Lest We Forget.Debt Deja Vu! From DU's bvar22 8/18/10: This is how "THEY" will cut Social Security:

[grahamhgreen]

Lest we forget - THIS IS BVAR22'S POST FROM LAST AUGUST (before the elections):
_____________________________

This is how "THEY" will cut Social Security:

1) Saturate the Media with the meme that something MUST be done to "Reduce the Deficit" or there will be a catastrophe, and strongly imply that Social Security is one of the BIG causes for the deficit.

2)Remove Pentagon/Military Spending from any discussion of cuts,
and imply that anyone who even talks about cuts to Military Spending are crazy, drug addled extremists.

3)Give all the politicians involved plenty of time to get out public statements that they support Social Security, and would never vote to reduce benefits.

4)Form a "Independent Secret Commission" to design a "Comprehensive Package" to study ways of Reducing the Deficit. This package will be lengthy and complicated, but it WILL contain reductions to Social Security benefits. For cover, the package will also contain a few minor crumbs that ARE good for the economy. These crumbs will be minor in scale compared to the structural changes to Social Security.

This "package" and will also contain some scam that opens the door for Wall Street to have access to Social Security funds. For cover, the package will also contain some easily avoidable "regulations" that will appear to restrict how Wall Street can use the Social Security Funds.


5)The Marketing will be Up and Running when the contents of the package is revealed. The Media will be saturated with pieces that highlight and overemphasize the few good crumbs, and catastrophizing the effects of not passing "The Comprehensive Package".


6)The Progressive Caucus opposition WILL be marginalized (again), and the full force of the White House, the DLC, DNC, and their Corporate Marketing & Messaging apparatus will be used to brand them as "traitors", "with the Republicans", "against Wall Street Regulation", "against the American People", "against Saving Social Security" or "Opposed to Saving our Children".
There will be a saturation of anecdotal testimony of how certain crumbs will "Save our Family, therefore the whole package MUST pass.
The Mighty Wurlitzer will be turned UP to FULL BLAST.
Any and ALL opposition WILL be Shouted Down and Demonized.

7)The Republican Party will play their assigned part in the Kabuki, and oppose the whole thing as "Big Government Takeover". It doesn't matter that their position makes no sense. It only matters that they oppose it so the illusion of a difference is maintained.

8)This "package" will be brought to Congress to be voted on as a whole, complete package immediately after the Democratic Losses in November 2010. No honest debate will be allowed.
No discussion of amending the package or deleting some elements will be allowed.
Democrats will NOT be "voting to cut Social Security".
They will be voting FOR "Saving the Economy", or "Protecting out Children (from the deficit)".

9) The Complete Comprehensive Package of Commission Recommendations WILL pass with a Party Line vote, or one or two Republican defectors if necessary to maintain the illusion of a Hard Fight.
No Democrat will have to admit that they voted to Cut Social Security.
Instead, they voted FOR a Reform Package that Saved the Economy.


10) The politicians will flock to the cameras with statements like this:
"I am on record as supporting Social Security, and of course I would have liked to NOT cut benefits, but we had to do something."

"This is historic reform legislation, look at all the good (crumbs) we got!"

"We couldn't let the Perfect be the Enemy of the Good."

"This is the best we could do under the circumstances because we didn't have the votes.

"This is a Step Forward."

"Today, we saved our children from a crushing deficit."



Sound familiar?
It should.

If you think I'm a little over the top in my assessment,
take a look at Chris Van Hollen's (weasel, MD) performance when asked a direct question on cutting Social Security:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wHr3nMG6Y4

They are coming.
"By their works you will know them."

_________________


End of original post.

Amazing, isn't it?

81% want to increase revenue by taxing the rich, 63+% by ending the wars.

It's time for them to STOP jerking us around.

[no_hypocrisy]

1. Social Security IS one of the BIG causes for the deficit b/c the funds were STOLEN

from the Trust Fund and must be repaid and THEY DON'T HAVE THE MONEY AND DON'T INTEND TO PAY IT BACK.

[sabrina 1]

5. Then we have to make them pay it back.

The way to do that is to end the Bush Tax cuts which cost over 2 trillion dollars over the past ten years and we got nothing for it, no jobs, nothing.

And, we have to end the wars, and make sure they do not start another one.

Government waste, in the Pentagon eg, needs to be dealt with. The corruption during these wars were billions go unaccounted for, is a travesty.

But in no way should the people agree to pay for the debts they ran up. It's time for them to pay the piper and it's up to us to make sure they do. Because no one in DC is going to make them do it.

