying benefits, as so many people believe.
It cannot pay benefits for another 20
years, as is often claimed. In fact,
Social Security does not have enough money to pay full benefits, even for 2014,
without borrowing money from China
How can
this be? Wasn’t Social Security fixed by the Social Security Amendments of
1983, which included a large increase in payroll taxes? That’s what we were told at the time. President Reagan signed that legislation into
law with great fanfare on April 20, 1983. With his comments at the signing ceremony,
Reagan gave the impression that it was a proud day for America America , as Reagan implied, the day the new
legislation was signed into law, turned out to be a day of shame for the United States
~~~
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
All five star ratings
Format: Paperback Amazon Verified Purchase
A heartless scam! That’s what Ronald Reagan and Alan Greenspan’s
Social Security reforms of 1983 are. Their
planned payroll tax surpluses were sold to the public under false pretenses.
Instead of being saved and invested for the retirement of the baby boomers, as
was the intent of the legislation, the surplus revenue was used to fund income
tax cuts for the wealthy, wars and other government programs.
Don’t just believe Dr. Smith’s charges; they are easy to verify if you know where to look. Start with the contents of the Trust Fund accounts. They are not previous issue treasury securities but non-marketable special issues, in other words new borrowings as opposed to old borrowings of the Treasury. They increase the national debt, which Reagan promised us his reforms would avoid.
This is the core message of all of Dr. Smith’s previous books, but each has added flesh to that skeleton. Read this one, if you want to know the how and the why of this theft, who perpetrated it and for whose benefit, and how it should be repaid.
These are not unimportant details, because ignorance and misinformation are both widespread and dangerous to the health of Social Security. We cannot solve its funding problem unless we properly understand it. A quick test of the state of your own understanding can be had by the way you answer the two following yes or no questions. Here is a hint: they cannot be answered adequately by a simple yes or no.
Does Social Security increase the national debt? Yes, the theft of its funds increases the national debt; but no, Social Security is not responsible for that theft. It never received the surpluses because they were intercepted by the Treasury.
Don’t just believe Dr. Smith’s charges; they are easy to verify if you know where to look. Start with the contents of the Trust Fund accounts. They are not previous issue treasury securities but non-marketable special issues, in other words new borrowings as opposed to old borrowings of the Treasury. They increase the national debt, which Reagan promised us his reforms would avoid.
This is the core message of all of Dr. Smith’s previous books, but each has added flesh to that skeleton. Read this one, if you want to know the how and the why of this theft, who perpetrated it and for whose benefit, and how it should be repaid.
These are not unimportant details, because ignorance and misinformation are both widespread and dangerous to the health of Social Security. We cannot solve its funding problem unless we properly understand it. A quick test of the state of your own understanding can be had by the way you answer the two following yes or no questions. Here is a hint: they cannot be answered adequately by a simple yes or no.
Does Social Security increase the national debt? Yes, the theft of its funds increases the national debt; but no, Social Security is not responsible for that theft. It never received the surpluses because they were intercepted by the Treasury.
~
Format: Kindle Edition Amazon Verified Purchase
I stumbled upon the Social Security scam while doing some
research on the Federal Reserve System and have followed it ever since. This is how I came to read Dr. Smith’s first
book, "The Alleged Budget Surplus, Social Security & Voodoo
Economics," which was very detailed with an abundance of references to
back up the data he presented.
Dr. Smith is a professional Economist and also a truth
seeker trying to correct an obscene injustice that the has been perpetrated by
every Congress and every President of the United States since Ronald Reagan
tried to “starve the beast” so that social programs would be cut or eliminated
completely.
This is not isolated to just one party, it was carried through by both Democratic and Republican parties despite laws that were passed to prevent the use of Social Security funds from being used for general expenses.
This is not isolated to just one party, it was carried through by both Democratic and Republican parties despite laws that were passed to prevent the use of Social Security funds from being used for general expenses.
This book also outlines just how and why our economy has
ended up the way it has, by pushing an untested, unheard of economic plan that
promised to resolve the ever increasing annual deficits as well as a mounting
national debt.
