I'm Mad As Hell and I'm Going to Rant!!!!!!

[Cary]

I posted my position on Social Security, duly citing some of my information to DU. What did I get? Well the poster who replied didn't have the guts to deride me directly, so I got a whole litany about DU. You know the drill, I'm sure.

Of course I got nothing about the points I made.

I listened to Sean Hannity for the 5 minutes a month I can stand to do that. When I come home from my martial arts classes there just isn't much else on the radio if there is no good game. As usual, he's berating liberals.

Nothing specific. We're just all stupid.

Here we have a radical change being foisted upon us. We are fed untruths about a crises. We are given examples of where their stupid privitization schemes have allegedly worked, the most recent being Galvaston, Texas, with no analysis of why it would work here except to say that the stock market always and everywhere outperforms any other investment. I've got one guy cajoling me about how great his "CalPERS" plan has been for him, giving him 3 times what he would have gotten under Social Security.

I am an attorney. I see a lot of people succomb to flim flam every day. I have enough experience to know flim flam, like the lies about the justification of the war in Iraq, lies about "tax fairness" and "tax cuts", Medicare Drug Bill lies, . . ., when I see it. How about "investing" all our wealth in universal life insurance instead? Then my children can get my safety net after I'm dead, right?

WHO IS GOING TO PAY THE $750 ESTIMATED COST? WHERE IS THE $2 TRILLION GOING TO COME FROM?

Don't worry about benefit cuts? Trust you, Mr. Bush? Like the Harken Energy shareholders trusted you, right?

Let's just take a meat axe to all policies of the past 60 years.Isn't that the real goal here? Starve the beast that is Social Security and Medicare? Isn't that the real goal? Like WMD was never the real goal in Iraq, right? Like refunding the surplus was never the real goal of tax cuts, right?

Sorry if this is disjointed. It's not nearly as angry as I'm feeling either.

[cyberpj]

1. Lawyer?....... Lawyer?....... What are our chances on THIS SS info?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1566269&mesg_id=1566269

[cthrumatrix]

6. That was my question....look at this thread --- you can make quite a name

for yourself if this indeed the case.

IMHO this would be akin to a CEO "breach of fiduciary repsonsibility" when wrong is done in a 401(k).

They took our money and now they want to cut our implied/promised benefits from the 1983 deal.

I paid in since that timeframe and it's not right.

[Cary]

10. I'm no Constitutional scholar. . .

but I do have a good "name" in my area of expertise.

I'm not sure how the Constitution deals with this issue anyway. My vague recollection from law school is that you cannot have a direct tax. The money has to be in the general fund regardless.

Seems to me the issue is a red herring anyway. It is all part of the larger issue of how the government pays it's bills, with the tab for Social Security being just another bill. The real crime here is Bush's fiscal irresponsibility.

But a "crime" requires intent and I just don't give the man credit for having enough intelligence to really know what he's doing. Perhaps I misunderestimate him? If I had my way, though, he wouldn't have ever had this chance to inflict any of this upon us.

[Steely_Dan]

2. I Fell Your Pain...

It is more than just starving the beast...it will also mean an influx of fresh money into the market to turn the economy around (supposedly)and save Bush's ass since he raided the coffers.

-Paige

[Dhalgren]

4. And that is one of the biggest lies in Bush's spew!

Putting money into the stock market has never, ever been the same as "saving" it. There had been billions pumped into the stock market in the 1920's; and where did all that go? An infusion of money into the stock market can really boost the market - for a day, a week, a month, maybe even a year. But the market absorbs that capital and then needs more. And influxes of cash into the market is no guarantee that the market will stay strong - there are too many other variables at play. That is why the stock market is so often compared to gambling - because it is. And that statement that "over a long term the market is a good earner" was also true right up until the fall of 1929 - then not so much. Getting away from the gamble of the stock market was exactly the reason this country created Social Security in the first place - so that people would have a sure and secure financial fall back if all else failed. Why does everyone pretend to forget this?

[Cary]

8. Good question.

" Getting away from the gamble of the stock market was exactly the reason this country created Social Security in the first place - so that people would have a sure and secure financial fall back if all else failed. Why does everyone pretend to forget this?"

I recall reading a story about Joseph Kennedy, where he knew it was time to get out of the stock market when he was getting stock tips from his shoeshine boy. I had the same kind of epiphony a few years back when a young client of mine, who was riding the "New Economy" bubble, informed me that the business cycle had in fact been repealed.

