"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties. Truth was never put to the worse in a free and open encounter..."
~ Milton
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~Benjamin Franklin

Reading:
A Fistful of Euros
Andrew Tobias
Angry Liberal
Archy
Bad Attitudes
Common Dreams
Fablog
Hullabaloo
Informed Comment
Madelaine Kane
Mahablog
Obsidian Wings
Off the Kuff
Orcinus
Sarah Kendzior
War and Piece
Washington Monthly

Books
The Emerging Democratic Majority (Judis & Teixeira)
Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them (Franken)
Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot (Franken)
The True Believer (Hoffer)
Still Being Bushwhacked

All Book Reviews
Race, Gender, and Sexuality
It's always "us" vs "them"
Women's March on (fill in your location)
Children learn what their parents teach them.
You Got My Support. But.
Even Endangered Penguins Do It

All Race, Gender, and Sexuality
Campaigns and Voting
Where do we go from here?
It's always "us" vs "them"
Some interpretations
On and on I go
Just appalled

All Campaigns and Voting
Lecture Circuit
It Was 40 Years Ago Today
July 2, 1964
Pledge
May 14-15, 1970
The Erotica of Bare Knees

All Lecture Circuit
Media
The Liberal Media, At It Again
Fairly UNbalanced
P.S.
What's this?
OHMIGOD

All Media
Big Brother
Shoulda' Guessed
Where did my country go?
You know what you never thought you'd read?
Not in his name
Sleight of Hand

All Big Brother
World O'Blog
It's Vocabulary Time!
They wrote it
Mighty-fine blogging
Other People Said....
Phillipines

All World O'Blog
Aimless Ranting
It's always "us" vs "them"
So, I'm thinking with half my brain
Do You Know Peter?
Long, Little Privacy Rant
My Takeaway

All Aimless Ranting
Archives
February 05, 2017 - February 11, 2017
January 22, 2017 - January 28, 2017
January 15, 2017 - January 21, 2017
November 13, 2016 - November 19, 2016
October 09, 2016 - October 15, 2016

All Weekly Archives


Electioneering
Open Secrets
Political Wire Exit Polls
Politics1
Polling Report

Information
American Research Group
Center for Democracy and Technology
Center for Public Integrity
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Congressional Report Cards
Death Row Roll Call
DebtChannel.org
Democracy Now
Economic Policy Institute
FairVote Colorado
Foreign Policy In Focus
Global Exchange
Human Rights Watch
Independent Judiciary
Inequality
Institute on Money in State Politics
Institute for Public Accuracy
JobWatch
Lying in ponds
Media Reform
Media Transparency
Move On
One World
Open Democracy
Pew Research Center
Project Censored
Public Citizen Health Research Group
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Take Back The Media
The Urban Institute
WHO Outbreak News

Connections
XML & RDF
Peevish for PDA



Blog Directory


Search








Credits
Powered by Movable Type

Site Design by Sekimori





All content © 2002-2005 Anne Zook

March 04, 2005
Brooding

Over Social Security "reform" at the moment.

Via Josh Marshall.

Josh is chatting about how the Right's alarmist rhetoric about Social Security is nothing new and they're just repeating things they've been saying for years and years.

Possibly he and others objecting to this retread of never-proven and never-fulfilled claims are missing the real point.

The 1936 Republican platform: "Society has an obligation to promote the security of the people, by affording some measure of protection against involuntary unemployment and dependency in old age. The New Deal policies, while purporting to provide social security, have, in fact, endangered it ...the [trust] fund will contain nothing but the government's promise to pay ... [and is] unworkable."

Nothing but "the government's promise to pay" is the key phrase.

First, upon what do they base this unspoken assumption that our government, after having incurred this obligation, will some day decide to blow We-the-People off? Are they living in some fantasy world where the government could just tell the voting population, "hey, no money back on the money we took from you" and continue to operate?

Upon what do they base the assumption that the government would want to do this?

And if this is really their fear, why don't they make the "trust fund" a real trust and stop taking the money and spending it elsewhere?

And am I the only one noticing that by trying to force the phase-out of Social Security, the Bush Administration is making one more key move in the attempt to nearly bankrupt the federal government so as to prevent it from legislating or administering social programs, environmental programs, worker protection programs, and anti-discrimination programs, or does everyone else understand this so well it doesn't seem to need mentioning?

Because it's not really a Trust Fund when the government takes the funds and spends them to support itself, which is what happens. If that income stops...the programs it pays for stop. Or, if they can cut off enough other sources of revenue, your Social Security taxes will have to be used for bombs-n-bullets instead of food and shelter.

(Also? I wonder how Congress, a body that's awarded itself raises five times in the last seven years and lives on a diet of aides and secretaries and assistants and chauffeured cars and expensed vacations and postage-paid campaign and re-election flyers, not to mention pork to toss to the voters back home, can face the prospect of a nearly bankrupt federal government without nightmares?)

Yes, I'm back on the diet and I'm cranky. But that doesn't make the ill-defined, carefully fuzzy Bush Administration "plan" for Social Security any less suspect.

________________

P.S. I think it's obvious. The dolphins beached themselves in a protest against our toxic pollution in their environment.

Posted by AnneZook at 03:46 PM


Comments