Whitewashing a $112 billion THEFT of SS Trust Funds as a "technical change" is a cynical lie. . .

[Faryn Balyncd]

The 112 billion dollars (that is being contemplated for diversion from Social Security beneficiaries in the next 10 years alone) are funds that are part of the $2.7 trillion surplus built with decades of sweaty payroll (and self-employment) taxes, loaned to the Treasury (financing the deficits caused by simultaneously waging multiple wars while slashing general fund revenues/income taxes on the financial elites to historically low levels), and which are now needed for the intended purpose (paying the retirement benefits which are fully funded until 2033, beyond the lifetimes of many baby boomers).

Rigging the already rigged CPI calculation in order that unsustainable, historically low income tax rates can be partially preserved is THEFT.

And whitewashing that theft as a mere "technical change" is not "spokesmanship" but a cynical & pathetic lie, more befitting Fox "News" than a Democratic administration.



How quickly we learn to ignore our prophetic and principled leaders: Only 13 months principled Democrats were introducing legislation to CORRECT the gross UNDER-stating of inflation in the current CPI-W calculation, and Sen. Sherrod Brown introduced the "Consumer Price Index For Elderly Consumers (CPI-E) Act"



. . . . . Now, 13 months later we are on the verge of replacing a bad CPI-W with a much worse "chained CPI", which will permanently enshrine a malignant "substitution" effect and permanently de-couple inflation calculations from reality.



Far better would it be to listen to prophetic voices like Howard Dean, go over the contrived "fiscal speed bump", let the Bush tax cut expire, then dare Republicans to block legislation re-instating middle class tax cuts ans other essential services.

[arjazz]

1. Worse than a lie - It's BETRAYAL

[plethoro]

2. Clearly...............nft

dddddddd

[Coyotl]

24. Worse still, it is a THEFT from the PEOPLE, not the fund.

How many people are being robbed at once? Worse crime in American history, it seems!

[JDPriestly]

14. It is theft.

And anyone who can't see what is going on needs to go back to pre-school and learn how to work puzzles. It's theft, massive theft from an entire generation, make that several generations.

If the CPI needed to be changed, why would President Obama have instituted the cut in payroll taxes?

The whole emergency is a huge hoax.

The economy is just barely starting to heat up, and they are trying to stop the improvement. What is wrong with them?

I could understand if they were purposely slowing the economy to combat global warming, but even then they should not do that on the backs of poor and elderly Americans. This is wrong.

The only people who benefit from this are the very wealthy and the big corporations that also benefited from the Iraq War.

They should be asked to pay their fair share.

The horror of it is that much of this money went to pay for the Iraq War. The oil companies that got the contracts for the Iraqi oil are the only ones to benefit from that War. And they don't even pay the taxes to cover the cost of it. They want low-income American workers to pay that cost.

[John2]

25. I'm glad you see

it. These Politicians are lying to younger generations and using the Baby Boomer Generation as scape goats. I'm part of that Generation. On one of my check stubs, there are three separate deductions for taxes. One is for Federal taxes, which is the largest. One is for Social Security, which I have paid in for years. My employers also doubled it over the years. The other is medicare taxes.

I don't get the Social Security and medicare back. Nobody does and no baby boomer does, which is this large group. Younger generations are doing the same on payroll taxes. It is suppose to be paid for and your money when you retire. It should include interest and adjusted for inflation rates. So part of the U.S. Debt Congress owe is to us. The baby boomers or today's retirees are not putting anything on any body's backs. The huge profits the wealthy are earning, is mostly gained on investments and low taxes. They are putting that money away for their kids. Look at the number of Billionaires and millionaires in this country. They are not decreasing but increasing. Congress has a large portion of them also. These American Billionaires have increased their family wealth out of this country too. So I don't feel sorry for them, because they have had it very good. This is nothing but a Ponzi scheme. That money belongs to us and ot is not entitlements. It is an investment, that we should get more than we put in because of market value over time. It is no different than the pensions of CEOS or Congress.

[INdemo]

19. Are Democrats really different ..don't think so

just maybe even better bullshitters(including the President)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=264831

[Enrique]

3. i see it as a joke

Jay Carney is a comedian. the idea that Obama and Boehner are up there hammering out technicalities, never mind that neither of them is an economist, is amusing.

[dkf]

4. It wouldn't be a theft from the system, it would be there for others to receive.

So the trust fund is solvent longer. That could extend the time before the drop in benefits which will occur when the trust fund is depleted.

[rhett o rick]

6. Yes and if we cut benefits more and more, it will be "solvent" longer and longer. The trust fund was

built to run out. Before Reagan there wasnt a trust fund. It was pay as you go. The trust fund was to handle the baby boomers and run out when no longer needed.

Raise the cap back to where it was before the REpublicans reduced it to make this crisis happen.

And this has nothing to do with the deficit.

The Republicans are trying to kill Social Security and I guess you agree.

[djean111]

7. If the cap was lifted a bit, it would be funded for a long long long time.

Lessee, we have gone from being admonished that Obama himself said no such thing, to being to not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good (barf), to being told it is no big deal, to being told that we are selfish for wanting what we funded ourselves, to being told that we have not sacrificed enough.......is that a pony I see in the distance?

[sabrina 1]

11. The trust IS solvent. You are confusing the Fed Budget with the SS Fund and

I have no idea why since I recall explaining all of this to you before.

Not to mention that SS has zero to do with the Deficit so it doesn't even belong in these negotiations.

[JDPriestly]

15. dkf, no. That is not how this worked. That is not how this works.

The trust fund is solvent long enough to get a good portion of baby boomers through their retirement. And if our economy continues to improve, it will be solvent much longer than that.

