Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Social Security is 75, and it Needs to be Put Out of Its Misery

Social Security turns (turned?) 75 this week! Let's see what we have to show for it:

$0

Yup, that's right. That program that was supposed to be optional, 1% of your income, with funds held aside to guarantee that you'd be repaid, is broke. CONgress spent all of it - every last dime. Much like Madoff, as new funds are coming in from current payers, they're being immediately sent to folks who are payees, because those folks' money was spent by the Government to keep up the wonderful utopian mirage of Progressive Socialism.

And here we sit. Each paycheck I get has 7% taken out of it, with jailtime or summary execution by Federal SWAT team awaiting me if I refuse to pay it, and I know with absolutely certainty that I'll likely never see a dime of the money I'm paying into it. That 7%, which could be used to invest in an account I CONTROL, which could be kept safe from the idiots in Washington that think that they're entitled to EVERYTHING you own, is sent to a group of people that piss it away on such high-minded activities as funding cocaine addiction studies on monkeys.

Need some fun analysis? Try this article from the Market Ticker: Revoke Krugman's PhD

That so-called "trust fund" is a fraud. It does not exist.

Here's what actually happens (and Krugman knows this, which makes him a damned liar besides):


  • Your tax dollars go to Treasury.
  • Treasury keeps them and issues "special" Treasury bonds to the Social Security "trust fund."
  • Treasury counts these tax receipts against the federal deficit, making it look (much, until the last year) smaller than it really is.


Note the slight-of-hand here. Social Security gets an alleged "bond" but they can't sell it to anyone but the Treasury. That is, legally it is an IOU, not a bond. A bond can be marketed in the open market to anyone who is willing to buy, for whatever they're willing to pay. These are unmarketable (intentionally) and thus can only be redeemed in one place - at Treasury.

The problem is that Treasury spent the money and thus doesn't have anything with which to redeem the IOUs!

So in order to redeem these alleged "bonds" Treasury will have to sell more bonds - this time to the general public (foreign governments, people, etc) who have actual capital surplus, because Treasury doesn't - it blew that surplus on social spending programs right here and now.

This is similar to you coming to me with $100,000 and I "promise" to hold on to it for you and keep it "safe." I give you a promissory note to this effect. But I never hold the funds - I immediately go blow them on hookers, coke and limousines. You now have a bunch of IOUs, and I have no money.

Now perhaps I can manage to sell someone else some bonds when you come to redeem those IOUs. Perhaps. But what is unmistakable and true is that the money you allegedly "deposited" with me was immediately dissipated, not invested, saved, held or secured.

This little scheme seems to work just fine provided that each year the Social Security system takes in more than it spends on benefits - that is, so long as the file cabinet full of IOUs continues to get bigger. Treasury gets the appearance of "Free Money", Social Security is able to pay benefits, nobody's the wiser.

But it's a scam, because in point of fact the so-called "Special Bonds" are nothing more than a bare promise to pay and the asset against which they were issued (tax receipts) was instantly dissipated!

The Baby Boomers are retiring, and there's nowhere near enough of us younger folks to keep this program solvent. "The Government will just cover the difference!" you say. Bull. We're currently spending $1.4 TRILLION MORE THAN WE MAKE. That is, the U.S. brings in around $2 trillion in revenues each year, and is currently spending $3.4 trillion. All of that money is coming in the form of a printing press from Treasury, or foreign investment - at the moment, Chinese funds.

"Well, the Government is aware of the problem and they're going to do something to fix it!" Wrong again. Check out this little gem (and it's a talking point for sure - I heard the exact same phrase from DemocRAT after DemocRAT on the news yesterday):

Social security at 75: don't mess with success (Rep. Sander Levin)

From that article:
Seventy-five years ago this month, President Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act. By any yardstick, Social Security has been the most successful domestic program in our nation's history, lifting millions of seniors out of poverty. Through good times and bad, American workers and their families have been able to rely on Social Security to provide guaranteed protection against the loss of earnings due to retirement, disability, or death.

This mental midget then goes forward with his talking point arguments of "had we allowed people to privatize Social Security and invest it in the stock market, they'd be broke right now". What tripe. Yes, the market goes up and down. Yes, you can lose money. However, Social Security pays around 1%. That doesn't even cover the massive inflation we have seen over the last 75 years, no where close. Having money in Social Security means you've LOST a significant portion of your "investment". I can get a better rate of return with that money in a Savings Account at a local bank that is insured by the FDIC.

Privatization doesn't mean you HAVE to invest your Social Security in risky equities, but it gives you the option of managing your OWN money. Personal accountability. Oops, can't have that - just let your betters in Government handle that for you - you can't be trusted with your own assets. Just give them to us so we can spend every last penny on bull$!@#.

It's far past time to stop this madness. Do away with the system. Every day Americans dump in good money after bad, and most of us will never see a dime. Robbing us to pay for the actions of politicians we were too young to even vote for isn't the answer - especially when we're all pretty sure that we won't ever see a dime of what we put in come back to us. How are we supposed to secure our retirement if we're told that we must pay for yours?

Friday, July 16, 2010

Body Mass Index - Now Required by Federal Government

Obesity Rating for Every American Must Be Included in Stimulus-Mandated Electronic Health Records, Says HHS

New federal regulations issued this week stipulate that the electronic health records--that all Americans are supposed to have by 2014 under the terms of the stimulus law that President Barack Obama signed last year--must record not only the traditional measures of height and weight, but also the Body Mass Index: a measure of obesity.

