This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

The Next Stop In Obama's Political Suicide Tour: Announcing Social Security Cuts During State Of The Union Address

Tyler Durden's picture





 

Obama's latest quid-pro-quo with the republican party over a doubling down on fiscal stimulus in the form of mutual back scratching, funding by yet another trillion in debt, may have well be the start of his toxic spiral to the the bottom of political insignificance. According to Politico, "The tax deal negotiated by President Barack Obama and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky is just the first part of a multistage drama that is likely to further divide and weaken Democrats." Next up on the path of what many see as the terminal alienation of the president from his liberal constituency, will occur during the next State of the Union Address, when the teleprompter in chief is expected to announce cuts in Social Security, according to Politico which quotes "well-placed sources." Why will the president pretend to espouse even an ounce of fiscal prudence? Because, around that time the discussion over the US debt ceiling will be in full heat: we expect total US debt to be about $14.1 trillion by the end of January: just a $200 billion buffer from the debt ceiling breach. Therefore, as Robert Kuttner of politico speculates: "The idea is to
pre-empt an even more draconian set of budget cuts likely to be proposed
by the incoming House Budget Committee chairman, Rep. Paul Ryan
(R-Wis.), as a condition of extending the debt ceiling. This is expected
to hit in April." And as Kuttner once again phrases it best: "
How to put this politely? For a Democratic president, this approach is bad economics and worse politics."

More from Politico:

For starters, cutting Social Security as part of a deficit reduction deal is needless — since Social Security is in surplus for the next 27 years. The move also gives away the single most potent distinction between Democrats and Republicans — Democrats defend your Social Security, and Republicans keep trying to undermine it.

If you think the Democratic base feels betrayed by Obama’s tax-cut deal, just imagine the mayhem when Obama proposes to cut the Democrats’ signature program.

Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) compared Obama’s tax deal to punting on first down. A pre-emptive cut in Social Security is forfeiting the game before kickoff.

Obama is already in trouble with older voters. Republicans have succeeded in convincing seniors that the health care reform bill diverted money from Medicare.

With his recent tax extension compromise Obama has effectively checkmated himself into a corner from which not even his delightful onscreen charm can extricate him:

Consider what the right will do when Obama moves to cut Social Security. Republicans, with no sense of contradiction or hypocrisy, will whack Obama once for not being sufficiently serious about deficit reduction — then whack him again for cutting Social Security.

As for what next steps are, it may just get a whole lot more interesting to all those who follow the MOVE index:

As for the Republicans’ leverage on raising the debt ceiling, a more resolute president would dare the Republicans to jeopardize government bonds, just as President Bill Clinton dared Speaker Newt Gingrich to shut down the government. One hopes that Clinton, in his recent visit to the White House, reminded Obama that Gingrich blinked first. But Obama’s trademark is that he blinks first.

There was brief talk in the House Democratic Caucus on Tuesday night of tying an extension of the debt ceiling to the tax deal, to deprive the Republicans of that leverage. But that support crumbled in the face of White House lobbying and overwhelming Senate support for the deal. Obama, who gives in repeatedly to Republicans, turns out to be highly skilled at isolating Democrats.

And another observation, which has to do with not only decision making in the beltway, but the increasing incursion by Wall Street into both the fiscal and monetary decision process in Washington: now that Obama has no economic advisors left aside from Geithner, it is up to Tim to call up Jan Hatzius daily and get his thoughts on what should be done. Of course, the end result is one that is in Goldman's best interest, and in America's worst:

Beltway Washington —
the editorial writers, columnists, centrist policy organizations, Blue
Dogs and, of course, the Obama administration and its Wall Street
advisers — has become an echo chamber of bad advice.

End result: no second term for Obama, as his shallow rhetoric is exposed for all to see that it is nothing but a deflection from the fact that his entire platform is falling asunder:

Obama is finally getting the bipartisanship he craved — but entirely on Republican terms.

Republicans win three ways. They have a Democratic president doing their work for them, destroying the Democratic capacity to use affirmative government to address dire national problems and annihilating his own party.

And for an economy, in which the market has become nothing but a policy tool, we believe that the rising temperature in DC, is about to manifest itself in a surge in market volatility, which on Friday hit a near record 2010 low, although not only in stocks, but across all asset classes, as we have been demonstrating patiently over the past month. Should that vol enter bonds, and just a few days ago we had a 6 sigma event in the 2s5s30s, which we will describe shortly, this would mean some very painful derisking in that most important of asset classes, and a rapid test of just how accurate Jim O'Neill's prediction that surging bonds rates are really nothing but a boon to the economy.

 


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sun, 12/19/2010 - 14:48 | Link to Comment Apostate
Apostate's picture

Naturally, the old, the weak, and the invalid will be defaulted against first.

By the time the system works through the rest, the golden men and their armed guards will be safe from reprisal. 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:50 | Link to Comment Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

and if history repeats itself, in 10 years there will be a uprising.

Not by us. We still have to much to lose, but by the kids that are now playing in the snow and don't really know what's going on.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:07 | Link to Comment Apostate
Apostate's picture

Less, I think.

The government steals from everyone who works for this antisocial insecurity program. It's right there on every paycheck.