The OP was absolutely prescient.

I especially like #7. The pretense that Republicans are against things they actually are for. It has all become so transparent.

[JDPriestly]

23. Cutting Social Security is a means of retroactively converting

all the Social Security taxes the baby boomers and current seniors paid into the Social Security trust fund (on top of the amounts paid out to the then retirees) into tax revenue for the general fund.

It is a means of imposing a retroactive very, very, very regressive tax on generations of older Americans.

Yet another crime.

I am trying to explain this to people on DU because it appears to me that people have not understood that the whole anti-Social Security deal is about imposing that regressive tax on the middle class and poor -- retroactively. I would like to see Rachel Maddow or Dylan Ratigan explain this on their show. I think I am right. And this would be easy to demonstrate with visual graphs -- or even glasses full of colored liquid.

[Big Blue Marble]

37. Thank you for correctly framing this issue.

In fact, the SS Tax implemented under Reagan with Democratic complicity was the largest tax hike in
history. It partially covered up the growing debt crisis caused by the supply siders insistence on deep cuts in income tax.

Even Clinton's so called surpluses were made possible by SS revenues masking general fund short falls.

This surely must be the largest heist in the history of the world. I am glad to see others waking to
what is really the crux of this issue. The wealthy want to default on the loans they received in enormous
tax cuts and subsidies from the middle class. It is that simple.

[JDPriestly]

39. Spread the word, Big Blue Marble

We have an ignore feature on DU. We also need to have a "friend" feature. People who agree with each other on the basics could get a little alert when a friend has posted something and would like some support. Send me a personal message via DU if you want my support on DU on some issue.

[Enthusiast]

52. It is theft.

We should call it what it is.

[mistertrickster]

57. correct . . . social security is not a "benefit" or an "entitlement," it is deferred compensation.

[truedelphi]

60. And even "liberal" Bill Maher is helping the neo-cons

With their message. Every single F___ing Friday night, Bill whips out what he thinks is this brilliant "pie chart" which has fried chicken taking up one third of the plate, potatoes taking up one third, and mac and cheese taking up one third.

These are, he points out, a reference to the fact that one third of the General Fund is used by our federal government's budget office to pay for education, one third is used to pay for defense and one third is used to pay for Social Security.

This is the same pie chart concept that my Congress critter, one Mike Thompson, uses in his talks - that one third of the deficit is Social Security/Medicare related.

The truth is, according to the laws concerning Social Security :

SOCIAL SECURITY IS PAID FROM ITS OWN FUND!

IT IS NOT PAID FROM THE GENERAL FUND

AS DEFENSE IS!

A woman in the audience tried desperately to make the "Hon."Mike Thompson realize his mistake, but he was too busy explaining how proud he is of his status as a Blue Dog Dem to hear her out.

[YankmeCrankme]

26. Social Security IS NOT one of the BIG causes for the deficit

The funds in the trust fund were stolen to be used in the general fund, but those were SURPLUS dollars collected every year, because the TAXES collected to pay benefits were more than what was needed and that was because 30 years ago Social Security taxes were increased to help cover the costs of Social Security in the future.

I believe until last year, all payments from Social Security were paid for, in whole, by the monies collected through the FICA tax. Last year, they had to cover a small shortfall by cashing in some bonds held in the trust fund. So, Social Security was self funded and added nothing to the deficit. But now, because of the 2% cut in personal contributions enacted by Obama, which will require general funding to cover the difference, it will become a contributor to the deficit.

Right now, the US Defense appropriations (in all their manifestations, i.e. CIA, NSA, Homeland Security, etc) are the biggest contributor of the deficit.

[marew]

34. I really get upset when the rethugs never...

mention this fact. They are lying to us over and over. We 'boomers' paid so much in and they stole our hard earned money.

[DesertFlower]

43. i don't think people realize this. i

posted this on facebook yesterday.

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/RetirementandWills/CreateaPlan/5mythsAboutSocialSecurity.aspx?page=1

[harmonicon]

72. isn't that like saying buying groceries is the cause of ...

someone's bankruptcy, because they used the money that should have been spent on groceries for cocaine?

[Peacetrain]

2. Damned chilling if you ask me..

[Little Star]

3. It is amazing how their playbook is so obvious yet....

many refuse to see. :shrug:

[Exilednight]

7. What's worse is that our leadership falls for it every time. n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

20. Or else they're in on it

You have to consider that possibility.

[liberation]

65. It works because logical dissonance is a powerful tool...

... and apparently intrinsic to the behavior of a large chunk of people.

