It has been said of warfare that the winning side writes the history. Will that be the case in the Terri Schiavo story? This dreadful, gloating commentary seems to say yes. The writer begins by proclaiming relief at the death of Schiavo and, he hopes, the end of the "political melodrama." Then he proceeds in the very next paragraph to call her "brain dead" -- which of course she wasn't until she was starved to death. Now she is brain dead. Expect to see a lot more of this "see, it isn't so bad now that she is dead, is it? Can't we all just get along and quit acting like a bunch of Bible-thumping wild-eyed pistol wavers?"
And ABC News still has their fake "GOP Talking Points" memo on their website under "Your Government.
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Playing Politics
Terri Schiavo is gone and ABC News still has their bogus "GOP Talking Points" memo displayed on their website. Disgraceful.
KEPT Men: Miller and Stumbo Sue, You Pay
Under fire for his misstatements about money-losing "Kentucky's Affordable Prepaid Tuition" program, State Treasurer Jonathan Miller took to the airwaves yesterday to defend his role in a lawsuit over the future of KAPT.
Miller told listeners to WVLK's Kruser & Krew show that he is still upset that bipartisan efforts in the legislature reversed Miller's $13.7 million raid on Kentucky's General Fund and prevented future such raids. This effort survived despite Miller's intense media campaign to justify spending taxpayer dollars endlessly on future KAPT losses.
Miller surely doesn't expect to win his ill-advised lawsuit against the General Assembly. More likely, he expects to keep spinning against the facts of the case and run as a hard-charging battler of the system in his future campaigns. It will be interesting to see how much Miller's silly lawsuit (filed by Attorney General Greg Stumbo) will cost Kentucky's taxpayers.
Call it Kentucky's Extravagant Politicians Tax. KEPT men Miller and Stumbo aren't worried about who pays for this bit of campaigning. We'll keep you posted.
Miller told listeners to WVLK's Kruser & Krew show that he is still upset that bipartisan efforts in the legislature reversed Miller's $13.7 million raid on Kentucky's General Fund and prevented future such raids. This effort survived despite Miller's intense media campaign to justify spending taxpayer dollars endlessly on future KAPT losses.
Miller surely doesn't expect to win his ill-advised lawsuit against the General Assembly. More likely, he expects to keep spinning against the facts of the case and run as a hard-charging battler of the system in his future campaigns. It will be interesting to see how much Miller's silly lawsuit (filed by Attorney General Greg Stumbo) will cost Kentucky's taxpayers.
Call it Kentucky's Extravagant Politicians Tax. KEPT men Miller and Stumbo aren't worried about who pays for this bit of campaigning. We'll keep you posted.
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
Stonewalling on Faked ABC News Memo?
When ABC News reported on March 18 about a so-called "GOP Talking Points Memo" related to Terri Schiavo, skeptical bloggers started searching for evidence of its true source. The Washington Post has picked up the story. Can the media feeding frenzy against ABC News be far behind?
It won't be good for ABC News if their actions can be compared to the CBS News' faked National Guard memo from last fall.
ABC claims "very reliable, multiple sources" in the flap, but stops short of naming any of them. Linda Douglass, the ABC reporter who first brought out the questionable memo is "out of the country."
In Lexington, WTVQ news director Tai Takagashi said of the controversy "It rings a bell, but we haven't been talking about it here."
It won't be good for ABC News if their actions can be compared to the CBS News' faked National Guard memo from last fall.
ABC claims "very reliable, multiple sources" in the flap, but stops short of naming any of them. Linda Douglass, the ABC reporter who first brought out the questionable memo is "out of the country."
In Lexington, WTVQ news director Tai Takagashi said of the controversy "It rings a bell, but we haven't been talking about it here."
Kentucky Progress Radio
Tune in to 1340 AM this afternoon at 5:15 pm for the latest news and comment by yours truly. Call in number is 859-623-1340.
KAPT and Social Security Linkage Ignored
In the search for news by local media outlets, national stories are often mined for a local angle. Such has not been the case, however, with the Kentucky's Affordable Prepaid Tuition scandal that is now headed to court. And that is a shame, because the connection between the disinformation campaign that rages around KAPT here mirrors that of the efforts to let Social Security drown in an obstructionist-led propanda campaign against reform.
