And So I Go: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow

Posts Tagged ‘Medicare

Yesterday I* posted on just where each of your tax dollars go.  The largest outlays were for our Senior Citizens in the form of Medicare and Social Security.    And yes dear reader I went into my usual rant about the reason for Social Security and is oldsters living much longer than we should and therefore getting  years and years more than we put into the Social Security program thru our payroll deductions while we were working.  In fact, we each get back every cent we put into our account within two and one half years after retirement!!  After that People we are on WELFARE and living off the backs of the young!!   Social security needs to be means tested and should go only to those who need it to live a decent life.  That does not mean paying for Grandma and Grandpa to spend lovely warm winters in Florida in their fancy RV’s.   And yes, I spent eleven years as a full time RVer so I know well what I am talking about.  I also lived for 19 years in Florida before retirement and know how populations in some towns in Florida go from 7000 in the summer to 70,000  in the winter.  People who can afford to own RVs do not need Social Security.  They should not be living on the backs of the young or getting money that is becoming a national debt that their great grandchildren will have to pay back.

Of course next on the Greedy Geezer list are those who are well able to buy their own health insurance but who take Medicare.   At the grand old age of 24 in 1965 i was so much against this Medicare scam that President Johnson and the Congress (both Democrats and Republicans)  were in on with the insurance companies.    At that time only an estimated 40% of seniors needed some help paying for their health insurance.  And instead of putting these people on Medicaid or some type of stipend to help them purchase their own health insurance the ENTIRE elderly population 65 and over no matter their income was put on Medicare.  It was a disaster in the making just as Obamacare is going to be the devastation of our country as we know it.   ALL the estimates of costs of the Medicare program in 1965 were 2000%  (that is two THOUSAND percent) under the actual costs of Medicare in 2010.  Again we Seniors are being kept healthy and alive on the backs of our current working young and by putting our great grandchildren in debt for life.  Our great grandchildren in effect will have no life because they will be slaves to paying for the lives we are living now.

How can Americans bear to live with what we are allowing to happen?  I grieve for my country and for my great grandchildren yet to be born.

Anyhow, no more ranting from me.  The following article from Cato Institute  explains better than I can why we must stop the madness of our entitlement programs and put them on a course that will  help those who truly need help but take those who can do for themselves  off the programs.  It really grates me when wealthy Americans are using Medicare.

Be sure to go to the referred sites for additional information.  Sincerely, Brenda Bowers (BB)

APRIL 16, 2013 8:40AM

Entitlement Spending Is America’s Biggest Fiscal Challenge, but Discretionary Spending Is Still Far too High

If America descends into Greek-style fiscal chaos, there’s no doubt that entitlement programs will be the main factor. Social SecurityMedicareMedicaid, and Disability are all fiscal train wrecks today, and the long-run outlook for these programs is frightful.

Just look at these numbers from the Bank for International Settlements and OECD to see how our fiscal future is bleaker than many of Europe’s welfare states.

Simply stated, if we don’t implement the right kind of entitlement reform, our children and grandchildren at some point will curse our memory.

But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t worry about other parts of the budget, including the so-called discretionary programs that also have been getting bigger and bigger budgets over time.

That’s why I want to add some additional analysis to Veronique de Rugy’s recent piece inNational Review Online, which might lead some to mistakenly conclude that these programs are “shrinking” and being subject to a “Big Squeeze.”

…there is another number to look at in that budget. It’s the shrinking share of the budget consumed by discretionary spending (spending on things like defense and infrastructure) to make space for mandatory spending and interest. This is the Big Squeeze. …in FY 2014 mandatory spending plus interest will eat up 67 percent of the budget, leaving discretionary spending with 33 percent of the budget (down from 36 percent in FY 2012). Now by FY 2023, mandatory and interest spending will consume 77 percent of the total budget. Discretionary spending will be left with 23 percent of the budget.

She’s right that discretionary spending is becoming a smaller share of the budget, but it’s important to realize that this is solely because entitlement outlays are growing faster than discretionary spending.

Here’s some data from the Historical Tables of the Budget, showing what is happening to spending for both defense discretionary and domestic discretionary. And these are inflation-adjusted numbers, so the we’re looking at genuine increases in spending.

Discretionary Spending FY62-14

As you can see, defense outlays have climbed by about $100 billion over the past 50 years, while outlays for domestic discretionary programs have more than tripled.

If that’s a “Big Squeeze,” I’m hoping that my household budget experiences a similar degree of “shrinking”!

Veronique obviously understands these numbers, of course, and is simply making the point that politicians presumably should have an incentive to restrain entitlement programs so they have more leeway to also buy votes with discretionary spending.

But I’d hate to think that an uninformed reader would jump to the wrong conclusion and decide we need more discretionary spending.

Particularly since the federal government shouldn’t be spending even one penny for many of the programs and department that are part of the domestic discretionary category. Should there be a federal Department of Transportation? A federal Department of Housing and Urban Development? A federal Department of Agriculture?

No, NO, and Hell NO. I could continue, but you get the idea.

The burden of federal government spending in the United States is far too high and it should be reduced. That includes discretionary spending and entitlement spending.

P.S. For those who don’t have the misfortune of following the federal budget, “entitlements” are programs that are “permanently appropriated,” which simply means that spending automatically changes in response to factors such as eligibility rules, demographic shifts, inflation, and program expansions. Sometimes these programs (such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc) are referred to as “mandatory spending.”

The other big part of the budget is “discretionary spending” or “appropriations.” These are programs funded by annual spending bills from the Appropriations Committees, often divided into the two big categories of “defense discretionary” and “nondefense discretionary.”

As many of you know I am, and have always been, against the government welfare for the elderly programs.  I am NOT, repeat NOT, against helping those who need help.  I am against forcing those who do not need it the government welfare programs.  At age 24 with an insurance covered by her children grandmother I very much opposed Medicare.  60%, that is 6 out of 10 elderly people at that time DID NOT need government welfare, but the insurance companies insisted that in order to take on those who did need this help with their medical bills the government must FORCE all elderly to participate.  This is why at age 71 I am on Medicare instead of the WORK EARNED TriCare medical insurance that I was most pleased with.  I will grant you that Medicare has paid for every thing I have needed it for.  And I still resent it because if the government had not gotten into competition with me on health insurance then the escalation of medical costs would have remained fairly even with inflation, and even gone down in costs as technology increased and medical practice and health car as other things that the government did not get into remained reasonably priced as have hundreds of other commodities and services that the government did not get their bumbling fingers into.  I hate every medical bill I cause and do at times refuse treatment  because it is the young workers who are footing the bills!  Bills by the way that only inflated by triple digits every year since Medicare went into effect!  EVERYTHING, yes EVERYTHING, the government gets into goes sky high in price and is POORLY RUN.  There is not one government program that is not poorly administered and wasteful and extremely high priced.  Even the very best of them, the military, is poorly administered and wasteful.  The military by the way is one of  the very few  government programs the Constitution demands that the federal government does undertake for it’s citizens!  Everything else our government, both city,state and federal,  just usurped from us the People.  Or, worse yet, we demanded that they take from our shoulders!

So my rant today is about Federal Government Welfare Programs for the elderly and the sad fact that an individual can not get  out of one of them even if they want to.  Read on for another great folly and how the Supreme Court helped in this folly. BB

JANUARY 25, 2013 2:22PM

Supreme Court Snubs Citizens Whose Social Security Will Be Confiscated If They Refuse Government Health Care

Some of the U.S. Supreme Court’s most significant decisions are those declining to hear a case. Two weeks ago, the Court made such a momentous non-ruling in refusing to hear a lawsuit, Hall v. Sebelius, challenging government policies that deny otherwise eligible retirees their Social Security benefits if they choose not to enroll in Medicare. (I previously wrote about the case, and Cato filed a brief supporting the retirees’ petition for Supreme Court review.)

Despite having paid thousands of dollars each in Social Security and Medicare taxes during their working lives—for which they never sought reimbursement—the five plaintiffs were told by officials at the Social Security Administration and Department of Health and Human Services that they had to forfeit all of their Social Security benefits if they wished to withdraw from (or not enroll in) Medicare. This determination resulted from internal policies that were put in place during the Clinton administration and strengthened by the Bush administration. The plaintiffs sought a judicial ruling that would prohibit SSA and HHS from enforcing these policies, which they believed conflicted with the Social Security and Medicare statutes. A sharply divided U.S Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit eventually upheld them. By its decision not to hear the case, the Supreme Court let that controversial ruling stand.

At this point, one might ask why someone would want to give up Medicare. The answer is that some people would prefer to keep their existing (private) health insurance, but that for various regulatory and economic reasons insurance companies are wary of insuring people already covered by Medicare. Talk about the prototypical case of government programs crowding out the private sector!  (THINK OBAMACARE!! How long do you think it will be before everyone is on the government  so-called Public Option? BB)

In any event, the troubling reality of the Supreme Court’s non-ruling is twofold: First, the government now has full authority to force citizens to participate in a financially troubled program (Medicare) that was originally intended to be—and operated for almost three decades as—a wholly voluntary program. If they refuse, SSA and HHS can deny them their Social Security benefits. If they seek to withdraw from Medicare, SSA and HHS can not only deny them future benefits, but force them to repay all benefits received from both programs. Second, the Supreme Court’s unwillingness to address the issue raised here allows federal agencies to bypass Congress with impunity when drafting and implementing their own rules.  (The President is doing this almost weekly with his Presidential Decrees and appointments.  Recently, the US District Court in Washington DC  did rule against the Presidential appointments of three extremely liberal and union representatives he appointed to the National Labor Relations Board when Congress was still in session.  Democrat Harry Reid set up this scheme whereby the Senate was considered in session if someone came in and called the senate to order regardless of how many people were in attendance or even if the Senators were in town.  He did this to block the Senate Republicans from an action they wanted to take.  Now this action of Democrat Harry Reid and the President’s Man in the Senate has played right into the hands of Conservatives!  Sometimes there is Pay Back!   At any rate, the US Court of Appeals in DC ruled that the Senate was indeed in session even tho the Senators were out of town and therefore the Presidents appoints were illegal and void.  This of course makes all of their ruling against the People and Business and for the union thugs illegal and void.  (I have copy the Cato Institute report on this at the bottom of this post)

The Supreme Court however by refusing to hear this case does open up the case for the department, and President to continue to by pass Congress and make their own laws!  Think long and hard about this People.  BB)

The plaintiffs’ lawyer, Kent Masterson Brown, had this to say in a press release following the Supreme Court’s order:

Not only have the Courts allowed these agencies to grant themselves permission to seize a retiree’s Social Security benefits should they opt out of Medicare, but they have allowed those agencies to turn voluntary programs into compulsory ones, giving Seniors no choice whatsoever but to accept the ever more limited health care offered by Medicare. The plaintiffs cannot pay for their own health care—and save the Government and taxpayers money—without forfeiting all of their Social Security benefits.  There is nothing in the Social Security statutes that says a retired individual who chooses not to apply for Medicare coverage will be stripped of his or her Social Security benefits.