Some individuals would rather refuse to acknowledge they are being fucked by finding justifications for the fucking, than actually confront those who are fucking them. Even though technically, both reactions may require the same level of energy. Many if not most social institutions (government, religion, corporations, etc) work by taking advantage of this fact.


Humans are a fascinating animal species, we ones who like to fancy themselves not animals are usually the ones who display a large set of animal traits. Fun ensues after that...

[ProSense]

4. "This is how "THEY" will cut Social Security:"

<...>

6)The Progressive Caucus opposition WILL be marginalized (again), and the full force of the White House, the DLC, DNC, and their
Corporate Marketing & Messaging apparatus will be used to brand them as "traitors", "with the Republicans", "against Wall Street Regulation", "against the American People", "against Saving Social Security" or "Opposed to Saving our Children".
There will be a saturation of anecdotal testimony of how certain crumbs will "Save our Family, therefore the whole package MUST pass.
The Mighty Wurlitzer will be turned UP to FULL BLAST.
Any and ALL opposition WILL be Shouted Down and Demonized.

7)The Republican Party will play their assigned part in the Kabuki, and oppose the whole thing as "Big Government Takeover". It doesn't matter that their position makes no sense. It only matters that they oppose it so the illusion of a difference is maintained.

8)This "package" will be brought to Congress to be voted on as a whole, complete package immediately after the Democratic Losses in November 2010. No honest debate will be allowed.
No discussion of amending the package or deleting some elements will be allowed.
Democrats will NOT be "voting to cut Social Security".
They will be voting FOR "Saving the Economy", or "Protecting out Children (from the deficit)".

9) The Complete Comprehensive Package of Commission Recommendations WILL pass with a Party Line vote, or one or two Republican defectors if necessary to maintain the illusion of a Hard Fight.
No Democrat will have to admit that they voted to Cut Social Security.
Instead, they voted FOR a Reform Package that Saved the Economy.

<...>

Uncanny!

[TransitJohn]

6. K&R for bvar.

:kick:

[leftstreet]

8. K&R

[Eyerish]

9. K&R

Bvar knows his stuff.

[Starry Messenger]

10. k&r

[slipslidingaway]

11. knr - looking forward to Wednesday when Obama tells the American people...

about the 2.6 Trillion dollar SS surplus and how that was loaned to the general budget for tax cuts and war funding ... and that we need to honor our debts to the workers of America.

Will any Democrat talk about the surplus that was collected to fund the shortfall they knew was coming with the boomers retiring?

Also why a deal was cut with Billy Tauzin to not push for bulk pricing for Medicare and advocates who had the best solution were kept out of the HC discussions while the insurance and drug company lobbyists and CEO's were invited inside the WH gates ... should be interesting.

[iwishiwas]

15. dream on.

[slipslidingaway]

21. One can try ...

actually I left out the sarcasm tag, guess that 2.6 million debt to the American means nothing.

Real problem is Medicare and health care costs which obviously were not addressed sufficiently in the historic reform bill.

[JDPriestly]

24. We need to spread the information that the attack on Social

Security is simply a way to convert the Social Security funds that we have been paying into the Social Security Trust Fund into ordinary general revenue. It is a way of converting that money into general fund money and thereby retroactively imposing a very, very regressive tax on Americans.

The Social Security money has been borrowed by the government and spent as part of the general fund. It has to be replaced through taxes on the rich. That would be a much better way to repay it than the method proposed by Republicans -- which is to cut benefits for people with higher incomes.

What is being suggested is the theft of money that people paid in Social Security taxes by the very rich -- pure and simple theft from the poor.

[slipslidingaway]

38. Yes we do ... been trying :) Obama should tell the people on Wednesday. n/t

[bvar22]

41. The Obama "Payroll Tax Holiday" has already...

...directly connected Social Security to the General Fund.

I thought it was bizarre when it was proposed.
1)A One Year Payroll Tax Holiday to "help the Middle Class",

2)The deficit from the Payroll tax Holiday to be made up with cash from the General Fund.



At the time, I thought, "Why not simply give the Middle Class a direct One Year Tax decrease,
or simply send them a check form the General Fundlike other presidents have done?
Why go to all the trouble and extra paperwork to mess with the Payroll Tax?:shrug:

Then the beauty of this scam hit me,
Because NOW SS & The General Fund are tied together,
and NOW it can be honestly said that Social Security payments (re-payments) are helping cause the Budget Problems.