And here we are, yet again, aren't we?

Those who do not learn from history. . .

[bunkerbuster1]

3. This issue actually gets me angrier than Iraq.

Don't know why, exactly, it's just that everything seems so transparently clear to me, and yet I am unable to get through the thick skulls of my countrymen (and let's face it, it's mostly the men who are to blame on this.)

At least with Iraq--even after the various and sundry clusterfucks that continue to surface--I can see my way to how a person could make a case to support the mission.

This piratization makes NO SENSE AT ALL.

And no, this message isn't anywhere near as angry as I feel about it, either.

[2Design]

5. everything they have privatized has hurt the public - the only

ones who have gained are rich already - telecommunications - created monopolies and big cable companies and UNFAIR news reporting

deregulation - privatization all = more money for rich

[Dhalgren]

7. Ah, there you have struck upon it.

The purpose of these freeloading freebooters is to plunder the whole world. They have no real allegiance to the USA except as a platform from with to rape the rest of the planet. These neocons are like alien creatures who simply want to suck the planet dry. When they speak of a New American Century, the "American" part is just circumstantial - they have no more respect or concern for the US (apart from how things generally effect themselves) than they do for Iraq or Iran or "Old Europe". They want the money - they would rather bilk you than kill you and take it, but they will do what they have to do...

[cthrumatrix]

9. bingo --- corporations/elite own the world

we are pawn and servants for thier theft,greed and control

[Cary]

11. You might cite a handful of circumstances in all of our existence. . .

where this was not generally true. It isn't particularly disturbing to me.

What is disturbing to me is the fact that the economy is 2/3 consumer spending, and we're killing off our consumers' buying power. This would seem to be contrary to everyone's best interest, and severely short-sighted.

I don't know where this is leading, exactly. But it should be noted that real revolutions occur when those with political power no longer have the bulk of the economic power. Wealth trickles up, not down. What happens in a modern, post-industrial society, when wealth isn't down there to trickle up?

[KansDem]

12. It becomes all too clear...

I think about this constantly. What is the NeoCon Fascist agenda? Namely, to destroy the US. Why? What is the only really power to counter huge corporations? The US Government. So, destroy the US Government and the Corporations will reign free.

I believe we all here at DU can be classed generally as "Roosevelt Democrats." That is (and I might be wrong), we all believe that government exists as a reflection of the people. It this regard, there is a kind of reciprocal agreement: Citizens live according to laws enacted by fellow citizens as representatives of government, and government sees to it that its citizens receive the basic foundations of human liberty: health, welfare, fairness, etc. I believe in this although I may be a little off on the details.

So I wonder, what do the NeoCon Fascists have in mind for the US? If Republicans despise government so much, why be a part of it? I believe they want to change the people/government dichotomy dramatically. They want to tear down American institutions to pave the way for Corportist rule. And to do this, they need government for two objectives:

Inter-national level--create the most powerful military in the history of the world to be used for global domination. This is already occurring in Iraq...

National level--create domestic spy and surveillance systems and "law enforcement" agencies to go hand-in-hand with the erosion of civil rights in order to put an iron boot to the backs of Americans. In order to rule supreme, the NeoCons need to suppress and silence dissent.

So look for budget cuts in education, health care, the environment, basic human needs, etc, and increases in defense and "homeland" security.

[2Design]

13. wow what a insight - the usa was the only democracy run by the

people who was able to curb government - fdr helped - unions helped - the socialist countries also seem to believe in - we are all in this together

but if congress and the other branches destroy the government - their retirement is gone too - their money comes from us
the only thing left that our taxes will be paying is their retirement and salaries

There will be no parks, public school, social security, no roads, nothing that the federal government pays to help the people - with this all gone - we the people will have nothing

how do they get wealth out of countries like Africa, middle east - if there are no cars and the people do not have any work?????

Although repubs say they want smaller government and people believe that - they are the ones who grow government - they increase spending and jobs that are funded by the government

when dems are in control the money goes to the good of the whole and government (people employed by government) got smaller

why do people believe the lie that repubs want smaller government? They want to get into your bedroom - that is worse in my value system

[1democracy]

14. Great Discussion..

You're bringing up things I never thought of... like social security was created in direct response to the stock crash of 1929-- and it is like gambling.