The obesity-rating regulation states that every American's electronic health record must: “Calculate body mass index. Automatically calculate and display body mass index (BMI) based on a patient’s height and weight.”


Lovely. Those of you who are serious about weight lifting take note - muscle weighs more than fat. It's possible that even though you are incredibly in shape, you'll be flagged as "obese". From a site with a BMI calculator:
Although BMI can be used for most men and women, it does have some limits:

* It may overestimate body fat in athletes and others who have a muscular build.
* It may underestimate body fat in older persons and others who have lost muscle.

The article also states that the health records will be available on the national exchange. Good luck getting insured (while there are still insurance companies other than the retards (and yes, I do mean retards Ms. Palin) in Washington.

Under the stimulus law, health care providers--including doctors and hospitals--must establish "meaningful use" of EHRs by 2014 in order to qualify for federal subsidies. After that, they will be subjected to penalties in the form of diminished Medicare and Medicaid payments for not establishing "meaningful use" of EHRs.


Doctors - this one is really simple. Stop accepting insurance. Stop accepting Medicare/Medicaid. Go back to directly seeing a local pool of patients who will pay you directly for your services. Drop your prices to something that will be in accordance with running a profitable and successful business, without being ripped off by the Feds and the Insurance Companies.

Screw the Washington Bureaucrats. Let them stew in the cesspool that is D.C, trying to get blood from the bankrupt stones that are many of the Liberal states, and lets get some 10th Amendment assertions and secessions going here folks. I'm tired of this crap.

Monday, July 12, 2010

I'm a racist, you're a racist, he's a racist, she's a racist...

NAACP Considers Condemning Tea Party for 'Racism'

Considers it? Hah, Tea Partiers have been branded as racists since they emerged during the Healthcare "debate".

Whatever, go ahead. We're WAY past labels at this point.

Hey, by the way, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Who's the bigot now???

Friday, May 21, 2010

Governor Jan Brewer - Obama, Do Your Job


A long watch, but worth it.

I'm liking Governor Brewer a lot more, with the various bills she's been signing, I *almost* regret leaving AZ.

Remember, the folks that are the most upset about this, other than the illegals of course, are the folks that don't believe in borders. Those folks that would like to invite anyone, regardless of criminal background, regardless of their ability to contribute to our country (and therefore help to pay for the entitlement programs they will enjoy), and most of all, people that actually WANT to become Americans, not Mexicans living in America.

You're an illegal? You don't want to get arrested in AZ? Don't do anything to draw the attention of the Police, such as speed, rob, burgle, etc. Don't like it? Get the **** out until you've gone through the time honored legal process of getting your citizenship.

Keep giving 'em hell Gov!

Thursday, May 20, 2010

Make the Mojave Cross Permanent

Authorities Say Mojave Desert Replacement Memorial Cross Must Come Down

Since apparently it's ok to settle a score after you lose the decision of the Supreme Court by removing that which offends you, I have a suggestion for the people that used to maintain the cross.

Get a large jackhammer and etch a cross into the rock. Make it as large as possible, and nice and deep. Make sure no matter what happens that it's always there.

Thursday, April 15, 2010

Hey Obama, About Those "Tax Cuts" and "Bi-Partisanship"

Obama Renews Call for Bipartisanship, Takes Jab at Tea Partiers

"I've been a little amused over the last couple of days where people have been having these rallies about taxes," the president said, noting the numerous tax cuts pushed by his administration. "You would think they'd be saying thank you."


Hey jackass, "cutting" my taxes just enough to buy a Whopper each month, all the while allowing for a monetary policy that is pushing commodities, including oil, higher, and passing a "Healthcare Reform" that in reality will COST me money (and possibly my job), and you want me to thank you??

I've got a different gesture for that:


You want Bi-Partisanship? You can start by resigning. Then, and only then, will we come to the table.

FBI Able to Read Emails Stored on Servers

Yahoo, Feds Battle over E-Mail Privacy

The legal dust-up, unsealed late Tuesday, concerns a 1986 law that already allows the government to obtain a suspect’s e-mail from an ISP or webmail provider without a probable-cause warrant, once it’s been stored for 180 days or more. The government now contends it can get e-mail under 180-days old if that e-mail has been read by the owner, and the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment protections don’t apply.

Yahoo is challenging the government’s position and defying a court order to turn over some customer e-mail to the feds. Google, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Center for Democracy & Technology and other groups late Tuesday told the federal judge presiding over the case that accessing e-mail under 180 days old requires a valid warrant under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of whether it has been read.

“The government says the Fourth Amendment does not protect these e-mails,” Kevin Bankston, an EFF lawyer, said in a telephone interview Wednesday. “What we’re talking about is archives of our personal correspondence that they would need a warrant to get from your computer but not from the server.”


I learn something new every day. Sometimes, I wish I didn't.

Quick note to my fellow Threepers - if you're in the habit of keeping communications on a server such as GMail or Yahoo, Hotmail, etc, be aware that someone without a warrant might be watching.

Of course, none of you would put anything that might incriminate you into email now would you? OpSec and CommSec friends.

Current Quote

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." – Thomas Jefferson