Now THAT is 11th Deminsional Chess,
and Obama plays it well:
Sacrifice the Pawns to protect The Royalty!
.
.
.
It only sucks when you are a Working Class Pawn.

[CrispyQ]

45. This deserves it's own post.

Maybe you have posted it & I missed it, but this is worthy of it's own post. And the things Priestly said, too.

[unapatriciated]

55. There is another little pearl in that "tax holiday" that is overlooked.

and it is a big tax break for corporations. Our tax break is minuscule compared to what corporate america will get by not having to match our contribution. I could be mistaken but I didn't see anything that said they didn't get the benefit of the tax holiday.

[Hissyspit]

66. I'm sick to my stomach.

Absolutely brilliant prescience, but what good does it do?

[senseandsensibility]

12. k and r

Can't think of anything to add.

[Harmony Blue]

13. The power of the people

must go beyond voting. We must take the streets and protest. Find ways to educate our neighbors, open dialogue with those that yearn to learn more.

[bullwinkle428]

14. I remember K&Ring this last August, and I'm proud to do it again now!

[crickets]

16. K&R

[Safetykitten]

17. Wow...and the amazing thing? The poster was probably call all sorts of names.

[KoKo]

51. Yes...he/she was... It's not easy being being a prophet.

[tex-wyo-dem]

18. Thank you for reposting this, and cudos to bvar22!

Like so many posters on DU: fucking prophetic! Personally, after years of reading DU, it's not hard anymore to spot the PTB's game anymore...in fact, I can spot it a mile away.

WRT Social Security, it's been their holy grail for some time now. They will continue to play the game descibed by bvar22 until the control of all that money is squarely in the hands of the wealthy class leaving us to fend for ourselves under a bridge somewhere.

Fuckers

[JDPriestly]

25. tex-wyo-dem, as I have been explaining

the suggestion that is so popular in D.C. is a method of imposing a huge regressive tax on the poor and middle class in the US. Here is how it works. We paid extra into the Social Security trust fund. The government spent the money, mostly on wars. Now it is time to pay it back.

If the government claims it can't afford to pay it back, it has retroactively and successfully converted the Social Security tax money into general fund taxes.

We have to point this out to Americans -- that their Social Security money is not lost -- it is just being misused. We have to increase the taxes on the rich in order to replace the money that has been stolen from the Social Security funds.

That is the only way to insure the justice in our tax system.

It is incredible that the rich would steal from the poor and middle class in this crass and obvious way. Converting Social Security money into regular tax revenue long after the Social Security money was paid to the government.

Regressive, regressive, regressive.

[HankyDubs]

19. I hope the demopods are taking notes

there will be a test on this material in 6 months.

[JDPriestly]

22. The only way we can get them to stop jerking us around is to find

an independent candidate who will support the middle class and poor and oppose Wall Street and big business.

[indimuse]

27. Obama is a *Diversion*

WAKE UP! THIS is all a part of a MUCH larger picture...most here are STILL in denial. (almost comical) ;)

[JTFrog]

29. Yes,

lots of comedy lately. Especially those crazy CT posts. Those are really sad, but hilarious.

[Roy Rolling]

28. change the framing...lose the word "entitlement"

bvar22 is absolutely correct and prophetical.

In addition, the word "entitlement" needs to be banished from a progressive's vocabulary, as I wrote on another issue:

"lose the word "entitlement" and change the framing of the argument. The use of the word "entitlement" is the Republican way of saying Medicare and Social Security are free gifts to recipients. They are not "entitlements"---they are the payoff from years of paying premiums. You don't call money received from your car insurance after a wreck an "entitlement"---it is an insurance benefit. A settlement, a payment,...never is it called an "entitlement".

Wording is SO important and anyone who uses "entitlement" to call benefits we receive after a lifetime of paying for them has already sipped the Kool Aid.

GET RID OF THAT WORD---ordinary people do not know what an "entitlement" is. Republicans use it as code talk to their base for "things that are free from government and should be cut"

[livvy]

31. I'm in full agreement with you on this.

Republicans are masters of framing. It is something progressives have not learned to utilize in their debate, IMHO. Although something you are entitled to may be earned, when used in the current debate by the right, it's connotation is that it is a freebie, or a gift that has not been earned.
Benefit might be a better frame as it is already part of the familiar title...SS Benefits. Because people pay into the system throughout their working lives, it is actually an earning, savings, or cooperative retirement fund.
You must be a Lakoff fan, or at least read some of his writings? Interesting guy, and makes a lot of sense, at least to me.