While the KAPT scandal involves a money-losing Kentucky ponzi scheme that will result in taxpayer dollars being spent to make up shortfalls, Social Security is a money-losing Federal ponzi scheme that will result in taxpayer dollars being spent to make up shortfalls. Unfunded liabilities plague both programs, as do loud Democrat politicians whose political futures ride on a persistent status quo. In Washington D.C., Democrats believe they can't allow a Republican to correct the structural failings of FDR's legacy and are seemingly willing to say anything to avoid such a result. In Frankfort, Treasurer Jonathan Miller has ignored repeated warnings for years that KAPT won't work for long; but he knows a good political issue when he sees one. So, the reasoning goes on both levels, turning Republican efforts to protect taxpayers against them works if no one pays attention to the details and the media plays along. So far this tactic is has effectively slowed reform.
But the tide may be turning.
Miller's ability to persuade Attorney General Greg Stumbo to file suit against the General Assembly for stopping the KAPT raid on the General Fund (under the bizarre claim that the opposite happened) is interesting. Their position is untenable and they must know it. General tax dollars were never intended to pay for bad "investment schemes." Much like the Harry Reid claim that a Social Security that can pay 70% of benefits before digging into taxpayer pockets isn't bankrupt, House Budget Chairman Harry Moberly declares KAPT "safe" by explaining that "No General Assembly is going to leave current (KAPT) contract holders in the breach." Translated, this means that Democrats aren't worried about structural problems with these two programs because when the going gets tough they can just raise our taxes. And, unfortunately, Republicans will be able to do little about it when that time comes; hence the efforts at reform now. But you aren't going to see that explained in the news.
Another key point that hasn't been explored in the old media is that the liberals who insist that the same financial markets that can't be trusted to keep Social Security contributions earning more than general wage inflation (which they easily do) can be trusted to keep KAPT contributions earning more than college tuition inflation (which they can't consistently do).
And they say conservatives rely too much on faith.
While the KAPT scandal involves a money-losing Kentucky ponzi scheme that will result in taxpayer dollars being spent to make up shortfalls, Social Security is a money-losing Federal ponzi scheme that will result in taxpayer dollars being spent to make up shortfalls. Unfunded liabilities plague both programs, as do loud Democrat politicians whose political futures ride on a persistent status quo. In Washington D.C., Democrats believe they can't allow a Republican to correct the structural failings of FDR's legacy and are seemingly willing to say anything to avoid such a result. In Frankfort, Treasurer Jonathan Miller has ignored repeated warnings for years that KAPT won't work for long; but he knows a good political issue when he sees one. So, the reasoning goes on both levels, turning Republican efforts to protect taxpayers against them works if no one pays attention to the details and the media plays along. So far this tactic is has effectively slowed reform.
But the tide may be turning.
Miller's ability to persuade Attorney General Greg Stumbo to file suit against the General Assembly for stopping the KAPT raid on the General Fund (under the bizarre claim that the opposite happened) is interesting. Their position is untenable and they must know it. General tax dollars were never intended to pay for bad "investment schemes." Much like the Harry Reid claim that a Social Security that can pay 70% of benefits before digging into taxpayer pockets isn't bankrupt, House Budget Chairman Harry Moberly declares KAPT "safe" by explaining that "No General Assembly is going to leave current (KAPT) contract holders in the breach." Translated, this means that Democrats aren't worried about structural problems with these two programs because when the going gets tough they can just raise our taxes. And, unfortunately, Republicans will be able to do little about it when that time comes; hence the efforts at reform now. But you aren't going to see that explained in the news.
Another key point that hasn't been explored in the old media is that the liberals who insist that the same financial markets that can't be trusted to keep Social Security contributions earning more than general wage inflation (which they easily do) can be trusted to keep KAPT contributions earning more than college tuition inflation (which they can't consistently do).
And they say conservatives rely too much on faith.
Tuesday, March 29, 2005
Professionals in Pajamas
The University of Southern California is hiring a blogger and paying $45,000 for a six month project. The funny thing is that this is listed on JournalismJobs.com. The job requires fluency in Japanese, but the point remains: the vast majority of "real journalists" will never get close to a six figure income. So the next time Joe Schmo at the Daily Fishwrap comes up with another snide remark about bloggers in pajamas, be cool, be calm, and smile.
Our day will come. Soon.
Our day will come. Soon.
Monday, March 28, 2005
Bloggers on Lexington Radio
Tune in to the Dave Baker Show on WLAP 630 AM Tuesday March 29 at 10 AM for a discussion about blogging and the latest issues with bloggers Leland Conway and David Adams. Also available on the internet at www.wlap.com. The call-in number is (859) 280-2287.