If the problem were a depleted Trust Fund, then President Obama would not have advocated for cutting the payroll taxes. Obama was a proponent of cutting the payroll taxes, and he apparently wants to continue the cuts, so that means he is not doing this because he is concerned about depleting the trust fund.

Besides, Carney stated that they are considering adopting chained CPI for all government programs.

I wonder whether they would adopt it in figuring out farm subsidies. That would be interesting.

I wonder whether the CPi would go up if poor people simply spent more and borrowed and went into even more debt.

This is the most unsound economic policy yet.

The reason that I say that is that it discourages poor people from trying to save. It is a disincentive to trying to make ends meet without debt.

If people live on their income and save a bit, then the chained CPI results in their receiving less money. That is crazy. Absolutely the opposite of what we need in a country that is impoverished due to too much debt.

Once again, this policy is a banker's dream and a mother's nightmare. On top of that, it is sexist. Women live longer than men in this country in general. Thus, we have more women in their 80s and 90s than men. That means that women will be the ones whose Social Security and other benefits are reduced right when they are the most helpless and likely to need expensive medications and medical aids such as wheel chairs and home assistants.

[forestpath]

5. President Obama obviously took Romney's advice when they met recently.

[dchill]

8. K & R.

[sabrina 1]

9. Shhhh, you imagined that cutting SS was in the agreement offered to the

Republicans.

You only imagined that Carney said that it was 'what the Republicans wanted'.

Someone has been linking to these facts on DU but we are supposed to ignore them!

just in case!

[amborin]

10. new levels of cynicism; Obama stood up there before freezing crowds in the evening in Iowa

shortly before the election....the "fired up and ready to go" speech.....and promised no cuts to soc sec and the end of the
bush tax cuts....

we were all played big time, yet again

all i can say is: i'm so glad Obama won. but no more illusions on whose interests are being championed (as if it weren't already super obvious)

[jsr]

29. His credibility was in doubt

not so much anymore.

[JEB]

12. The rick fucks and pukes

are leeching off of disabled Vets and Grandma.

[pansypoo53219]

13. this is ALL BULLSHIT. the publikklans have perverted the landscape since the 70's.

WE ARE A RICH COUNTRY. we can DO EVERYTHING we NEED to but for the claim by the EXTREME wealthy that they need tax cuts. they are ENTITLED TO NOT HAVING TO PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE. yes, we ALL NEEN TO PAY our fair share. we need to go back. hell, forget eisenhower. lets go back to napoleon, who when he was a GOOD LEADER, made sure EVERYBODY payed a fair tax. INCLUDING THE RICH, and france once again was a rich country. we can't be 'exceptional' if we do not take care of the young + the old.

no more PARTISAN SACRIFICE. NO MORE CUTTING. the bill for ronald reagan has come DUE. the bill for GW FUCKING B has COME DUE.

the teafucks can sit down + STFU.

[No Compromise]

20. +100000

Social Security is not part of the deficit and shouldn't even be in the discussion.

They are ALL LIARS.

We need to march on DC and the TV stations and demand they stop lying@!

[blackspade]

16. +1000

[KoKo]

17. Recommend...!

[valerief]

18. +1

[a2liberal]

21. K&R (n/t)

[A Simple Game]

22. I have mostly only heard denial, only one "they are doing what they have to for now" and

Last edited Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:36 PM - Edit history (1)

"we will fix it later".

The only problem is, tomorrow never comes.

I along with several others saw this coming over a year ago. I hoped someone would primary President Obama. But I remember some as far back as 2008 saying Obama would be the President to do what no Republican could do-destroy Social Security. Almost makes you wonder if that is why Romney ran, so President Obama would get a second term. It hasn't even been a month.

On edit: changed won to ran

[John2]

27. What do you mean

if Romney won? Nobody in the Republican Party is for Social Security. The problem is people voting against their interests and Republicans race baiting. If President Obama had a Democratic House, excluding Blue Dog Democrats from Southern States, America wouldn't be in this position.

And for the last time, I'm not stupid. Quit hiding behind Obama did this and that. He can't do anything with Democrats approving anything. That includes Pelosi. If she goes along with Obama, she is just as culpable. The real enemy is the Republican Party and don't forget it. That party needs to be dealt with. The Democrats don't even have to go along with President Obama to go off the cliff and let all taxes disappear themselves no matter what the Whitehouse compromise with Boehner on.

[A Simple Game]

30. Sorry, typed won when I should have typed ran. n/t

[A Simple Game]

31. Sorry I didn't finish my reply in the last post, had to leave for a while.

What I meant to say about Romney was maybe that is why he "won" the Republican nomination. No big concern, what I am concerned about is where I called you stupid. I called no one stupid in this or any other thread that I know of. But it must have been in another thread if I did it so, please point me to the thread and post and I will correct the mistake.

Yes Democrats other than President Obama must also be in on the act for it to reach completion. I don't think anyone has said otherwise. But remember this, President Obama is the one doing the negotiating, not Pelosi or Reid.

I am not a Republican so can not help fix their party, I am also not a Democrat, so can not help fix their party either. I swore off Republicans about 30 years ago and Democrats about 20 years ago. If I vote for a Democrat, as I did President Obama both times, it is on a third party line. President Obama got my vote on the Working Family Party line both times.

[madfloridian]

23. Thank you.

Recommended

[AzDar]

26. K & Fookin' R

[mathematic]

28. Your posts on inflation and the CPI are completely and utterly wrong

Nobody here is interested in understanding the academic issues surrounding CPI calculations (I've tried before) so I'll say the following: If you think social security payments should increase at a rate independent from (and higher than) the rate of inflation JUST SAY SO.

Stop saying wrong things about how CPI is calculated, the quality of the CPI, and the change in actual prices over the years. And for the love of all that is holy stop linking to that cracked-out right-wing anti-government conspiracy nutcase over at shadowstats.