[Roy Rolling]

32. haven't read

Lakoff...but since you recommeded it I will. Thanks

I find the 1980s theories on "positioning" by Ries and Trout a good basis for understanding how marketing guides the business-dominated Republicans. (to my surprise, despite the name, it was NOTHING like "Trout Fishing in America" ! ) B-)

[livvy]

40. Start with...

Don't Think of an Elephant!. It's only about 120 pages and $10 or less, so you can get an idea of what he's talking about. He's written quite a few books.

Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Think-Elephant-Debate---Progressives/dp/1931498717/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1302539540&sr=1-1

[grahamhgreen]

36. I like SS insurance, Unemployment insurance, since that's what it actually is,

then we have the Repubs wanting to cut insurance programs, and for Americans to live without insurance; it's easy to understand how foolish that is.

Of course, many social democracies refer to them as "Benefits".

[grahamhgreen]

33. Good point. Just calling it insurance might work!

[KoKo]

50. After all this time...why don't our Dems "change the framing?"

No matter what they constantly have used the Repugs Framing. Since Reagan it's been the "same speak." Yet George Laker and others have done studies and issued reports about how Dems must learn to REFRAME issues.

That they don't says more about what they are about...than that they are "wanting" to reframe the issues. Where are our Dem Ops out on the cables who ever frame any issue in a Democratic Way. It's always the Media/Think Tank or Repug way.

[CrispyQ]

76. Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

I'm so disgusted with the democratic party.

[tomp]

30. only radical action now will turn this around. nt

[zorahopkins]

35. Corporate Media (CBS) Is Censoring

Your link to youtube works but when you get there, there is a message saying, in effect, that CBS has told youtube ot to show the video of Van Hollen.

Corporate America does not want the truth out there!

[BlueJac]

42. Where is my pitch fork?

[DesertFlower]

44. a few weeks ago ed rendell said

people are living longer. they can work until they're 67. i lost all respect for the man.

[Enthusiast]

54. Yeah.

Rendell is one of 'them'. Lawrence O'Donnell said something of a similar nature.

[KoKo]

46. Thanks for the Reminder. That seems to be the script...works like a charm

every time. :grr: Do they think we are stupid? Or, do they just not give a damn?

[Uncle Joe]

47. Kicked and recommended, thanks to bvar.

Thanks for the thread, grahamhgreen.

[CrispyQ]

48. K&R

& bookmarked.

They won't be happy until they steal it all.

[Enthusiast]

49. They will not STOP jerking us around.

No way. There is way too much money involved. They have invested too much.

[SaveAmerica]

53. Add to # 2 - they will call you Unamerican for suggesting cuts at the Pentagon or DoD/Warz r'Us

[swilton]

56. You certainly nabbed Van Hollen correctly

my former Congressman from Montgomery County, Md.

[DesertFlower]

58. it doesn't matter what the people want.

it's what the greedy corporations who line our elected politicians pockets want.

i'm totally disgusted. i'm 69 and have been collecting social security since '91 when i became disabled. i want what i have for everyone else who works hard. not just social security, but the american dream. my husband is 63. been with the same international corporation for almost 42 years. he's going to get a hefty pension and social security.

the politicians never talk about raising the cap either. just think of how much money would go into the ss fund if everyone making over $106,000 a year kept paying into the fund. but of course, we can't have rich people pay any more. there's no cap on medicare and we don't need one on social security. personally we would pay more. hubby seems to hit the cap every year around september. it's nice having that extra $750 a months for a few months but i'm willing to give it up to save ss.

[CrispyQ]

74. I worked for a small company where the engineers were paid in the $150,000-$250,000 range.

Sometime around the middle of May to the end of June, they all reached their SS cap. They would carry on, in the break rooms, in the hallways, in the reception area, about how they didn't have to pay anymore SS taxes for the rest of the year. They even had a big FAC party at the end of June to celebrate. It was demoralizing for us peons to listen to them go on about it, knowing that our annual income was taxed at a higher percentage rate than theirs & yet they were making so much more than we were.

I had a chance to work with the VP of Engineering on a special project & I asked him if he knew about the party & how insensitively his engineers behaved by carrying on about this issue in front of employees who made a fraction of what they made. I thought he was going to blow a gasket he was so angry. He very quietly said, "Thank you for telling me this." If there was a party the following June, no engineer spoke about it.

[DesertFlower]

78. OMG. that's disgusting.

sorry you had to be subjected to that.