The bottom line is this, we have been lied to by our own government. The FICA tax was increased in 1983 to plan for the baby boomers that would start retiring in 2010 so that full benefits could be paid. That extra tax was supposed to be invested and accumulating interest but instead the money was siphoned off mostly to pay for tax cuts that were aimed to make the wealthy even wealthier.
The bottom line is this, we have been lied to by our own government. The FICA tax was increased in 1983 to plan for the baby boomers that would start retiring in 2010 so that full benefits could be paid. That extra tax was supposed to be invested and accumulating interest but instead the money was siphoned off mostly to pay for tax cuts that were aimed to make the wealthy even wealthier.
Now one party in particular is trying to point the blame at
a program that did not even contribute one penny to the deficit. The idea is to
convince the public it is broken because it doesn’t work so that cuts will be
made to decrease the deficit. A deficit
created as a result of this same party pursuing their own political interests
instead of the interests of the United States by force feeding us an economic
plan that caused unemployment, inflation, and deficits never before seen, not
to mention the untold human suffering that resulted.
Social Security has worked and would still be working today
had the government not raided the Trust Fund piggy bank and left it full of
IOU’s. Don’t take my word for it, read
the book, it is full of facts not supposition or theory and if you want even
greater detail then read his first book.
~~~
NAFTA’s 20 Years of Unfulfilled
Promises
Manuel
Perez-RochaOther Words / Op-Ed
Published:
Sunday 29 December 2013
FROM FLOYD:
In OBOF PART 60 I provided you the released text of the Trans Pacific
Partnership (TPP). It is the same type
of free trade agreement as NAFTA, only worse.
Take a look, at what NAFTA has accomplished, or not accomplished, and
you can get an idea as to how bad this TPP would be for us. I am certainly on the other side of the fence
with the President on this. He is
pushing hard to get it passed without any debate or even letting Congress know
what is in it. BAD
NEWS.
~
Twenty years
after it took effect, NAFTA has failed the vast majority of Mexicans.
Of course, hundreds of thousands of U.S.
This was supposed
to boost employment in Mexico United States
Why?
Under NAFTA,
cheap subsidized corn from the United States
flooded Mexico
“Before NAFTA, Mexico
Still, even with
hard times in the countryside, the trade deal’s architects promised that Mexico
Unfortunately,
most factories that opened in Mexico
Parts arrive from
the United States , China
Adán Rivera, who leads an association of small
and medium-sized companies in Mexico
NAFTA not only
decimated many Mexican small businesses, it also helped to destroy entire
national industries. Before NAFTA, Mexico
Many of these
industries have wasted away. During the 2008 financial crisis, Mexico ’s economy shrank
6.6 percent — Latin America’s steepest
decline — because of its chronic dependence on the U.S.
Meanwhile,
Mexican consumption of U.S. Mexico like
tortilla chips and salsa are brought in from the United States
The result, millions
of small-scale producers, mom and pop shops, and other traditional Mexican
employers were scrapped, and the national diet went downhill. The gusher of processed foods and beverages
from the North has made Mexico the world’s most obese nation, with diabetes its top cause of death.
Not everyone is a
loser, of course. Mexico boasts the
richest man in the world, Carlos Slim — who amassed his fortune from
privatization schemes related to NAFTA. Mexico’s economic elite, with its wealth
securely deposited in banks in the United States and elsewhere, finds a lot to
like in NAFTA.
But for the rest
of the population, Mexico’s experience with NAFTA shows why free trade and
investment deals are bad not only for America’s working families, but for
working families all over the world.
That’s why the
wide-ranging Trans-Pacific
Partnership, President Barack Obama is now championing, faces
growing global resistance. After 20
years of NAFTA, the predictions we made that the agreement would cause massive
social problems have proven true. It’s become clear that these pacts can hurt people
in every possible way.
~~~
Political stars to watch in 2014
By Andrew
Rafferty, NBC News
With 35 senate races, 435 House races and 36
contests for governor on the ballot next fall, 2014 is certain to bring forward
a new cast of political stars.
Look no further than last year for proof.
Even though it was a non-election year, 2013 saw several politicians leap
from relative obscurity to national prominence. Chief among them was
Texas Senator Ted Cruz, whose 21-hour talk-a-thon on the Senate floor made him
the face of the Republican Party’s opposition to Obamacare as Congress barreled
into the government shutdown in October.