Martha de Forest, executive director of a group that supported the lawsuit, the Fund for Personal Liberty, also had a response:

Why would the government tie two programs together when they have different payment mechanisms and different start dates? It is about control, nothing more.  That is why the government forces retirees to participate in Medicare as a condition of receiving Social Security Retirement benefits.

At base, it’s axiomatic that administrative agencies have no powers not granted to them by Congress and that regulations must be anchored in their operative statute. The rules challenged here failed this standard. Combined with the fiscal irresponsibility of forcing citizens to accept costly benefits during hard economic times, the SSA and HHS rules are an arbitrary power grab. Agency overreach imperils the separation of powers and therefore liberty.

Now that the Supreme Court has failed to counter this unauthorized expansion of federal power, it’s time for Congress to do so by legislation—as Quin Hillyer suggests in his commentary on the case. Richard Epstein has further thoughts on how Hall v. Sebelius illustrates the untrammeled growth of the administrative state.

Creative Commons License
This work by Cato Institute is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

 

JANUARY 25, 2013 3:38PM

DC Circuit Overturns President Obama’s Power Grab

Today, in an important decision with far-reaching implications, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unconstitutional President Obama’s appointment of three members to the National Labor Relations Board.

Slightly over a year ago, on January 4, 2012, President Obama appointed four people to high-level offices without the constitutionally required “advice and consent” of the Senate. Three of those appointees were placed on the NLRB, and the other was Richard Cordray, chosen to direct the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, the “consumer watchdog” agency created by Dodd-Frank.

The appointments were one of the most significant power grabs by a president in recent memory. The Constitution requires that certain “officers of the United States,” a category which indisputably includes NLRB board members and the director of the CFPB, be appointed by the president with the “advice and consent of the Senate.” Like many constitutional provisions, this is a “checks and balances” requirement that helps ensure the president does not unilaterally control the executive branch for his own purposes.

As a precaution against crucial offices staying vacant while the Senate is not in session, the Framers included a clause that allows the president to temporarily circumvent the “advice and consent” requirement in order “to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.” At the time of the framing, as well as for many decades afterward, senators would usually spend six to nine months out of Washington. In those absences, it was left to the president to keep the government going, and the Recess Appointment Clause gives the president the power to make temporary appointments during those long periods when the Senate was simply unavailable.

Unfortunately, like so many constitutional provisions, the last 80 years have seen a gradual, bipartisan effort to whittle away the Recess Appointment Clause’s function and to concentrate more power in the president. Initially, presidents began redefining what a “recess” is by asserting the power to appoint officers during “intrasession recesses”—that is, breaks within a formal session (e.g., holiday breaks)—rather than just during intersession recesses. After this precedent had been established by President Warren Harding, successive presidents began appointing officials during shorter and shorter intrasession recesses. President Clinton made a controversial appointment during a 10-day intrasession recess, and President George W. Bush followed suit.

In 2007, after Bush’s controversial appointments, the Senate, led by Harry Reid, began holding “pro forma” sessions in order to block future appointments. Usually held every three days during intrasession recesses, pro forma sessions are often less than a minute long and held in a largely empty Senate chamber. Yet the sessions satisfy the constitutional definition of being “in session” and are often used by the Senate and House to satisfy the constitutional requirement that either chamber cannot adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other.

Whereas previous presidents only had the gall to assert the power to determine what a recess was, President Obama’s innovation in executive power grabs was to assert the power to determine whether or not a pro forma session is actually a session for the purposes of the Recess Appointment Clause. According to the Office of Legal Council, the president has the “discretion to conclude that the Senate is unavailable to perform its advise-and-consent function and to exercise his power to make recess Appointments.”

The OLC’s argument “will not do,” wrote Chief Judge David Sentelle in a stirring and chiding opinion rooted in constitutional originalism. He continued:

An interpretation of “the Recess” that permits the President to decide when the Senate is in recess would demolish the checks and balances inherent in the advice-and-consent requirement, giving the President free rein to appoint his desired nominees at any time he pleases, whether that time be a weekend, lunch, or even when the Senate is in session and he is merely displeased with its inaction. This cannot be the law.

As for whether or not the Senate’s intentions for holding pro forma sessions permit the president to determine whether the Senate is actually in session, Judge Sentelle writes:

The Senate’s desires do not determine the Constitution’s meaning. The Constitution’s separation of powers features, of which the Appointments Clause is one, do not simply protect one branch from another. These structural provisions serve to protect the people, for it is ultimately the people’s rights that suffer when one branch encroaches on another. As Madison explained in Federalist No. 51, the division of power between the branches forms part of the “security [that] arises to the rights of the people.”

After appointing Cordray and the NLRB board members, President Obama said he “refused to take no for an answer,” and that he would “not stand by while a minority in the Senate puts party ideology ahead of the people they were elected to serve.” The President’s attorneys made a similar argument, claiming that the Senate was standing in the way of his duties as president. Sentelle’s response:

It bears emphasis that “[c]onvenience and efficiency are not the primary objectives—or the hallmarks—of democratic government.” … The power of a written constitution lies in its words. It is those words that were adopted by the people. When those words speak clearly, it is not up to us to depart from their meaning in favor of our own concept of efficiency, convenience, or facilitation of the functions of government.

The decision is an important step to reining in a long line of presidential abuses. If the court had upheld the appointments, Obama unquestionably would not have been the last to use this power. Moreover, the reasoning of the decision should directly apply to Richard Cordray of the constitutionally problematic CFPB. His days are numbered if the Supreme Court either upholds the decision or does not take the case.

In case you missed these during the year I am posting Heritage top 10 2012 research papers here in one place.  They are all as relevant now as when they were published; in fact some even more so.  The United States is well on its way to total destruction as a free nation.  Our one chance at salvation was to elect Mitt Romney for President and we didn’t.  Obama won by a slim margin, but he  and the Democrats take that as a mandate to do as they please and because they still control the Senate and Harry Reid is at the helm there is nothing in the federal government to stop them.   The only forces now fighting Obama and Obamanation are the states and some very brave companies and individuals  who are trying thru the courts to hold off or hold back the onslaught of our demise.    I think you need to know what all of these reports say in order to perhaps  minimize the  personal damage the federal government will do to individuals in the coming years.  Sincerely and Happy New Year my Friends, BB

Top 10 Heritage Research Papers of 2012

Todd Thurman

December 27, 2012 at 8:02 am

federal spending 2008 – 2012As the year comes to a close, we reflect on 2012 by offering highlights of the top 10 most-read research papers by Heritage scholars.

1) The 2012 Index of Dependence on Government
By William Beach and Patrick Tyrrell
February 8, 2012
The great and calamitous fiscal trends of our time—dependence on government by an increasing portion of the American population, and soaring debt that threatens the financial integrity of the economy—worsened yet again in 2010 and 2011.

2) Taxmageddon: Massive Tax Increase Coming in 2013
By Curtis Dubay
April 4, 2012
If President Obama and Congress fail to act this year, an enormous, unprecedented tax increase will fall on American taxpayers starting on January 1, 2013.

3) High Gas Prices: Obama’s Half-Truths vs. Reality
By Nicolas Loris
February 23, 2012
Higher gas prices drive up production costs for goods reliant on transportation, and more money spent at the pump means less money spent at restaurants and movie theaters.

4) Federal Spending by the Numbers
By Alison Acosta Fraser
October 16, 2012
The federal government has closed out its fourth straight year of trillion-dollar-plus deficits, and the imperative to rein in spending has never been greater.

5) Red Tape Rising: Obama-Era Regulation at the Three-Year Mark
By James L. Gattuso and Diane Katz
March 13, 2012
During the first three years of the Obama Administration, 106 new major federal regulations added more than $46 billion per year in new costs for Americans.

6) The Ryan Budget: Confronting the Nation’s Spending Crisis
By Alison Acosta Fraser and Patrick Louis Knudsen
March 21, 2012
In the few months since Washington’s dramatic debt ceiling confrontation, America’s fiscal situation has only worsened. Federal spending is set to soar past previous record-shattering levels, endangering the economic future of the nation.

7) Auto Bailout or UAW Bailout? Taxpayer Losses Came from Subsidizing Union Compensation
By James Sherk and Todd Zywicki
June 13, 2012
The U.S. government will lose about $23 billion on the 2008-2009 bailout of General Motors and Chrysler. President Obama emphatically defends his decision to subsidize the automakers, arguing it was necessary to prevent massive job losses.

8) Government Employees Work Less than Private-Sector Employees
By Jason Richwine, Ph.D.
September 11, 2012
The stereotype of the under-worked government employee is frequently invoked in criticisms of public-sector employment. But does the average public employee really work less than the average private employee?