[felix_numinous]

59. Actually, I listened to Chris Van Hollen

and think he cannot promise an agreement because he has to consider the '...package as a whole.' I think he is talking about possible riders on the bill he would not agree to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2eKT70DtgI

I think one big obstacle to passing legislation is that the bills are rarely 'stand alone' bills. Important legislation is offered with other stipulations which can make it a deal breaker. I may be wrong here, but this is my opinion.

[davidwparker]

61. "It's time for them to STOP jerking us around." - Oh, this

was done when filibuster reform came and went.

After a respite and clarity, politics is so easy for me now: Vote them all out.

[bertman]

62. Good call, bvar22; although, I wish I was saying "I'm glad you were wrong"

Thanks for reposting grahamhgreen.

REC.

[abelenkpe]

63. Progressives marginalized?

What by referring to them as a tiny minority of extremists who ask for impossible things cause hey, the dems don't have the votes anyway?

:/

[hulka38]

64. Thanks for reposting this.

One of the best OPs I've read and more relevant now than ever. Nice job, bvar.

[OwnedByFerrets]

67. K and R

[Octafish]

68. ''By their works you will know them.''

bvar22 deserves a Pulitzer for connecting the dots that Corporate McPravda doesn't see and, when it notices, ignores.

Thank you for the heads-up, grahamgreene!

[Moostache]

69. Ironically - just listening to 11 March 1996 - George Carlin (Back in Town)

Carlin was onto this nonsense and BS duplicity 15 years ago (and truthfully further back than that)...
"If you're pre-born, you're fine (with the GOP)....if you're pre-school, you're FUCKED!"
"Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers."
"They're not 'pro-life', they're 'anti-women'"

Nothing at all has changed in either their agenda or their implementation of said agenda.
They were, are and ever shall be the party of "feed the rich, fuck the rest"...
Dems need to ditch the idea of fucking "HOPE"...we need to smack these fuckers upside the head with REALITY!

The Republicans constantly get a pass on defending the actual RESULTS of their ideology.
Start with 1980 and pick ANY quality of life indicator for people making a median or lower income in this country.
If the thugs are correct, and trickle down in the true path to prosperity, then several or MOST should be trending positive....what is the REALITY?

NOT ONE!
ZERO!
GOOSE-EGG!
0-for-30 years!

If Republican ideology was anyone in a normal job, they'd have been fired SEVERAL TIMES ALREADY....shit, the results are so bad, that if their ideology was a banker it would not even be getting a bonus.

I am tired of their same old shit....maybe now that gas is over $4.00 a gallon again (and the economy will be cratering in 3-4 months as a direct result of everyone cutting all discretionary spending AGAIN...re-run 2008 anyone?) and we are being fucked with a broomstick that says "Property of David and Charles and Koch and Friends"....MAYBE more people will wake up and demand better from their government and from those who claim to have their interests in mind...

[grahamhgreen]

71. "Start with 1980 and pick ANY quality of life indicator..." - excellent point.

[CrispyQ]

77. You should write the major points of this post as a LTTE.

Your point about comparing any quality of life indicator for the past 30 years & coming up with a big goose egg is most excellent. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[desertrat777]

70. Nothing to look at - move along now - it's for your own good.

Another step towards global corporate fascism and the New World Order, where the sole function of government will be to disempower people (except for the top 1% of course) and maintain the money funnel in all of its manifestations. That is, the money funnel that funnels the life force/work energy/money of the working class (i.e. you) to the "ruling elite," namely those who have so much money that they are able to use their financial power to steal even more money, rig the sails in their favor, and prevent we the people (the lower 99%) from stopping them. As usual, it is all about divide and conquer, the 180 degree rule (the facts twisted around 180 degrees into a lie presented as truth), and enslaving the people. Once again, the faults of our antiquated capitalist system have allowed the uber-rich to take over and enrich themselves. The only question left remaining is this: which milking machine do you choose, the red milking machine, or the blue milking machine? The next step is elimination of personal freedoms. Nothing to look at - move along now - it's for your own good.

Oh - by the way, the uber-rich are not the "job makers." The working class people are the job makers, as their demand for goods and services creates jobs. Tax cuts for the rich and spending untold billions on "defense" does not do much in the way of creating jobs or infrastructure. The Dems and Repubs are both complicit in this insult to the American people.

[inna]

73. too late to k&r, unfortunately. i always dig Bvar22's posts.

[CrispyQ]

75. Kicking for the morning crowd.

This is such an important thread. So much great info here. We should all take pen to paper & write letters to the editor & submit them! And then be prepared to defend them, if other community members respond with attacks.