Others who raised their profiles included Sen.
Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and New York City Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio, who
touted the issue of income inequality to become stars for progressive Democrats
seeking to address the topic.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., used 2013 to
burnish her bipartisan credentials with her work to curb sexual assaults in the
United States
Some of those who splashed into the national
spotlight aren’t done yet and even some familiar names are poised to make a big
impact in 2014 as the midterm elections ushers in a new class of politicians
with the potential to shape statehouses and Congress for years to come.
Here is a look at some of the candidates who will
shape 2014 and, potentially, beyond:
Liz Cheney
Reuters Staff / Reuters
U.S.
Senate candidate Liz Cheney speaks to voters during a Republican and Tea Party
gathering in Emblem, Wyoming August 24, 2013.
The daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney
made Wyoming Wyoming
The race has already proven to be personal and
bitter, a political rarity in the sparsely populated state. Enzy said
he felt blind-sided by the challenge and Dick Cheney refuted the senator's
claim that the two were ever "fishing buddies."
On top of sparring with Enzi, the Cheneys have also sparred with themselves. Liz
Cheney's campaign stumbled out of the gate when her sister, who is married to a
woman, posted on Facebook that her sibling is "on the wrong side of
history" on the issue of same-sex marriage. Though gay marriage will
unlikely be a defining issue in the race, a feud within the Cheney
family could be a big distraction.
If polling shows an even somewhat close race, the
Cheney/Enzi duel will suck up much of the political media's attention ahead of
the August primary.
Wendy Davis ignited an often ignored
political contingent -- Texas Davis and the pink tennis shoes she wore during her
stand catapulted the Fort Worth
Danny Johnston / AP file
U.S.
Rep. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., speaks to members of the Political Animals Club in
Little Rock, Ark., Friday, Nov. 22, 2013. Cotton will face incumbent Democrat
Mark Pryor in the race for U.S.
Republicans have been eying Democratic
Sen. Mark Pryor's seat in Arkansas for a while now, and Rep. Tom Cotton will
give the GOP a fighting chance to take it. The two have been campaigning for
more than a year in a state where Obama won just 37 percent of the vote in
2012. The 36-year-old Bronze Star recipient has already received major
help from Florida Sen. Marco Rubio's Reclaim America PAC, which made a big
TV ad buy that emphasized Cotton's military background and promise to fight big
spending.
Look for other GOP heavyweights to get involved in
a race that is one of Republicans best shots at snagging back a Senate seat
from Democrats.
Alison Lundergan
Grimes
Democrats hope Alison Lundergan Grimes can mount a
serious challenge to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who first needs to
get past conservative Matt Bevin running to his right. The 35-year-old Kentucky
Still expect Democrats to go all-in, attempting to
make the Republican leader in the Senate look vulnerable.
Michelle Nunn
The daughter of former Georgia Sen. Sam Nunn is
running against a crowded Republican field that could produce a highly
conservative candidate that would struggle in a general election. Though she
has never run for public office, Michelle Nunn had an impressive $1.7 million
fundraising haul last quarter. She currently serves as the CEO of Points of
Light, a group dedicated to promoting volunteer service.
To win in Georgia
Scott Walker
Yes, Walker is a
known commodity by now after taking on Wisconsin
But before he can go fishing for votes in Iowa , New Hampshire
and beyond, he needs to win again in Wisconsin Badger State race is close, and Walker
If Walker
Scott Brown
Steven Senne / AP
U.S.
Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., center left, gives a concession speech as his wife
Gail Huff, right, watches on at an election night watch party in a hotel in
Boston, Tuesday, Nov. 6, 2012.
After losing his tough-fought Senate re-election
campaign in Massachusetts to Elizabeth Warren,
Scott Brown may be preparing for another run -- in New Hampshire Bay State
senator has been traveling around New Hampshire
talking to voters and fueling speculation that he may mount a challenge to Granite State New
Hampshire in his truck with Massachusetts
~~~
If the
good Lord is willing and the creek don't rise, I'll talk with you next
Wednesday, January 8, 2014.
God
Bless You All
&
Floyd
No comments:
Post a Comment