9) Tax Policy Center’s Skewed Analysis of Governor Romney’s Tax Plan
By Curtis Dubay
September 23, 2012
Their conclusion is the result of a series of carefully made choices. These choices, not the underlying nature of the Romney plan, cause them to arrive at their selected result. This finding is harming the debate on tax reform.

10) Welfare Reform’s Work Requirements Cannot be Waived
By Andrew M. Grossman
August 8, 2012
Under the guise of providing states greater “flexibility” in operating their welfare programs, the Obama Administration now claims the authority to weaken or waive the work requirements that are at the heart of welfare reform.

Government Cash Handouts Now Top Tax Revenues – FoxBusiness.com.

Americans are now a people on the dole! and this will be the death of us.  BB

Government Cash Handouts Now Top Tax Revenues

By Elizabeth MacDonald

Published April 20, 2011

| FOXBusiness

U.S. households are now getting more in cash handouts from the government than they are paying in taxes for the first time since the Great Depression.

Households received $2.3 trillion in some kind of government support in 2010. That includes expanded unemployment benefits, as well as payments for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and stimulus spending, among other things.

But that’s more than the $2.2 trillion households paid in taxes, an amount that has slumped largely due to the recession, according to an analysis by the Fiscal Times.

Also, an estimated 59% of the 308.7 million Americans in this country get at least one federal benefit, according to the Census Bureau, based on 2009 data. An estimated 46.5 million get Social Security; 42.6 million get Medicare; 42.4 million get Medicaid; 36.1 million get food stamps; 12.4 million get housing subsidies; and 3.2 million get Veterans’ benefits.

And the handouts from the government have been growing. Government cash handouts account for a whopping 79% of household growth since 2007, even as household tax payments–for things like the income and payroll tax, among other taxes–have fallen by $312 billion.

That is a tough feeding trough to take away from voters.

For instance, Hennessey asks, if indeed more households have the government to thank for their wealth, does that mean those households are more inclined to re-elect politicians who are pushing for more government handouts?

………………………………..

President Obama had asked for the debt commission to “address the long-term quandary of a government that continually and extravagantly spends more than it takes in,” only to initially set aside  the commission’s recommendations. (What he should have done was to accept ENTIRELY the Debt Commission’s suggestions and pushed for it.  It would have brought the jobs and economy back full force while putting our country on a path to recovery and prosperity and given him the place in history he seems to want.  Of course it would also have been totally against his personal goal of destroying America. 
Since Obama did not use the Debt Commission program the House Republicans should have run with it!  The damned fools had the Republican sweep of the government in 2012 all laid out for them even if Harry Reid wouldn’t allow it thru the Senate.  Instead the Old Dog Republicans in the House are fumbling around with half measures that will do much less than is necessary and making themselves look inept to the public.  Perot was ahead of his time and could win in a landslide in 2012! BB)

And earlier this year the White House first introduced a budget that would have added $6.7 trillion more in deficit spending over the next 10 years, yanking the national debt higher to more than 75% of gross domestic product, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That, until GOP Rep. Paul Ryan offered his $4.4 trillion in spending cuts over ten years, causing the President to offer $4 trillion in cuts over 12 years.

The Fiscal Times reports that “the only other time government income support exceeded taxes paid was from 1931 to 1936.” The Times notes that “government transfers of income to households started to overtake personal taxes at the start of 2008, and the gap has been widening.”

The difference between what households received and what they paid in taxes is about $125 billion, equal to a little more than “three times the amount Republicans and Democrats agreed to cut from government spending through Sept. 30,” the Fiscal Times said. Typically, the gap between government transfers and taxes runs the other way, the Times reports.

“In normal times the household sector gives about eight percentage points more of its income in taxes than it receives in direct transfers,” the Times quotes J.P. Morgan economist Michael Feroli as saying, adding that a return to normalcy, or this eight-percentage-point spread, is equal to about $1.2 trillion in income.

So the question is: What government policies will bring the U.S. labor market back to robust health, enough to drive economic growth, consumer spending — and higher tax revenues?

When will the U.S. government pull back from its intervention into the U.S. economy, so the economy can try to stand on its own?  (Will this happen in time to save our nation?  I don’t know because it is mighty hard to take away once given, but it  is  almost impossible to explain to the elderly who make up the bulk of voters that their Social security and Medicare will not be taken from them.  I am one of the elderly and it amazes me how extremely stupid  this group of people are!  No matter how many times they are told that only those UNDER AGE 55 will see changes to their Medicare and Social Security this group of already on the dole senior citizens continue to mob town halls and yell, “Don’t touch my Social Security and Medicare!”  So between the stupid Senior citizens who are the voters and the gutless Congressmen who only want to be re-elected  I don’t have much hope.  Sincerely BB)

Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/04/20/government-cash-handouts-exceed-tax-revenues/#ixzz1M9mrw3la

To Boldly Go Where No Party Has Gone Before… | The Weekly Standard.

By laying out the GOP case for entitlement reform this year, Republicans in Congress would show themselves to be the “adult” party. They’d force 2012 GOP candidates to be serious. They might even find bipartisan support for changes sooner rather than later. They’d also prove to the voters that they know why they were sent to Washington. What would it mean, after all, if the Tea Partying GOP House shied away from attempting to address federal spending in all its particulars—discretionary and nondiscretionary?

Why, it would mean failure.

The Republicans only control the House and they have a formidable  liberal wall in speaker Harry Reid Democrat in the Senate but they can put press and get things done  if there is a will to do so.  Just reducing or even doing away with all the “discretionary spending” will only be a drop in the bucket.  Our country needs to cut our entitlement spending!   This Congress has a chance now with the people by in large  behind them.

Many still can not understand that they did not pay into Social Security what they are getting out of it and demand “their” money back.   Most however are slowly coming to the truth and facts of the matter and know that Social security is really a government welfare program now.  And it is broken and broke.  The money is gone.  Yes it is true that the past Congress’s have stolen the money and squandered it on other programs.  And it is equally true that nothing can be done about this raiding of the Social Security pot.  And even if it were possible to put this money back it would only carry the current retirees until 2017 or there abouts depending on who is telling the tale. Something has to be done about the system now if  the young men and women  now employed and paying for us old geezers are going to get a bit for themselves.  The Debt Commissions has an excellent plan to save the system if Congress would but give it a hearing.

 

Medicare and Medicaid are so far in the red that only draconian changes can save the system.  I believe those who can afford their own medical insurance no matter how old there are should buy their own and get off of Medicare.  I also think that the taxes taken out of our paychecks for Medicare and Medicaid should be taken out of all income no matter how high it is.  Right now there is a ridiculously low cap, IMO.

 

Anyhow, the title is very apt: To Boldly Go where No Party Has Gone Before….       Please God help our Congress to have the courage top save our nation.  BB

Deficits, Debts and Unfunded Liabilities: The Consequences of Excessive Government Spending4:19

Added to
queue
Deficits, Debts and Unfunded Liabilities: The C…145 viewsCFPEcon101

I wanted my readers to listen to this video because it is telling Americans the TRUTH.   A truth that I  personally don’t think we Americans have the guts to accept and take action on solving.  If we do not then what we saw happening on the streets of Greece this past week will be on the streets of America soon.    Only in Greece it was the unionized government workers  which in Greece is approximately 60% of the population, whereas in the United States it will be a generational battle unfortunately pitting grandparents against their grand children and as yet unborn great grand children.

Greece is bankrupt, flat out busted and in order to remain a viable nation the European nations will have to come together and bail Greece out.  The other nations have agreed to this but only if Greece takes measures to greatly reduce their debt which like ours the problem is not the deficits or borrowing, but the promises.  Promises made to the government workers for  long paid vacations (10 weeks),  large salaries, and large pensions and health retirement benefits at age 53.  The workers are rioting to hold the government to it’s promises.

Our government has also made promises.  Promises that like Greece the government can not possibly keep. Not if America is going to survive, and quite frankly not even if America does not survive because the money simply is not there and unlike Greece we are too large for any country or group of countries to bail out even if they were willing.    America is not to large to fail, we are to large to succeed on the path we are now traveling.

The two currently most disastrous unfunded liabilities are Medicare and Social Security.  Promises made that can not be kept under any circumstances.  I asked a poster to my blog the other day some questions and today Dear Reader I ask them of you;

Jordan, I don’t know your age but are you willing to tighten your belt to the point of what we will consider poverty? Are you willing to give up Social Security? You do know that the amount you paid into SS is returned to you within two years of retirement and after that you are really and truly living on the backs of your children with Elderly Welfare?

Are you willing to give up Medicare and cut back on all the doctor visits unless you are sick? In the past 10 years I have visited a doctor approximately 30 times. Half those visits have been for nothing more than “check ups” and an opportunity for the doctor to write me another prescription. I started eliminated those pills I was taking one at a time to see if there was a difference in how I felt. I went from 12 pills daily to seven. Then I cut out  the three and four times a day pills to once a day. Guess what? my blood tests given by the doctor have been much better!   In fact he doesn’t believe how much better.  I didn’t mention to him what I did.

Are you willing to give up your cell phone? You know we managed to live very well and raise our families without instant communication. I often wonder what so many people have to say to each other that can not wait until a face to face encounter!!

Are you willing to give up eating out? Are you willing to wear your clothes until they show wear and empty your closet of ten pairs of pants and twenty shirts when three pair of pants and 10 shirts will see you thru any occasion?

Are you willing to have no more than three pairs of shoes and to go to the shoe repair shop for new heels and soles? Fix the appliance rather than throw it out and get a new one?   Why must you and your family have a minimum of two cars?  Do you children really need dance lessons and riding lessons and all those organized sports?   Do your children (and you too) really need every new electronic gadgets  that comes out?  Will one computer per household and one TV per household be enough?  And I could go on and on with this. This is how my grandparents lived all their lives and my parents lived most of their lives until they caught what I call “affluenza” ( affluence gone wild) I have always lived with affluenza and except for a brief time early in my marriage when the babies were coming I never really had to watch my spending.