Ben Chandler Wants More of Your Money
An emailer to the Jack Pattie Show this morning asked Rep. Ben Chandler, in light of his recent calls for tax increases to avoid dealing with the fundamental problems with Social Security, if he was being dishonest now or in early 2004 when he promised not to support tax increases.
The fact is that raising payroll taxes doesn't address Social Security's unfairness. Further, here is how personal accounts will make the program solvent without tax hikes or benefit cuts.
The fact is that raising payroll taxes doesn't address Social Security's unfairness. Further, here is how personal accounts will make the program solvent without tax hikes or benefit cuts.
Lexington Writer Draws Attention
Kudos to Michele Ferguson, a Lexington Herald Leader Community Columnist, for drawing not one but three letter writers' wrath in Sunday's newspaper. Her writings have been stirring things up for a while. Nice job Michele.
Saturday, March 26, 2005
Faulty Economics Indeed
More evidence that the left is cracking up comes from fellow central Kentucky blogger Bluegrassroots in a post by Brad Clark. Below is the entire post with my corrections in bold.
Faulty Economics: The Myth of an Independent Dollar
The dollar has had its day in the sun. (Bad start. This is highly debatable and nothing in this essay supports such a statement.) Any lingering warmth from the day will soon fade with nightfall. (Soon? Evidence? No, this is just wishful thinking.) In 1980, the United States was the world's strongest creditor; the dollar setting the standard for international currency exchange, and the value of commodities such as oil, gold, and copper. Even today, the dollar is the standard by which international markets determine value, even though twenty-five years later, the United States is the world's leading debtor. (Factoids don't advance your ambitious premise.)
No other nation in the world owes as much money to foreign banks. No other nation in the world has as much consumer debt (consumer debt curtails consumer spending, which is the bulk of America's Gross Domestic Product). Many politicians and businessmen, the ill-informed bastions of a mythological, quasi-Smithian economic model, (name calling. Nice.) hope that the opening of Chinese and Indian markets will foster the expansion of the dollar's power and the democratizing effects of capitalism, (no, they hope to make money through increased production. It's working.) but as China grows in wealth, the more dependent America becomes to its four banks, (this same reasoning in the 1980's would have us a Japanese colony by now) which are controlled by the Chinese government(ominous and xenophobic, but not very relevant). Over fifty percent of all U.S. Treasury securities are owned by Chinese and Japanese banks.(Again, inflammatory rhetoric and fear-mongering factoids don't make good economic analysis by themselves. You need more.)
In all, the U.S. owes almost three trillion dollars to foreign banks. That is twenty-five percent of America's Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The growth rate of America's debt exceeds the growth rate of the nation's GDP. One does not have to have a degree in economics to see that the equation does not equal economic stability for America's future.(Maybe not, but perhaps a little historical perspective would help. See World War Two.)
The dollar is inflated. The Federal Reserve has recently raised interest rates seven times trying to curtail the inflation of the dollar. The Euro is quickly becoming a stable and expansive form of currency for a strong European market(Europhoric talking points, not a realistic appraisal of the European currency. Currency trading strength in the face of dollar trading weakness is not evidence of true stability in the euro. Another highly debatable proposition). U.S. foreign policy, if it continues to engage in costly conflicts with no clear and easily accessible economic benefits, will eventually bankrupt the American homeland (This is no more substantial than a good Dean Scream). The American government will not be able to avoid going further and further into debt. Eventually, domestic programs will have to be cut (i.e. education, healthcare, social welfare). Not to mention that American foreign debt will inevitably rise. Debt to foreign banks is a threat to national security; especially when the banks underwriting the American economy are owned by the Chinese government. (Chinese banks underwriting the American economy? Reading the rest of this vapid essay assures me that you aren't kidding, but this is utterly ridiculous. Production "underwrites" the American economy. Chinese banks may underwrite a part of the U.S. government, but Econ 101 should teach the difference between the government and the economy.)
As confidence in the faultering U.S. economy diminishes, foreign capital will leave in search of more stable markets. Look at Mexico in 1994 (hello NAFTA, hello Zapatistas), Russia in 1998 (transition to capitalism, hello organized crime), or Argentina in 2001 (attractive South American economy, hello civil unrest). (Totally bogus examples.) The attractiveness of a new market open to foreign investment inflates a nation's currency beyond its true value, and the slightest signs of distress see foreign investment fleeing for safer markets (or, more often than not, ones that have yet to show signs of distress). How much more dangerous is the fall of a nation's economy when it has been the cornerstone of a world economy for three quarters of a century?(The prior two sentences add nothing of value to the discussion. The question would be scary, but there is nothing here --or anywhere-- that suggests the "fall" of the American economy.)
