Posted on 03/11/2005 7:56:57 PM PST by wagglebee
If Americans of all ages ever recognize the degree to which they've been conned by the proponents of failed government programs such as Social Security, they will likely respond in a manner reminiscent of the Boston Tea Party. And it is not hard to imagine a few career politicians floating in the harbor alongside King George's cargo.
Consider the caterwauling from Democrats in response to President Bush's efforts to reform Social Security. Originally promoted as merely a retirement supplement, Franklin Roosevelt's scheme initially involved a miniscule payroll tax. Once the tax was implemented, however, the road was clear to incrementally grow the program in scope and cost, eventually burdening American workers with a 13 percent confiscation from every dollar they earn. Politicians in Washington quickly recognized that intake from taxpayers would, for a time, exceed expenditures. So, in a manner sufficient to earn any Enron executive a trip to the slammer, Congress soon began pillaging the fund, using the money to supplement its insatiable quest for pork. Worse yet, it then covered its actions with a lie of unfathomable proportions.
Ostensibly, such violation of public trust is assuaged by the substitution of IOUs, offered as a "guarantee" of repayment. Consider the abject absurdity of this concept, and how it exemplifies the unbridled contempt with which these politicians regard the American people.
Not even worth the paper it is written on, any government-issued "IOU" simply concedes the fact that monies were indeed appropriated and that sooner or later somebody will be forced to repay them.
Since governments cannot create wealth, and possess only that which can be forcibly extorted from their citizens, those promissory notes hold no monetary value whatsoever. Instead, they are nothing more than confessions of the original theft. If they are to be repaid, it will be by the very same citizenry that was overtaxed to create the surplus in the first place.
Meanwhile, political operatives are having a field day dipping into the coffers, essentially robbing from one citizen in order to purchase the loyalty of another. It is perhaps the biggest deception of the 20th century to portray Social Security surpluses as anything other than a supplemental income tax, further burdening the citizenry while enabling big-government liberal Democrats from both parties to perpetuate their "business as usual."
Thus, the phony outrage among liberals, intent on maintaining the system in its present form, offers proof of their real loyalties. And politicians who piously suggest another tax hike as some sort of corrective action are merely showing themselves to be willing to continue the theft, not only from this generation but also from future generations, until such time that the public wakes up to the sham.
Such underhanded tactics are the lifeblood of liberalism, which on the one hand publicly reviles the evils of capitalism while on the other hand continually seeks to solidify its access to the lion's share of the fruits. Is it any wonder that liberals vehemently oppose revamping the system into a form that would allow average people some measure of independence, and would eventually force the system to become honest and accountable?
Perhaps common citizens, particularly those who rely heavily on Social Security for their sustenance, can be forgiven for their anxiety. But those politicians echoing such alarmist rhetoric are either grossly ignorant of the fiscal reality, or shamefully disingenuous and willing to stoke the fears of their constituents in order to keep them in line.
Among the worst collaborators in this ruse is the American Association of Retired Persons, an organization with a fundamental necessity to maintain its symbiotic tie to the governmental status quo. The AARP thrives on the backs of frightened and dependent members, and therefore works to ensure that they stay that way.
That is why it cannot sanction any Bush plan, no matter how favorable to future generations or how thoroughly it protects present recipients from any adverse effects, if such a plan holds even the tiniest possibility of allowing them to disentangle themselves from the debilitating web of dependence on government.
Every pyramid scheme in existence requires the inclusion of a "bottom tier" of people whose destiny it is to be robbed blind, in order to enrich those above them. Social Security is no different.
In the private sector, such schemes are considered criminal. How much more criminal is it for the government to continually subjugate present and future working Americans by fleecing them in this manner?
In the private sector, such schemes are considered criminal. How much more criminal is it for the government to continually subjugate present and future working Americans by fleecing them in this manner?
And that pretty much sums up FDR's Ponzi scheme in a nutshell.
And, interestingly, George Bush wants to "fix" this Ponzi scheme, rather than shutting it down and prosecuting for conspiracy anybody who advocates such fraud and theft.