Are you willing to admit that social equality is a punk dream? That some people will always have more and do more than other folks because some folks are smarter and/or work harder?   Are you willing to accept the old fashioned moral obligation  of taking care of your own parents as they took care of you, and your children will be expected to take care of you?

Are you able to accept that there will always be rich and poor?  And instead of damning the rich man  you just might be glad to have a few around because Jordan I personally have never had a poor man give me a job!

Are you willing to live in a house that fits your family size and not a show place with pretty unused rooms?  My last three homes had to have a formal living room and dining room which were only used for holidays.  What a waste!

All of the above and much much more is what we Americans are going to have to do in order to bring our country back to liberty and freedom for all.

But heed my warning please:  this is coming to your life.  All of this austerity is coming to your life whether you voluntarily give it up and roll up your sleeves  and get to work or whether you go on a rampage and demand what simply is not there.  With the first  you take responsibility and accept changes to your life styles perhaps you can leave a better world to your children.  Or if you choose to whine and cry and riot and demand then evil will have won and will take over your government and take all this from you anyhow.  BB

While you are listening to this video you might take a look at some of the others.  Some good stuff here.  BB

Paul D. Comi Sr.

I am a 78 year old veteran of the Korean War. Upon my discharge in 1952, I came to California from my home in Massachusetts to attend college. My first job at Douglas Aircraft was for $1.25 an hour and even with the lower cost of things in those years, it was very difficult.
Starting college I got $110.00 a month from the GI bill, from which we were expected to pay our rent, education fees and other necessities of life. Fortunately, living in Manhattan Beach, all I needed was a couple pairs of denims, sweatshirt and “go aheads”, a Japanese inspired footwear that was very popular in the Beach area.
Every paycheck that I earned showed deductions for social security, by which we were promised it would be held in an inviolate trust by the congress. Of course, immediately, the congress began to take out the money and put IOU’s in its place.
I got a scholarship to USC and also got married and we soon had one child. My wife is an air force veteran who worked for an Orthodontist, so we were able to get by and even save money for the future of the education of our children.
Upon graduation, I worked as an actor for 41 years and while friends and many others that we knew, went on vacations and spent with little concern for their future and the future of their children, we were very focused on saving and investing what we could afford, while at the same time, paid into our social security and eventually, Medicare when it was made a law.
With this new Health Plan, that is purported to be so wonderful, but not good enough for Congress, the President and government workers to participate in, we find that not only have all of the congressmen and women who voted on our behalf for the bill, despite the majority of us being opposed to it, none of them have ever read the bill, nor can they understand it and are unable to explain it.

Now, we find out that this bill will affect and take money from Medicare, in which we have paid dutifully for years, but also will impact Social Security, which is already destined to be bankrupt in the near future. We also learn that one of the ways that this bill will be funded, is by taking away from my plan and giving the benefits to those who either avoided in some fashion contributing to it, or as in the case of illegals, didn’t contribute at all, but still have added an impossible burden on our hospitals and are one of the major reasons for the increasing costs of health care in the country today.

This all started with FDR and then with LBJ’s “Great Society” where the progressives and the democrats to gather the power from the unions, the illegals and indolent members of society that simply squandered their earnings.

Now of course, there are unfortunate people who need our support and compassion, but there is no attempt by the inefficient government system to weed the malingerers and the cheaters out. They don’t want to lose their vote, so they have created organizations like ACORN that have gotten millions of dollars of stimulus money and put pressure on banks to put up mortgage money for people who could never afford to pay the payments. That is where we find ourselves today.
I fear that we are laying the foundation for a time when both the dumber ones of us who believe that the government can produce money, when all it can do is tax us for it, will wake up and find the cupboard bare.
It will be at the same time that those of us who have been dependable and loyal supporters and have paid and invested in our future and the future of our children will also rise up in protest, not unlike some of the destructive protests that we have witnessed by the far left in response to what they perceive is not to their liking.
Wake up America, Wake up before you allow the greatest, most benificent nation that has struggled endlessly to improve and overcome whatever human failings it may have from time to time.

I did something I seldom do, I carried over not only the entire article but the comments as well.  (There is only 112 of them at this point.)  Andrew Mellon is one of the most astute liberty loving individuals of our time.  I have made his blog  Mellon’s Musings. a part of my daily visits tho I have only “pimped” his article from Big Government Blog.  His bio reads: “Andrew Mellon is a liberty-loving student at Columbia University (oxymoronic though that may be). Writing deep behind enemy lines, Mellon covers issues political, social and economic with a Classical Liberal bent. He worked on his first campaign when he was five-years-old and has been fighting to return the country to its founding principles ever since. If you enjoy his pieces, check out his blog, Mellon’s Musings.

This particular article is a must read.  Not only a must read, but a must understand!    This is going to happen.  It will happen at some point in the future; maybe tomorrow maybe next week or next year but it will happen.  You must prepare for it.  We are all going to suffer when the chaos comes.  And as is usual; the poor among us will suffer the most.  Prepare yourselves and your families as best you can.  I would say save money but probably it would be better to buy up and save food.  Glenn Beck has been telling us to remember our Grandmother’s root cellar where she stored food over the summer  to carry the family thru the winter.  I mention this as being the best course of action for those of lower income because the dollar won’t be worth much  with hyperinflation.  At the same time you should save as much money as possible so you can continue to pay your rent or mortgage and utilities.  You will survive because people do.  Families and friends pull together and help each other.   We as a people have survived before but this time will simply be so much worse because we have been made dependent on the nanny state which is not going to be there for us any more.  The biggest entitlement programs will simply have to go since they now take up one half of our national budget: No Social Security, no Medicare, no Medicaid, no government services of any kind for anyone at all!  Only  the necessary  police services for our personal security and possibly the city utilities.  Our nation has come to the point where there simply is no more money and soon there will be no more lenders.  Remember: we are now borrowing from China to pay the interest on our debt to China!  But as things continue to get bad for the people of the United States and the people stop buying then China too will suffer because the imports from China will decrease causing factories to close in China.  Do you see the connection and how our fall will cause another  because we have become so inter dependent as nations?  It is like tying your income to your neighbors work and spending habits and having him spend like a drunken sailor.  We Americans have been the drunken sailor!

(Sigh) Please read the article .  BB

***************************************************************

Fiscal Death by Welfare

by Andrew Mellon  (highlights are mine BB)

Ironically enough, the medicine applied by our state as the antidote for our ills has proven to be poison.  The welfare state is killing our nation.  Today entitlement spending makes up nearly half of our budget.  Long term, we know that there will be no way to pay off our unfunded obligations — we will go bankrupt. There will be three options ultimately, though ultimately can come quite suddenly: default, hyperinflation or abolition of the welfare state.

265-1109140020-MoneyPrintingPress-thumb-468x280-1

Default is considered by many to be an impossible option as it would likely lead to mass chaos given the necessary suspension of many government services, not to mention the practical reality that WE are the collateral in the event of default.  To default is to be honest, and to be honest is anathema to the state.

Hyperinflation in my view is the most likely outcome given the massive increase in the money supply, which is good for politicians until it hits because it allows them to kick problems down the road and impose a stealth tax.  Currently, government is toeing the line between monetizing debt and intervening to keep its borrowing rates down, while incentivizing banks to keep money in their vaults or pump it into the stock market.

I believe that as the downturn goes on the government will blame the banks for the lack of economic growth and force them to allocate credit to chosen political entrepreneurs and other bad credit risks, leading to massive inflation in prices which they will likely blame on evil speculators and greedy price gouging companies.  Hyperinflation would allow the government to pay for the welfare state –  by writing entitlement checks in worthless dollars and lead to economic paralysis as constantly rising prices would make economic calculation and thus commerce impossible.

The final option would lead to the crucifixion of politicians.  Of course, this might not be such a bad thing.  All joking aside, there is a reason that entitlement spending is categorized as “mandatory” spending in our budget.  It is wrongfully viewed as an essential function of a civilized western nation, and its end would be met with a serious backlash from all of the welfare state’s recipients.

(The screaming will be loud and hysterical when Social Security and Medicare are cut!  Look what happens when there is even a hint that Medicare may be cut just a speck which the $500,000  really is.  The elderly have grown accustomed to being care for by the nanny state and they feel they have a right because of being bad mannered enough to get old entitles them to special treatment.  And they feel no concern for the young who are trying to pay the bills or the future children who will pay their bills!   BB)

Yet while default is the most honest option, hyperinflation the most likely and abolition the most untenable, in my view it is the third option which is the inevitable end, regardless of the path we choose, with the only question being whether we take our lumps now or at some unknown and jarring point in the future.

But it never had to be this way. Back in February of 1887, Texan farmers were struggling as a severe drought was killing their crops.  Congress was looking to pass an appropriations bill to bail out the ailing farmers.  President Grover Cleveland had the following to say on the matter:

Though there has been some difference in statements concerning the extent of the people’s needs in the localities thus affected, there seems to be no doubt that there has existed a condition calling for relief; and I am willing to believe that, notwithstanding the aid already furnished, a donation of seed grain to the farmers located in this region, to enable them to put in new crops, would serve to avert a continuance or return of an unfortunate blight.

And yet I feel obliged to withhold my approval of the plan as proposed by this bill, to indulge a benevolent and charitable sentiment through the appropriation of public funds for that purpose.

I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the general government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that, though the people support the government, the government should not support the people.

The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow citizens in misfortune…Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood.

Unfortunately, as we well know future politicians failed to heed these words.  Due in large part to the New Deal and Great Society legislation, post-Lochner era court decisions and ideological subversion of the left in media and academia, the state became the paternalistic figure that it is today.  The welfare state imposed on the people the notion that we were morally required through the force of government to help out our fellow man, an inherently immoral argument.  In so doing, the state became the institution of moral hazard.