If the American bubble pops(made up scenarios and their explosive demise make great science fiction but poor economic discussion) , the structure of international finance will have to be reevaluated. Can America take a backseat role in the world? It has been well over a century since America really needed welfare from other states. My advice: make sure your kids speak a foreign language. (Foreign language instruction is a great idea, but none of the other ideas here hold any water.)
Posted by Brad Clark at 02:19 PM in Politics Permalink Comments (1) TrackBack (0)
Faulty Economics: The Myth of an Independent Dollar
The dollar has had its day in the sun. (Bad start. This is highly debatable and nothing in this essay supports such a statement.) Any lingering warmth from the day will soon fade with nightfall. (Soon? Evidence? No, this is just wishful thinking.) In 1980, the United States was the world's strongest creditor; the dollar setting the standard for international currency exchange, and the value of commodities such as oil, gold, and copper. Even today, the dollar is the standard by which international markets determine value, even though twenty-five years later, the United States is the world's leading debtor. (Factoids don't advance your ambitious premise.)
No other nation in the world owes as much money to foreign banks. No other nation in the world has as much consumer debt (consumer debt curtails consumer spending, which is the bulk of America's Gross Domestic Product). Many politicians and businessmen, the ill-informed bastions of a mythological, quasi-Smithian economic model, (name calling. Nice.) hope that the opening of Chinese and Indian markets will foster the expansion of the dollar's power and the democratizing effects of capitalism, (no, they hope to make money through increased production. It's working.) but as China grows in wealth, the more dependent America becomes to its four banks, (this same reasoning in the 1980's would have us a Japanese colony by now) which are controlled by the Chinese government(ominous and xenophobic, but not very relevant). Over fifty percent of all U.S. Treasury securities are owned by Chinese and Japanese banks.(Again, inflammatory rhetoric and fear-mongering factoids don't make good economic analysis by themselves. You need more.)
In all, the U.S. owes almost three trillion dollars to foreign banks. That is twenty-five percent of America's Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The growth rate of America's debt exceeds the growth rate of the nation's GDP. One does not have to have a degree in economics to see that the equation does not equal economic stability for America's future.(Maybe not, but perhaps a little historical perspective would help. See World War Two.)
The dollar is inflated. The Federal Reserve has recently raised interest rates seven times trying to curtail the inflation of the dollar. The Euro is quickly becoming a stable and expansive form of currency for a strong European market(Europhoric talking points, not a realistic appraisal of the European currency. Currency trading strength in the face of dollar trading weakness is not evidence of true stability in the euro. Another highly debatable proposition). U.S. foreign policy, if it continues to engage in costly conflicts with no clear and easily accessible economic benefits, will eventually bankrupt the American homeland (This is no more substantial than a good Dean Scream). The American government will not be able to avoid going further and further into debt. Eventually, domestic programs will have to be cut (i.e. education, healthcare, social welfare). Not to mention that American foreign debt will inevitably rise. Debt to foreign banks is a threat to national security; especially when the banks underwriting the American economy are owned by the Chinese government. (Chinese banks underwriting the American economy? Reading the rest of this vapid essay assures me that you aren't kidding, but this is utterly ridiculous. Production "underwrites" the American economy. Chinese banks may underwrite a part of the U.S. government, but Econ 101 should teach the difference between the government and the economy.)
As confidence in the faultering U.S. economy diminishes, foreign capital will leave in search of more stable markets. Look at Mexico in 1994 (hello NAFTA, hello Zapatistas), Russia in 1998 (transition to capitalism, hello organized crime), or Argentina in 2001 (attractive South American economy, hello civil unrest). (Totally bogus examples.) The attractiveness of a new market open to foreign investment inflates a nation's currency beyond its true value, and the slightest signs of distress see foreign investment fleeing for safer markets (or, more often than not, ones that have yet to show signs of distress). How much more dangerous is the fall of a nation's economy when it has been the cornerstone of a world economy for three quarters of a century?(The prior two sentences add nothing of value to the discussion. The question would be scary, but there is nothing here --or anywhere-- that suggests the "fall" of the American economy.)
If the American bubble pops(made up scenarios and their explosive demise make great science fiction but poor economic discussion) , the structure of international finance will have to be reevaluated. Can America take a backseat role in the world? It has been well over a century since America really needed welfare from other states. My advice: make sure your kids speak a foreign language. (Foreign language instruction is a great idea, but none of the other ideas here hold any water.)