Bush's SS plan is not about taking away benefits for older people. Look carefully at the numbers: For those who are older, your benefits stay the same. Those who are inbetween, your benefits will lessen but the money you invest in private accounts will more than make up for the loss in benefits. For those of us who are younger, SS will only be what it should be: a minimal safety net for the disabled and those who made bad financial decisions.
Older and younger shouldn't be fighting on this. We should both be rising up against the politicians who are sticking their hands in our cookie jar and protect it from them.
I think a lot of the resistance to making changes in Social Security is because if we don't recognize it yet then it's like the crime has not happened yet.
Listen to me, you impudent whippersnapper! Stop insulting President Bush!!! I have had it with your constant criticism of a fine man. You aren nothing but a nattering nabob of negativism.
Ideologies that you embrace are not acceptable on this site.
That sounds like the eight horrific years of the Klintoons!
Uh, he's been around here a lot longer then you have. (;-)
Whoopie do! The value of a freeper is not determined by his tenure, or seniority. - that is a very Democratic way of thinking! One 's value is determined by loyality to the principles & Leaders of the Republican Party.
I'm here... I'm 25.
I'm here to say that if I hear a 'fatwah' that I recieve 50% LESS benifits, I consider it a 50% INCRASE in benefits.
I've never counted on SS, I've NEVER thoguht it would be there for me.
I'm willing to take benefit cuts, I'm willing to take retirement age increase... BUT ONLY (and I goddamn mean ONLY) If i get my own account to manage outside of the beaurocratic bullshit.
What are you talking about????
Ideologies that you embrace are not acceptable on this site.
Those who bootlick politicians are just so much fun! The hardest part of composing this reply was to think of who else needed a ping.
I hope I got that part right.
"impudent whippersnapper"!!!! Hee-hee; a first for me. Did you swipe that line from Green Acres?
As for "impudent", don't get me started. I'm just warming up.
Well, now you've gone and done it, comrade.
The only appropriate response is this one.
Yo, LarryLazMartinKoz - we may have to retire the Lame Post 'o The Day award with this one. Either that, or I have no value.
Politicians have been raiding SS fund for a looong time
it was these theives that put SS in jeapordy in the first place...
Maybe so - but that is because in the real world adults recognize that one must choose between options that are actually available.......we cannot choose options which are nothing more than pie in the sky type thinking (which is exactly what you suggest by simply dismantling Soc Sec).
Your philosophy is to try and act like the smartest person in the room.....when actually to adults you are still thinking with the maturity level of a child.
Fighting for private accounts is the smartest and most realistic option available for turning around the current Soc Sec system (in both the short and long term).
The loss of wealth that is taking place on the poor and working class via the current Soc Sec system is simply criminal.
Implementing private accounts is the first step in continuing toward an "ownership" society which will lead toward a complete shut down of Soc Sec "as is now" -
But serious adults who want actual results not just "words of smoke" recognize this will only be accomplished in increments.
Which is exactly what President GWB is doing!.
I could swear he left the sarcasm tags off #5 and 8. Please tell me he did.
If so, he's been "forgetting" them for several days on multiple threads.
I know what you mean, though; it's hard to fathom being that thick. Funny as hell, though.
Unfortunately, any reform plan has to maintain that current recipients receive their benefits as promised. You just can't shut down SS and tell seniors to go to hell. Pay them the monies rightfully owed to them, and mandate that younger workers invest a minimum percentage in their own private retirement plan.
Who died and made you the boss?
By the way YOU have a very Totalitarian way of thinking.
What you're saying is that if you're old enough now, you reap the benefits of the Ponzi scheme, as those who are in early enough usually do.
What you're also saying is that people younger than that have to pay off the old people, accept the fact that the system will blow up and pay them nothing and somehow scrape together enough to support themselves in old age after paying off the older ones who've scammed them.
The big problem is that the parasitic frauds who perpetrated this scheme were dead before I was born, so we can't hang them in the public square. Well, we could, but the remnants would probably fall apart.
What needs to be done is to explain clearly to the idiots that this scheme won't work, can't work and is about to blow up. It needs an orderly shutdown, not an illusion that it can be "managed".
And the old people need to share the burden as well; they can't just waltz off to the shuffleboard court and golf course leaving the next few generations to pay for their vacations.
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.