By providing aid to untapped politically lucrative constituencies for many of life’s woes, the state altered the character of the American people.  When before, life was based on self-reliance, innovation and entrepreneurship, today a wide swath of American life is based on dependency, complacency and politics, an ironic assertion in that we built our wealth that funded the welfare state on the very foundations that the welfare state undermines.  George Will outlined this transformation eloquently in his CPAC speech.

The demoralizing nature of the welfare state in absolving people from making decisions on matters of health, career and retirement in altering our character necessarily altered our actions, the sum of which make up our economy.  By taking long term planning out of the hands of people, the welfare state led us to increase our time preferences.  Time preference refers to our relative short term or long term orientation.  When we prepare for the long term, we make prudent decisions such as saving more and borrowing and spending less, in expectation of reaping greater rewards down the road.  On the other hand, when government taxes, reducing returns on capital and removes the need for cogent planning, we become more short term oriented, valuing more highly instant gratification achieved through spending and borrowing more to consume today.  High time preferences result in low capital formation, high real interest rates and diminished prosperity.

It should be noted that politicians are not immune to time preferences.  Since politicians are concerned most with getting re-elected, and the state came to be seen as the mechanism for spreading the wealth around to various voting blocs, naturally there grew a conflagration of welfare programs (using the term welfare loosely) funded through direct taxation, inflation and debt with little regard for the future.

The psychological and concomitant economic effects of the redistributive state cannot be understated.  What has been consistently understated is what the world would look like without the welfare state.  If we were to abolish Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, billions of dollars would return to the hands of the people.  People would have to plan their lives more carefully and responsibly and redevelop the drive that had been taken from them by the state, and they would allocate these new funds accordingly.  This influx of new cash to be reallocated according to the preferences of consumers would lead to unimagined innovations.

How many new hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and insurers would crop up?  How many more dollars would people save for retirement and in so doing invest in the private sector?  How many charitable organizations would be created for people to voluntarily help their fellow man?  How many government bureaucrats would be unleashed into the economy and employed in productive jobs?  How many productive jobs would the private sector create?  How many people would pick themselves up out of poverty?  One fascinating anecdotal example of the types of innovations that occurred when the government did not coddle people from cradle to grave was the institution of the fraternal society, one of the functions of which was healthcare provision under “lodge practice,” whereby society members could voluntarily pool their money and draw upon it when in need of medical care.  Prices were low and service was of quality until government intervened and destroyed the practice.

Now surely, as a practical matter the scrapping of the welfare state would cause great disruption, and people expecting to receive and/or reliant on benefits would incur immediate hardships.  But with the infusion of capital back into the hands of private individuals making decisions for themselves, in the long run our standard of living would increase, our competitive advantage in the world would widen and we would restore the national character to which Cleveland spoke.  We would reverse the demoralization and economic stagnation induced by the state.  We would see the bountiful unseen benefits blocked by the massive edifice of the state that holds our people back. It bears remembering that we didn’t grow wealthy with a safety net under us in the first place.

Our society was built on the non-aggression principle.  Individuals should be free to pursue purposeful ends so long as they do not harm others.  Government’s role is to protect us from external harm by providing defense, public safety and the courts.  By government attempting to protect us from the harm of our own decisions, imposing morality on the people through forcing some to subsidize others, government becomes an immoral, socially and economically destructive institution and perpetuates a cycle of intervention, dependency, crisis and further intervention.

As the healthcare debate rages on, and in context of the reality on the ground today, it surely seems as if we are miles from the end of the welfare state.  But indeed, we are going to arrive at the end of the experiment of the Ponzi welfare scheme, and it will not be by government fiat but by gravity.  This will be a blessing in disguise, though the short term pain of a sudden collapse will be great.  Traumatic as the collapse of the welfare state will be for those reliant on it, collapse will go quite a ways towards restoring power back with its rightful owners, the people.
Email this to a friend | Print | Share on Facebook | Tweet this | // Bookmark  and Share

RSS Icon RSS FeedComments (112)

You are about to flag this comment as being inappropriate. Please explain why you are flagging this comment in the text box below and submit your report. The blog admin will be notified. Thank you for your input.

CloseLogin with your OpenIDOr create an account using OpenID

OpenID URL:
  • Logged in as
Loading comments…

Cowboy Logic 118p

sumcowboylogic has not yet written a personal description.

View IntenseDebate profile

Cowboy Logic's avatar - Go to profile Cowboy Logic 118p · 16 hours ago

Parasitical organisms must always live off their host organisms, until they have drained them of blood. Then they move on to the next host, for the next free lunch, and free ride…………

8 replies · active 2 hours ago

“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.”
Alexis de Tocqueville’Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the head of the International Monetary Fund, suggested Friday the organization might one day be called on to provide countries with a global reserve currency that would serve as an alternative to the U.S. dollar.’
Won’t that be nice? That is exactly how the the British Empire fell from world economic power when the ‘pound’ lost status…

Wasn’t it Rahm Emanuel who said ‘“Let not one crisis go to waste”?
One really has to wonder just what the end game is here, these are not stupid people in the White House.

4 replies · active 3 hours ago

“Reagan proved deficits don’t matter”— DICK CHENEY

7 replies · active 13 hours ago

Well written, Mr. Mellon.
“The final option would lead to the crucifixion of politicians.”
I favor the final option. Although painful, it does offer full relief, in the end.

1 reply · active 14 hours ago

Excellent post, Mr.Mellon.This is Truth, and it hurts.Just how disconnected from reality are our politicians?This article shows, quite succinctly, how far in the stratosphere the pols are today. Engorged with their own self-importance, these pompous fools have taken our great nation from the heights of greatness to the shallows of despair, accelerating the course exponentially in just a couple of generations.None dare call it Treason? I do.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Hanzo

2 replies · active 15 hours ago

MarkG 98p

Reality is for people who can’t handle Bourbon! A fan of Blues music

View IntenseDebate profile

MarkG's avatar - Go to profile MarkG 98p · 15 hours ago

“I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.” – Winston Churchill”When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” – Benjamin Franklin

“A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.” – Thomas Jefferson

“Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” – Ronald Reagan

“Welfare’s purpose should be to eliminate, as far as possible, the need for its own existence.” – Ronald Reagan

2 replies · active 5 hours ago

StoryKeeper 83p

Preserving the Past, Enriching the Present and Inspiring the Future for all Families

View IntenseDebate profile

StoryKeeper's avatar - Go to profile StoryKeeper 83p · 15 hours ago

Can we say Cloward-Piven?

3 replies · active 9 hours ago

Welfare is the extension of slavery which is acceptable to the lazy and irresponsible for generations. If you are a welfare recipient; then this indictment is for you. You have no honor.

1 reply · active 4 hours ago

I think its all part of the progressive design. To change us they must first break us. Share the weath…let all the illegal immigrants in who can receive benefits without paying taxes. Create countless useless entitlement programs to “help them” (the poor and lazy) and of course share some kool aid. Normal hard working Americans don’t believe in entitlement and the progressives know that so.. they buy the votes and support of the poor and lazy and import others who will do anything to get out of there own country.

1 reply · active 6 hours ago

Your whining might have more legitimacy if you prioritized your focus a bit. “Welfare” on Americans is more justified than welfare on foreigners – particularly violent, terrorist foreigners who have attacked us and make enemies for us by supporting them: Israel.

18 replies · active 1 hour ago

Excellent and very, very honest piece. It’s a shame FDR was right when he said that no damned politician would ever get rid of his social programs. The people are too damned used to the government handout right now. There are too many out there that would only lift a finger to keep the checks coming – and then sit right back down on their sorry, lazy butts.

0 replies · active 15 hours ago

Ron Greene's avatarRon Greene · 15 hours ago

New York cops get a pension of 80 % of their last year of service salary so what they do is buy up overtime from other officers to run up thier last year salary to 120 % of normal and then after 20 years retire collecting 100 % salary for the next 30 years plus their Social Security and none of this money has been set aside and all must be pulled from that states annual revenue.
It just cannot work the numbers just do not add up and something must be done to end this.

1 reply · active 12 hours ago

kooz 80p

kooz has not yet written a personal description.

View IntenseDebate profile

kooz's avatar - Go to profile kooz 80p · 15 hours ago

Unemployment compensation has to be adding to this right now.
I suppose the recession in general.
It would be great to have a time table,but I suppose the best thing is to buy what you need now
without going into debt.

0 replies · active 15 hours ago

The welfare state cannot exist without the creation of an authoritarian government structure which forcibly takes the funds from one to give to another.After that, it’s just a matter of degree – in how much is taken from the “haves,” and how much force is used in the taking.

2 replies · active 15 hours ago

Woodshedder's avatarWoodshedder · 14 hours ago

Excellent. I agree with you 100%. And I thought I was the only one having these kinds of thoughts.

1 reply · active 10 hours ago

Once a people accept the notion that failure should be rewarded, it was all over.

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

To quote Rush Limbaugh, we are speaking truth to welfare.Hey Obama – you wanna see fundamental transformation – The Tea Party Movement is gonna create a Revolution against the big government monster your ilk feeds off and they’ll return America back to First Principles.

The free ride is over for you parasites!

0 replies · active 14 hours ago

Preventing the insolvency of the socialist welfare entitlement state has been the goal of every administration for a very long time, and crafty politicians have been inventing ways to forestall the event. After all, no politician wants to be the one who presides over that.This, I believe, is the prime motivation for “comprehensive health care reform,” with its four years of benefit free tax increases and medicare cuts used to prop up social security, as well as the cap and tax green agenda which is designed to extract more money from every American in order to move the eventual collapse of the welfare state beyond 2012.