Posted by Brad Clark at 02:19 PM in Politics Permalink Comments (1) TrackBack (0)
Great Fiscal Policy
Thanks to Jeff Smith for this post about Social Security. ---
The Socialists like Ben Chandler say it's not a retirement fund.
They call it "insurance". What they conveniently leave out of
their claim that it's insurance is that insurance companies have
the ability to pay out claims due to their INVESTMENTS! Hello!
Our Congress, that screws up everything it touches, borrows from
SSI, to fund everything under the sun, and replace our money with
IOU's. Insurance companies INVEST our monies so it grows. They
make huge profits, claim recipients get huge checks, and the system
is solvent.
Again, the private sector proves it can manage anything better than
the public sector. Hello! But woe be unto anyone who even thinks of
touching the holy grail of American socialists, Social Security and
Medicare. You must be a "baby killer" or a "racist" or "Hitler" if you
want to touch SSI. It is broken. What do we do when our car breaks?
We fix it right?
Mario
__________________________________________________
The Socialists like Ben Chandler say it's not a retirement fund.
They call it "insurance". What they conveniently leave out of
their claim that it's insurance is that insurance companies have
the ability to pay out claims due to their INVESTMENTS! Hello!
Our Congress, that screws up everything it touches, borrows from
SSI, to fund everything under the sun, and replace our money with
IOU's. Insurance companies INVEST our monies so it grows. They
make huge profits, claim recipients get huge checks, and the system
is solvent.
Again, the private sector proves it can manage anything better than
the public sector. Hello! But woe be unto anyone who even thinks of
touching the holy grail of American socialists, Social Security and
Medicare. You must be a "baby killer" or a "racist" or "Hitler" if you
want to touch SSI. It is broken. What do we do when our car breaks?
We fix it right?
Mario
__________________________________________________
And he sends along this link that just makes too much sense.
Thursday, March 24, 2005
What a Difference Six Years Makes
Slate had a fairly sober look at Social Security reform in 1998 that makes for a pretty interesting history lesson. What really makes it noteworthy is the partisan crowing in a story this week from the same publication.
Kathy Stein Binge and Purge: Schiavo and Roe v. Wade Out?
The only thing stranger than Kathy Stein's column in the Lexington Herald Leader calling for the murder of Terri Schiavo because some of Kathy's friends were bulimic in the 1970's was her contention yesterday on Sue Wylie's show on 590 WVLK that states' rights should rule supreme on the issue of Terri's life or death. Could Rep. Stein, an ardent pro-abortion activist, have gotten her talking points mixed up? Roe V. Wade prevents states from enacting life and death laws related to abortion. Does Stein want badly enough to give that power back to the states so Terri Schiavo can be starved to death, that she is willing to allow states to prevent the murders of innocent unborn children?
She would, one presumes, claim now that states' rights apply to killing inconvenient sick people while federal law must apply to killing inconvenient unborn children. Who is playing politics now?
She would, one presumes, claim now that states' rights apply to killing inconvenient sick people while federal law must apply to killing inconvenient unborn children. Who is playing politics now?
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
Social Security Reform on an Index Card
Personal Savings Accounts (PSA) are funded just like Social Security benefits. The money comes from payroll taxes. When payroll taxes aren't enough to fund the PSAs and pay benefits, the Social Security Trust Fund will be tapped. Since the SSTF has been embezzled already, that money must come from other revenue sources. Opponents call this borrowing, but the "borrowing" must happen anyway because the Trust Fund is gone. Opponents claim benefits will be cut for all. This is a flat lie. The lie has a source, though. Opponents claim that, as part of reform, benefit growth would be reduced. This reduction is not being seriously considered, wouldn't help anyway, and is just being used to promote fear of change. Over 55? Nothing changes. Don't like change? Fine, opt out if you choose. Don't like stocks? That's okay, choose not to invest your money in them. Don't like the idea of lower and middle income people being able to own some of their Social Security funds to pass on to their children and grandchildren? You must be Ben Chandler.
Tuesday, March 22, 2005
Social Security Showdown
The Bluegrass Institute's Chris Derry will join the newly formed Save Social Security Now to discuss how personal savings accounts will increase national savings, spur the economy, and preserve Social Security.
The Town Hall forum will take place tonight at 5:30 pm at the KU Building in Richmond, Kentucky. The public is invited. Anyone with questions may call David Adams at 859-537-5372.
