Posted on 12/09/2010 3:20:36 AM PST by Scanian
On a midweek afternoon in February 2009, a month into the Obama presi dency, Republican Rep. Mike Pence arrived at Columbus in his east-central Indiana district for a town hall meeting, the sort of event that usually attracted a few dozen constituents. Surprised to see the hallway outside the room crowded with people, "their arms folded and brows furrowed," Pence shouted down the hall to an aide, asking him to get a janitor to open the room.
The aide shouted back that the room was open -- and overflowing. Congress had just passed the stimulus (Pence voted no), and Hoosiers were stimulated to anger. Soon the Tea Party would be simmering.
Five months earlier, on a Friday, TARP had been proposed. The original three-page legislation sought $700 billion instantly, no time for questions; Pence's staff figured the cost would be about a billion dollars a word. On Saturday, Pence announced his opposition, but thought the bill would pass the House 434-1. On Monday, however, other members started approaching him, almost furtively, "like a secret society." A week later, the House rejected TARP, 205-228.
Four days later, the House passed TARP's second, 451-page, pork-swollen iteration, 263-171. That weekend, Pence, who voted no, was at a Scout jamboree at the Henry County Fairgrounds. A man approached to thank Pence for opposing TARP. The man said that although he had lost his job the day before, "I can get another job but I can't get another country."
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Actually, there “was” a fund. LBJ stole it and rolled it into the “Great Society”.
_________________________________________________________
My understanding is that LBJ made an accounting change and put SS on budget rather than off budget. Place on a spreadsheet is all that changed.
Moving from "off budget" (meaning it can't be used for another purpose), to "on budget" (which means it can be used for anything) is equivalent to "LBJ stole it".
Moving from "off budget" (meaning it can't be used for another purpose), to "on budget" (which means it can be used for anything) is equivalent to "LBJ stole it".
In real economic terms though the US government essentially burned the money collected for Social Security when it was a trust fund(the money no longer circulated and took the form of a line item “asset” on the budget) while the US government ran a larger deficit and issued more bonds for the rest of its spending than if it used the taxes collected for social security. It’s an accounting game. I guess when the dollar actually represented a value in gold it did matter though . . . so you may be right. In modern, fiat currency terms, it’s just accounting entries though.
In real economic terms though the US government essentially burned the money collected for Social Security when it was a trust fund(the money no longer circulated and took the form of a line item “asset” on the budget) while the US government ran a larger deficit and issued more bonds for the rest of its spending than if it used the taxes collected for social security to pay for other things. It’s an accounting game. I guess when the dollar actually represented a value in gold it did matter though . . . so you may be right. In modern, fiat currency terms, it’s just accounting entries though.
They spent your money now you want them to steal money from me to pay you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.