0 replies · active 14 hours ago

but they need anohter $93,000 for petty cash !!!! WTF ?????What is wrong with them? This is not the hope and change I voted for !!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNRt9R7S8aM

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

On a site that’s full of excellent posts, Mr. Mellon’s writings the past few weeks provide the clearest warnings of a perfect storm dead ahead, how it formed, and some idea of painful choices to be faced.. We Americans sometimes pat ourselves on the back about extreme hardships overcome by previous generations, forgetting the genuine and lasting pain involved, and imagining it immunizes us from any real pain of our own.Unfortunately, we’re likely to experience a historic crisis firstthand. And it it wil be largely inflicted from within.Some Democrats argue they just need to push their stinking carcass of a health-care bill over the hump to get it passed by any means, and Americans will learn to like it. This sounds like some crack dealer who wants to pin down a recovering addict and shoot them up in the arm, figuring once that addictve dependency is injected forcefully, they’ll have a lifelong customer. It may mean ruin for the victim, but keeps the money and power flowing to the pushers, BHO, Pelosi, Reid & crew.

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

The collapse of Greece, & the potential of the same for Ireland & other western European countries will bring about the fall of the EU. The U.K. will double-dip into recession followed by the U.S., Japan & China. We are witnessing the final cut w/all ties to 20th century policy. The short term result will be difficult to say the least as those who’ve become addicted to government-imposed dependency start waking up to the real world without their fix. This will be the evil outcome the political “Left” (of both parties) has imposed; FDR’s legacy. But the long term runout will be a much better place & uniquely 21st century as Americans again learn to be self-reliant & neighbor-helping neighbor becomes the new norm.

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

Marko68 36p

Marko68 has not yet written a personal description.

View IntenseDebate profile

Marko68's avatar - Go to profile Marko68 36p · 13 hours ago

Thanks for finally calling it what it really is, WELFARE! The 800lb guerilla in the room at the summit are politicians don’t dare mention.

2 replies · active 2 hours ago

j2points's avatarj2points · 13 hours ago

Get ready for the great recession of 2012 & the final defeat of Liberal Progressivism.

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

ahahahahaah all your cons .. fell for the republican line.. they got you convinced that ALL our tax $$’s are spent on people who sit around drinking beer and not working – collecting welfare….
the fact is if congress started to cut all that YOU think is “welfare”.. so many of you would jump up and say “hey not that one”… then on the other hand you are happy with 13 aircraft carrier groups and corporate american paying them selves HUGE bonuses… if my country is going to pay for anything. .I want it to pay for what the people need not what corporate america needs
we need to cut ALL the fat
this is NOT a left/right issue.. it is US against them…..
no palin.. no obama.. no cheney

4 replies ·

's avatar - Go to profile

Government-worker unions are on the rise and they are demanding higher salaries and benefits with your tax dollars. They refuse to take pay cuts, benefit cuts, more employee contributions, etc.. They want top raise property taxes, payroll taxes, corporate taxes, user fees, higher sales tax, food tax, etc…If you are lucky they will sue you with your tax money and take the unions dues you give them to continue to socialize America.

http://thelibertyjournal.com/2010/03/01/the-unite…

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

“Death by Deficit” and “Death by Welfare” are two phrases that should resonate with most Americans. We should use those phrases relentlessly because they clearly enunciate the future and our consequences of the path we are on.

mments (112)

You are about to flag this comment as being inappropriate. Please explain why you are flagging this comment in the text box below and submit your report. The blog admin will be notified. Thank you for your input.

Loading... Logging you in…
CloseLogin to IntenseDebateOr create an account

Username or Email:
Password:
CloseLogin with your OpenIDOr create an account using OpenID

OpenID URL:
  • Logged in as

Admin options

Disable comments for this blog post

Save settings

Loading comments…

StanH 109p

“The Constitution” a binding contract from the Founders to the future.

Blogs/Websites

View IntenseDebate profile

StanH's avatar - Go to profile StanH 109p · 13 hours ago

That’s what stimulus (porkulus) was all about TARP, healthcare, and on and on. These bastard politicians have over promised, and now, “America’s chickens…have come home to roost!” Stand back America the parasite class with devour itself. It’s time to say, “NO!”

0 replies · active 13 hours ago

mac1000 1p

mac1000 has not yet written a personal description.

View IntenseDebate profile

mac1000's avatar - Go to profile mac1000 1p · 13 hours ago

I work in the welfare state. I can promise you that welfare has killed more people than poverty ever did. It has helped NO ONE. And at what staggering cost. Look at the crime rate, the incarceration rates, the miscarriage rate, the life expectancy among welfare recipients. It’s a staggering travesty and our tax dollars are paying for this death.

0 replies · active 13 hours ago

OklahomaBound's  avatarOklahomaBound · 13 hours ago

toconn – March 1st, 2010 at 1:18 am
“Reagan proved deficits don’t matter”— DICK CHENEY
===========================================================================

Hey “toconn”, obviously Chenny never could have imagined that a Progressive scumbag like Obama would come along and run up a deficit in one year that exceeded all of the deficit spending of every President in the history of this country combined. When you spend that kind of money to the welfare left and unions then deficits DO MATTER!

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

Dau.of Patton's  3rd's avatarDau.of Patton’s 3rd · 12 hours ago

The Marxist in Chief must be awfully proud to see this happening.
Probably has a thrill go down his leg everytime he thinks about it.

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

cardon 79p

Just an ordinary person with extraordinary concerns about what’s going on in our government!

View IntenseDebate profile

cardon's avatar - Go to profile cardon 79p · 12 hours ago

We should be inundating our Senators and Congressmen with
e-mails, letters, phone calls, about this healthcare takeover…
Time to put on the pressure…With all the people out of work, and
not paying taxes, there will be a shortfall…there’s no way they’ll be
able to pay for the programs they have without adding this piece
of crap…..

0 replies · active 12 hours ago

Congrats’ America Your entiteded To It!

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

All Your Entitede Are Us

4 replies · active 11 hours ago

Over The Hill's  avatarOver The Hill · 12 hours ago

It’s About time

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

Socialism is a fraud. Keynesian economics is a fraud.Socialism lets politicians lie to gullible people, telling them what they want to hear, which is that they can get something for nothing. Keynesianism lets the politicians print unlimited amounts of money to pay for the promises. But when the promises come due, there will be a reckoning and it is coming.

In times of financial collapse and turmoil, civil society may break down. It is at that time that our civil society is weakest and may either devolve towards dictatorship, under the guise of keeping civil order, or civil society will recover and reboot itself. We need to be prepared for that time.

It does not bode well, or give any comfort, to know that the Federal government is hurriedly trying to make us give up our liberty in advance of that time.
.

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

Nothing worth having ever comes easy.
[edit]
I remember Jack Kemp (speaking around the time Perot got Clinton elected and the MSM caused the L.A. Riots) advocating the creation of “enterprise zones” in inner cities. As I recall this involved tax breaks and govt loans. I thought “eh, not too bad” but then I heard him talking about home ownership [because you don’t burn what you own] and while I can’t remember the details I think it was an expansion on the already growing Fannie/Freddie bubble.
See, while I paid attention to politics, without the benefit of Liberal indoctrination, I hadn’t a clue about the ramifications of the Open Conspiracy in play. I knew something was wrong – that RINOs were filling the ranks of the Republican party but I didn’t know about the Progressive infiltration or agenda. I’m indebted to Andrew Breitbart, Beck and the other New Media outlets for bringing truth to the surface for all the world to see.
Now, how are we going to get that country “though the people support the government, the government should not support the people” back?

0 replies · active 11 hours ago

Dave Rooney's avatarDave Rooney · 10 hours ago

Mr. Mellon.With all due respect give a time line or time table when you say “Hyperinflation in my view is the most likely outcome given the massive increase in the money supply, which is good for politicians until it hits because it allows them to kick problems down the road and impose a stealth tax.”

One year? Two years? Three years?

You’re not speaking about the crux of the crisis. And that is fatal. CREDIT my friend is contracting and is in a tailspin. Those that want it can’t get it. Those that can get don’t want it.

How on Gods great green earth is that inflationary in the near term? Are you suggesting that house prices have to rise to unleash pent up credit? Hyperinflation is a wet dream for the Fed. Gold bugs are going to take some heat. Which ones can hold on and not be forced to sell time will only tell.

This analysis is not only counterproductive to BIGs readers but it almost galvanizes their beliefs. NOTHING will reverse the credit contraction with current prices. It will be a huge lower price tailspin that precedes the availability of fresh new credit. Ergo reduce the risk and let the new games begin.

But at that juncture you will find an American psyche so wounded by the carnage that only the brave souls will step up to the plate and seize opportunity. And that is how fortunes are made. Be prepared to act and not react. And based on the what I see as prevalent few will be in a position to act. The masses will be scared chitless.

1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago

If you want to really understand all that needs to be changed. Just look here at what the last Congress did (110th.) With an avg of 170 days in session they enacted 460 Laws >> http://tinyurl.com/yhmlezgMost of the laws had to do with funding/creating entitlements and monuments to cronies. We have a long way to go to correct ourselves.

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

When we have card carrying socialists in our government, no one complains, people elect these people.
This seems to me these are the free loaders of society, these are the people who want more.
60 plus congress people are Democratic Socialist.
Until the people of the nation become independent thinkers, and become informed, the DemoRats will destroy our great Nation.
It will take generations to try to undo what this administration has done, if ever.

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

And the rose colored glasses approach that future growth will bring in more revenues, I’ll work twice as hard in the future knowing that my hard work will be transfered by the likes of Nanny Pelosi to those she deems worthy, by sacrificing my labor for the greater good I will get that euphoric feeling of being a good commie.