Reform protestors have flown in Congressman Ben Chandler for an anti-reform rally to draw attention from the Town Hall forum. Any legitimate questions from the protestors will be answered at the forum.
The Town Hall forum will take place tonight at 5:30 pm at the KU Building in Richmond, Kentucky. The public is invited. Anyone with questions may call David Adams at 859-537-5372.
Reform protestors have flown in Congressman Ben Chandler for an anti-reform rally to draw attention from the Town Hall forum. Any legitimate questions from the protestors will be answered at the forum.
2006 Election Season Begins Today
The Kentucky General Assembly wrapped up work late last night as the news was getting around that Speaker Jody Richards will not run for Governor. Attorney General Greg Stumbo still seems to be in the hunt; his statements about gambling keep the pot stirred. Crit Luallen quietly bides her time, despite her very narrow win in 2003. The prediction here is that several House Democrats are mere months away from deciding they would prefer to spend more time with their families rather than run for re-election next year. Last year's crop of first time candidates for the House take note. Also look for Richards to face stiff opposition to his own re-election.
Monday, March 21, 2005
Lexington Mayor: The Search Continues
Still haven't seen a better potential candidate than Warren Rogers come forward. Maybe while the pro-condemnation folks are collecting their signatures on petitions we could follow their lead. How about a Draft Warren petition? We could call the organization LEAD (Lexington Excels at Democracy) and build a true grassroots organization for giving Lexington the great leadership it deserves.
Save Social Security Now!!!
The Social Security "debate" shows clearly what is wrong with Washington D.C. Just as national Democrats fought against tax cuts that boosted the economy from recession (eventually blaming the tax cuts for the recession--someone buy these folks a calendar!) and after caterwalling against the War on Terror as if we started it, they now turn their efforts toward the absurd contention that Social Security is just fine and dandy as it is and we should just leave it alone.
The first baby boomers turn 62 in 2008 and all credible analysts see this as an unsustainable drain on Social Security. When Bill Clinton was POTUS, he said the choice for saving the system was to raise taxes, cut benefits, or invest some of the money privately. In 1999, with the problem more distant than it is now, Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) said "Most of us have no problem taking a small amount of the Social Security proceeds and putting it in the private sector." The only thing that has changed since then is that Harry became Senate Minority leader. Now he seems to think that investment choice would destroy the Republic.
But the fact is that private accounts are all that we need to preserve Social Security. And yes, I know that President Bush seems to disagree. The rationale for private accounts is pretty simple. First, diverting Trust Fund dollars keeps Congress from spending them. That is huge. When Congress takes Social Security Trust Fund dollars and spends them, that money has to eventually be produced all over again to pay off the IOU. That process stops if we stop allowing excess payroll taxes from being spent and replaced with IOU's. Second, giving people the option to gain market returns on their money can't, over any time horizon of five years or more, be worse than what is currently earned in the system. And third, the private accounts will be owned by the people who created them, American individuals. As it is now, the same government officials who want to starve Terri Schiavo so she dies on their schedule will always be hoping you and I die quickly enough to keep their ponzi scheme alive.
The first baby boomers turn 62 in 2008 and all credible analysts see this as an unsustainable drain on Social Security. When Bill Clinton was POTUS, he said the choice for saving the system was to raise taxes, cut benefits, or invest some of the money privately. In 1999, with the problem more distant than it is now, Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) said "Most of us have no problem taking a small amount of the Social Security proceeds and putting it in the private sector." The only thing that has changed since then is that Harry became Senate Minority leader. Now he seems to think that investment choice would destroy the Republic.
But the fact is that private accounts are all that we need to preserve Social Security. And yes, I know that President Bush seems to disagree. The rationale for private accounts is pretty simple. First, diverting Trust Fund dollars keeps Congress from spending them. That is huge. When Congress takes Social Security Trust Fund dollars and spends them, that money has to eventually be produced all over again to pay off the IOU. That process stops if we stop allowing excess payroll taxes from being spent and replaced with IOU's. Second, giving people the option to gain market returns on their money can't, over any time horizon of five years or more, be worse than what is currently earned in the system. And third, the private accounts will be owned by the people who created them, American individuals. As it is now, the same government officials who want to starve Terri Schiavo so she dies on their schedule will always be hoping you and I die quickly enough to keep their ponzi scheme alive.
Friday, March 18, 2005
Save a Liberal, Ride a Polar Bear
This is beautiful. Senator Barbara Boxer is organizing a boycott of every oil company that winds up drilling for oil in ANWR.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)