1 reply · active 5 hours ago

Roundup_Logan's  avatarRoundup_Logan · 4 hours ago

I’ve always thought the true underlying issue with health care was to kick the entitlement program crash further down the road. We should start reversing this now by cleaning out the illegals off the welfare roles, then move to married couples (potential double income earners), and then start raising the income base line lower and lower to be elligible for any type of public assistance until soon if you make more than $1000 a year you won’t get public assistance. And if you can walk, talk, and breath – you can work and if you can work, you don’t need public assistance. Spend your time working instead of standing in the welfare line to get some of Obama’s “stash”.

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

It’s called ‘mordidas’, the death of a thousand cuts.

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

Tyrant 53p

Tyrant has not yet written a personal description.

View IntenseDebate profile

Tyrant's avatar - Go to profile Tyrant 53p · 4 hours ago

We have too many illegal immigrants, AND too many recent “legal” immigrants we unwisely allowed into the country that have become a burden to society. They need to go.

0 replies · active 4 hours ago

Must Know Headlines 3.1.2010 — ExposeTheMedia.com

[…] Fiscal Death By Welfare […]

Kevin  Butterfield's avatarKevin Butterfield · 3 hours ago

I see no real end to the welfare state. In fact, it is probably more true that the vision concerning monetary ends for the citizenry according to the Socialist visionaries is a society where there are no wages, but credit. You would work, do your job, and have an allotment of resources that you can access. Products would be government controlled, and therefore equal in quality, so excessive consumption would be, theoretically, phased out. For instance, think, no exotic sports cars, because there would only need to be so many models for certain demographics necessary to produce in a One-Minded homogenized society. Obviously, sports cars are not a necessity. All that is needed in this particular scenario is for an exotic car company to fail, become owned by the government, and have it decided that the best interest of the company is to be absorbed by a general car manufacturer where, from that point, the exotic car companies goals and aspirations for future models is also absorbed. Ahhh, there is so much to consider, but it really is similar to 1984. Healthcare definitely is a major first step in building this new world. Mind, it isn’t begun with welfare – that was tearing down the old. I see it starting with healthcare, because society turns on food, and health is primarily about consumption. So, it isn’t about controlling money really, but controlling actual needs. Needs are subconscious, and logical. There is a lot to consider…

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

Justamused's avatarJustamused · 3 hours ago

After coming out of a Wal-mart, filled with “Made in China” merchandise, I watch as a mother/daughter sumo team worked strenulously to lift the lard they carried on their frames into a $52,000, 2009 F-350 Ford. It was convieniently parked in the handicapped spot with bales of hay (a sure sign of hay burning horses) and empty beer cans. A cigarete dangled out the puffy, celulosic lips of both. I was amazed that a disable individual could climb into such a tall vehicle, let alone afford it. This thing was crew cab diesel. Heel, I work for a living and can’t afford such high end equipment. But I guess Walmart’s motto is right, “SAVE MONEY, LIVE BETTER”. Keep paying your taxes kids. The poor need you.

1 reply · active 2 hours ago

vlscpa 78p

vlscpa has not yet written a personal description.

View IntenseDebate profile

vlscpa's avatar - Go to profile vlscpa 78p · 3 hours ago

Yeah, well, when the $hit hits the fan we suburbanites won’t look so stupid for having fled the cities. Welfare has to end, just like those ridiculous and unsustainable gov’t salaries have to end, and the end won’t be pretty.

0 replies · active 3 hours ago

its time  continued's avatarits time continued · 3 hours ago

If you cannot help yourself, then you can you help?

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

How does ANYONE expect the problem to be corrected when the scumbag PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES is, himself, a welfare rat and entitlement clown. From his high school days to his degrees at Columbia and Harvard he has sucked on the welfare teat of minority programs to pay his way. And no records to ever be reviewed. Gee.. I WONDER WHY ! One cannot change the stripes on a welfare bum. It’s generational as those of us who have lived close to large urban areas know !Cut all welfare programs and subsidies to minority pregnancies immediately. Let them work as I am sick and tired of carrying their lazy asses while they get their “HAIR AND NAILS DID” ! Lazy scumbags…. Soon to change !

0 replies · active 2 hours ago

In a world where a smug socialist president takes cheap pot-shots at a vietnam war hero, serving in Congress, and is obsessed with using the words HealthCare to ‘transform America’ into a Welfare state, we have no choice but to use whatever freedoms we still have left, to to overthrow him and his entire team. TeaPartyNurse, NJ

0 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

Look on the bright side!Economic meltdown will present plenty of opportunities to get back in touch with our roots!

Dig up your lawn and plant crops! Get a rifle and learn how to hunt (something edible, not each other …).
Throw away that useless paper money and learn how to carve wampum out of clam shells!

Consider it as an opportunity for personal growth!

sbenard's avatarsbenard · 45 minutes ago

“Death by Deficit” and “Death by Welfare” are two phrases that should resonate with most Americans. We should use those phrases relentlessly because they clearly enunciate the future and our consequences of the path we are on.

A well informed  frequent reader and commenter has commented on my post about my views of what we as a people need to do about social Security and Medicare.  Her comments I think deserve to be heard here rather than as merely a comment.  she feels I am sure the way most felt when they read my post but just didn’t take time to comment or just put it down to Brenda being out of her mind.  So here goes: the original post,  Snappy’s comment and my answer.  BB

Original post:

This year Social Security pay outs will exceed what is taken in.  And, there is nothing but debt in the treasury.  Our nation is on the brink of bankruptcy.  Our debt is 84% of of Gross National Product.  That means that if we could take all the money  that changes hands in the form of profits (wages are profits) this year  and pay off out national debt it would take 84% of it.  Think of it as your pay check or your yearly wages if you want.  Your bills for  everything but food, clothing and shelter (that diamond ring you got your wife, that expensive vacation, those iPod and cell phones and cars for everyone in the family of driving age–all this stuff) takes $84 dollars out of every $100 you earn just to pay off your debt for this things.  That leaves you $16 out of every $100 for food, shelter and clothing.  This is where our government is right now.  The debt for the government is in the form of Treasury Nots (promised to pay or IOU’s) our government has sold to other countries and other entities, even Americans themselves.  This debt the government has incurred is now 84% of what the entire nation can make in profits for a year and the debt is growing by the minutes our government continues to buy those diamond rings!

(From BB:  Heritage Foundation has reported their study indicated with the passage of the Health Cared Reform Bill  within 10 years the national debt will amount to 90% of our Gross Domestic Product.  That means the value of everything   made or produced in our country if sold would  be needed to pay for our debt leaving just 10% to run the rest of the country.  Also you might want to read this:  According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), from 1998 to 2008 public employee compensation grew by 28.6%, compared with 19.3% for private workers.   BB)

This is what has to be done and there is no other alternative.  We elderly have to bite the bullet the same as our young workers and their families for what our government leaders have led us into.  But remember, We the People voted these people in office and now it is time to pay our bills and take our lumps for investing  with not our dollars but with our trust in the Ponzi Schemes of Social Security and Medicare.


The solution is simple.  Social Security and Medicare are Ponzi Schemes.  Or more precisely, Welfare for the elderly.  The government has sold the American people a bust just as did Madoff and the people who swallowed the lies unfortunately are going to have to take the loss.  The fact is anyone who paid into Social Security has received back every cent put in after only two years of retirement.  At that point it becomes welfare—taking money from one and giving it to another.

The Congress is going to have to pick a number and anyone having an income above that number will not receive Social Security. Period!  Cut off!

Cut out Medicare.  Insists that all people have to purchase their own health insurance. (I sincerely hope for a rational health care reform package based on the Republicans model)   Now since health insurance for the elderly is expensive and the government intervention in the health care industry by foisting Medicare on people has made the cost escalate beyond the stratosphere then the government will have to help elderly people purchase their own insurance by putting those who cannot afford it  on a sliding scale of support based on their income and costs of the insurance they will have to purchase, and this  based on their individual needs.  Many in this group will have preexisting conditions.   Those on the lowest level of income must be put in an expanded Medicaid.    This is a sad adjustment but has to be  until it is worked out of existence by the death of the current and some future retirees.  With reform the younger workers will have their own insurance as they age and retire.   (I would have had my own if government intervention had not priced me out of the market.  I hate and resent the fact that my government has forced me to take Medicare because I can not afford the insurance they helped to create!  )

This will be a hardship on the elderly and retired for now and into the future, but we have to accept that the burden of carrying us the elderly is a great burden on the young workers today and into the future.   We with our voting the wrong people into office who promised us the moon and we blindly followed  just like those who invested their dollars with Madoff must accept responsibility for our actions.  The young workers didn’t do this to us.  No one is going to like this or get the bigger piece of cake.  In fact, we are all young and old going to be reduced to crumbs now for the sake of the future of our nation and our children.  We created this problem and now we are the ones who must pay our bills and not pass them on to our grandchildren!  Older Americans are proud people in the main and they believe in paying their bills.  Once they understand what has been done to them and to the future children they will tighten their belts.  BB

Snappy:   Sadly, I disagree with the way you want to correct the situation of Social Security. Many seniors will not be able to survive if they do not get the Social Security they expected to be there when they retired and there are many reason why.
1) Many always lived on a very meager income and looked at Social Security as a sort of savings for when they retired. If they didn’t make much money, like minimum wage workers they might only get $400-600 per month. If they live alone they may have to live in shelters or in subsidized housing (Government would still be paying for them) because that amount of money is not enough to live on.
2) Many have been wiped out; hence all the bankruptcies. Now they surely don’t have any money to live on unless they are still working.
3) Then how about those who actually saved their money, but were wiped out by Corporate crooks, like Ken Lay, of Enron fame, or the crooks at Tyco, and World Com. There were millionaire retirees who lost their whole stock portfolio and had to sell their homes, and many 70yr. old and 80 yr. old Seniors, who actually planned for their retirements, but had to actually go out and find jobs just to survive. What happened to the white collar low-lifes that caused all this thru their crooked trading schemes, hey, most still have money hidden away in some Swiss bank account, or family members are holding the cash for them. They went to Club Med, prison, where they had quite a comfy life, compared to those in hard core prisons and these guys are usually out in a couple of years. Not much of a punishment for men who completely wiped out the savings of the Americans who invested in their companies.
4) Then there are the people who have had enormous medical bills due to some unexpected disease or accident..

There are too many people, seniors who need that Social Security to exist, we’re not talking about a luxury life-style here. Some can get by, but if there should be an emergency expense and they don’t have someone, maybe a relative to bail them out they are screwed.

Nope I think all Congress and House of Representatives, must give up their life-time salaries once they retire. I think that immediately they should all be put on Social Security like the rest of us. Did America forget that these creeps work for us? We pay their salaries and they make more than we do. Something is wrong with this scenario, especially since this Congress under the mighty hand of Nancy Pelosi think that they know more about what is good for us than we do. Their spouses if they did not work, should not get this $250, 000 bonus that I understand they get when their partners retire from Congress. No work, NO MONEY, no Social Security either.

As I see it, these Congressmen retire with Millions of dollars. I want all them to open up their stock portfolios and have them checked out for insider trading. I want to know how many bought stock in companies just before they voted on some bill in Congress that would effect the company they bought stock in. Believe me, after the way I have seen that they spend our money, I have no doubt that 90% of them would be eligible for prison
due to insider trading.

Okay, let me say here that I know that all of them are not crooks. I’m sure that some of the newly elected Congress people have not had a chance to be corrupted yet.

All Health Insurance in any package or bill should be the same as that which these crooks in Congress have. It seems to me one of Obama’s campaign promises was that we would have the same Health Insurance as Federal employees, which also included Congress.

Americans seem to have always been too trusting. We trusted Congress to be upfront and honest, they have not been. We trusted what they said when they were vying for our votes, and when we voted them into office they acquired short-term memory loss. While in office many appear to work on deals for their own bank account and not the country’s.

This is the time for Americans to wake up and acknowledge what these elected officials have done to the country, literally.

This is the time to say, NO MORE! And this is the time to let them know that they have used up all their chances. Let’s make this year, 2010 the year that we clean house, that’s the House of Representatives and the Senate. Let’s let these evil-doers know that we mean business. By the way, I just had a thought, it seems to me over the years Congress borrowed money from Medicare. Maybe they need to pay it back before spending money on their Pork Barrel projects. If this money were paid back we may not have a problem with Medicare, at least not until we have time to fix the damage that Congress did.

Brenda:   Snappy,  Honey you misunderstood me.  I don’t want these people you outline to be dropped from  getting the funds they need to live.  I merely want  us to admit that Social Security was, and is,  a Ponzi Scheme  and that it is after a couple years Senior Welfare.  Then I want all those who have an independent income over a certain amount , say $40,000 the average pay for working Americans, to be cut from the Social Security rolls.  They don’t need nor deserve  younger people paying for their extra little goodies.  As a full time RVer traveling on my husbands military retirement and our traveling craft show (my hand crafted items)  I saw far too many retirees with two homes and a fancy RV to take them from one to the other.  I do not begrudge these people this  life style or benefits they earned while working in the way of pensions.  In most cases they paid a great deal into these pension plans.  I do begrudge them the extra Social Security which they probably get the most available having been higher income people while working.  But they too have gotten back every cent they put in after two years!  These people have no right to be on the government dole and the backs of young workers simply because they are older.

Seniors who need their Social Security should continue to get it but under another department.  Perhaps they can even get food stamps to also help them because for many  Social Security isn’t enough to live but they “make too much” to get any other help. As a retiree I can tell you that the cost of living does  not go down that much after you  retire.  Help should be provided for ALL people who need help.  But NEVER for people who simply do not need it.

You too would get hot under your collar to hear retired people living on the backs of young workers complaining that they can’t live on their Social Security and have to spend their savings!  These people after two years are on welfare and have savings?!?

As for Congressmen.  I totally agree with you.  These people have been in office for years and have become millionaires.  The pensions and benefits should all be cut retroactively.    Not one Congressman should get the outrageously extravagant pensions they get! They should get pensions based on their years served and in line with those of us who didn’t work for the government.   Those below a certain personal income should be treated like the rest of us and put on food stamps if needed.   No Cadillac health care either!

As for the funds paid into social Security and Medicare it is truth that congress used the money and gave back Treasury Notes (IOU’s)  and spent the money on other things.  It was by doing this that the country was able to provide all these entitlement programs and welfare programs and foreign aid and everything else and keep the national debt (borrowing from other countries and entities) down.  But if you look at the figures closely you will see that even if this money had been kept safe and used for only Social Security and Medicare the country would  not have enough in either fund to keep paying out for much longer.  And, the national debt would be a whole lot higher because of all the spending of money that simply wasn’t there.  Americans and America’s government have been are a drunken sailors holiday for almost 70 years now and the bank is busted.

A fix?  Honey there is no fix.  We are flat on our arses and that is all there is to it.  The only “fix” is to go back to depression like conditions by stopping all unnecessary spending on all government levels: local, state and federal.  Governments should spend only on defense, keeping up the roads, keeping up the utilities and collecting the taxes to do these things.  Welfare should be what it was meant to be: families taking care of each other and personal charity.  health care should be what it was meant to be: a personal and family obligation.  Believe me if governments stopped paying the bills for these things the medical and drug companies would not go out of business.  They would simply  cut their prices back to where they should have been.  the only reason medical costs went up so much was because government guaranteed payment.  Look at the other businesses that government didn’t get into and you will see the costs actually went down  in relation to incomes.  My Dad was making 25 cents an hour when he and Mom bought a 4 room shack for $700.  Do the math.  the same goes for automobiles, computers and anything else you can name that government hasn’t put their fingers in.  But medical costs and education have gone sky high after Uncle got in the business.  The same is about to happen to housing now that the government owns Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and owning a home is considered an entitlement!

Anyhow there simply is no fix except to stop living high on the hog as we all have and pay our bills.   Or, we could just continue as we are and pass the tab onto our grandchildren so they will have to live like slaves and beggars.  Sincerely, BB

Snappy:  I don’t know if you have listened to Yuri Bezmnov explain how America would be subverted.  He was a Communist involved in the plans to subvert America who defected to the United States.   These videos were made in 1983 when he tells us exactly how it  was planned and how it was happening just as planned..  One of the main things was getting all Americans on the government dole.  You will find his videos listed on the right hand column.    Just page down to them and click.

This year Social Security pay outs will exceed what is taken in.  And, there is nothing but debt in the treasury.  Our nation is on the brink of bankruptcy.  Our debt is 84% of of Gross National Product.  That means that if we could take all the money  that changes hands in the form of profits (wages are profits) this year  and pay off out national debt it would take 84% of it.  Think of it as your pay check or ypou yearly wages if you want.  Your bills for  everything but food, clothing and shelter (that diamond ring you got your wife, that expensive vacation, those iPod and cell phones and cars for everyone in the family of driving age–all this stuff) takes $84 dollars out of every $100 you earn just to pay off your debt for this things.  That leaves you $16 out of every $100 for food, shelter and clothing.  This is where our government is right now.  The debt for the government is in the form of Treasury Nots (promised to pay or IOU’s) our government has sold to other countries and other entities, even Americans themselves.  This debt the government has incurred is now 84% of what the entire nation can make in profits for a year and the debt is growing by the minuteas our government continues to buy those diamond rings!

This is what has to be done and there is no other alternative.  We elderly have to bite the bullet the same as our young workers and their families for what our government leaders have led us into.  But remember, We the People voted these people in office and now it is time to pay our bills and take our lumps for investing  with not our dollars but with our trust in the Ponzi Schemes of Social Security and Medicare.


The solution is simple.  Social Security and Medicare are Ponzi Schemes.  Or more precisely, Welfare for the elderly.  The government has sold the American people a bust just as did Madoff and the people who swallowed the lies unfortunately are going to have to take the loss.  The fact is anyone who paid into Social Security has received back every cent put in after only two years of retirement.  At that point it becomes welfare—taking money from one and giving it to another.

The Congress is going to have to pick a number and anyone having an income above that number will not receive Social Security. Period!  Cut off!

Cut out Medicare.  Insists that all people have to purchase their own health insurance. (I sincerely hope for a rational health care reform package based on the Republicans model)   Now since health insurance for the elderly is expensive and the government intervention in the health care industry by foisting Medicare on people has made the cost escalate beyond the stratosphere then the government will have to help elderly people purchase their own insurance by putting those who cannot afford it  on a sliding scale of support based on their income and costs of the insurance they will have to purchase, and this  based on their individual needs.  Many in this group will have preexisting conditions.   Those on the lowest level of income must be put in an expanded Medicaid.    This is a sad adjustment but has to be  until it is worked out of existence by the death of the current and some future retirees.  With reform the younger workers will have their own insurance as they age and retire.   (I would have had my own if government intervention had not priced me out of the market.  I hate and resent the fact that my government has forced me to take Medicare because I can not afford the insurance they helped to create!  )

This will be a hardship on the elderly and retired for now and into the future, but we have to accept that the burden of carrying us the elderly is a great burden on the young workers today and into the future.   We with our voting the wrong people into office who promised us the moon and we blindly followed  just like those who invested their dollars with Madoff must accept responsibility for our actions.  The young workers didn’t do this to us.  No one is going to like this or get the bigger piece of cake.  In fact, we are all young and old going to be reduced to crumbs now for the sake of the future of our nation and our children.  We created this problem and now we are the ones who must pay our bills and not pass them on to our grandchildren!  Oldeer Americans are proud people in the main and they believe in paying their bills.  Once they understand what has been done to them and to the future children they will tighten their belts.  BB


See topic cloud at bottom of page for specific topics.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 96 other followers

BB’s file cabinet