This is not something arcane like fiddling with the COLA numbers. The blowback will be more immediate.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:28 | Link to Comment UGrev
UGrev's picture

So if anything, we should put a stop to SS NOW so our kids don't have to pay into anymore/at all and can thus use that money in the way they deem proper (i.e. being fiscally responsible and saving it). 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 17:28 | Link to Comment notaFerengi
notaFerengi's picture

Sorry but those kids will be supporting their parents and grandparents. 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 17:38 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

Yes, that's one good use to which our money could be put if it wasn't stolen by the government. Why does that make you "sorry?" One would think that the ongoing theft would be the object of any remorse.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 18:30 | Link to Comment UGrev
UGrev's picture

OMG.. self sustainability... watch out!! we can't have that now, can we?  If I didn't have to spork over that extra cash each month, I could concievably store it for the future on some medium that, oh.. I don't know.. stores wealth. My kids could do the same.. then, when I kick the bucket, I give them what I have left, if anything...and holy shit! I might actually avoid a nursing home. I swear to god, I'm checking out if my kids put me in one of those fucking places. I give them life and they put me in there... fuck it. This world doesn't allow for people to take care of their elderly and dying parents. Any one else sick of this shit yet? 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 18:42 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

I could concievably store it for the future on some medium that, oh.. I don't know.. stores wealth. My kids could do the same.. then, when I kick the bucket, I give them what I have left, if anything.

 

Parents could invest money in their childrens' education thereby increasing that generation's ability to earn and in turn support the parents. Parents could invest in capital goods like a farm or a store or a fabricating facility which would be eventually taken over by the children who would care for their elders in turn.

One can imagine myriad ways that our lives would be more fulfilling if we didn't have to hand over half of our incomes for the government's protection racket.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 20:20 | Link to Comment UGrev
UGrev's picture

This is part of the cycle. I would love to invest in my childrens' education.. but I'll be fucked after all the taxes and shit we have to pay, as well as trying to invest for my own retirement, if I can afford to put away enough (I still do, just not enough) for my kids. Then they're forced to take out loans.. what a miserable cirlcle jerk.

I went to school for psychology and ended up making a living as a software developer. Guess what.. I spent about 600.00 on books over the course of my eduction in programming and that was AFTER psych college. Man, I always wonder what I could have done if I didn't "almost waste" 4 years of college and I maybe spent 600.00 a year on learning how to program as well spent all that time I had without a wife/kids to support; what kind of education I could have given MYSELF. I guess I'll find out 4 years from now. 

The system is fucked up. It benefits no one but the recipients of our money. 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:03 | Link to Comment tip e. canoe
tip e. canoe's picture

funny...this is exactly what the chinese do.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:39 | Link to Comment StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

Why should your children put their lives on hold, taking care of you, until you finally die in a pool of your own filth?  There aren't enough hours in a day for two, let alone one person, to care of someone infirm or demented -- throw in having to raise children of their own, and it becomes obvious why nursing homes exist.  Native Americans had the right idea; once someone reached the age where they became mostly a burden on the family, they would go off into the woods and never return.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:49 | Link to Comment tmosley
tmosley's picture

Right, the Native American model was clearly superior to the European model, as is made obvious by the Native American colonization of Europe.

Oh wait, that isn't how it happened, is it?

Having extended family living with you is a blessing.  It means that you never need to look far to find someone to watch the children, or to run errands.  You can have multiple incomes in a single household as well.  Knowledge is also passed down from the grandparents to the grandchildren this way while the parents are working their jobs.

"Caring" for an elderly member of the family only becomes a burden at the very end.  If they live with their family, they will find ways to be helpful right up until they have gone deaf dumb and blind.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:53 | Link to Comment -Michelle-
-Michelle-'s picture

Nursing homes exist because people are afraid of death.  Instead of facing their twilight years with acceptance, people swallow dozens of pills daily in order to stave off the inevitable.

Instead of a quick diagnosis and rapid decline, at home and surrounded by family, the infirm are forced by well-meaning doctors and relatives to extend their lives to the point of misery.

And, no, I'm not advocating euthanasia.  I am pro-life, from natural conception to natural death.  It's just that death isn't very natural anymore.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 20:45 | Link to Comment tip e. canoe
tip e. canoe's picture

methinks you just smacked the keystone of the whole kitakaboogle.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 21:08 | Link to Comment ColonelCooper
ColonelCooper's picture

CLAP CLAP CLAP CLAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I would only add that "Big Pharma", whose evil is rivaled only by "Big Banks" have hijacked our entire medical existence, and greatly contribute to the problem.

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 15:16 | Link to Comment DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

another round of applause. Big Pharma, Big Banks, Big Oil, Big Media. They all have the same first name. They must be related.

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 02:02 | Link to Comment A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture

Pro-property rights. I have the right to terminate my existence should I become a burden to those around me, or my existence become too painful for me to bear.

Prolonging of life is more about the guilty consciences of the living, than it is for the benefit of the dying. Death is part of the cycle. Period.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 20:10 | Link to Comment UGrev
UGrev's picture

Have fun on your long walk. I would expect a little more out of my children that I raised them and took care of them in their piles of filth. At a such a young age they are mostly a burden too, are they not? You win the "Go screw yourself" award of the year. I may not be most knowledgable person when it comes to the markets.. but damn, bro.. at least I have a clue or two about life.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 20:37 | Link to Comment Eally Ucked
Eally Ucked's picture

What a bunch of american losers! For years grandpa & ma were providing you with whatever they could, to buy your toys. And now when SHTF they are dispensible and burden, what a sad end to that  most developed  society of yours.  

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 21:13 | Link to Comment UGrev
UGrev's picture

Umm. I think you replied to the wrong person. I'm all for children taking care of their parents. Heck, I helped take care of my grand-mother who had alzheimers when she lived WITH us. In fact, I went to school to study psychology with a focus in neuroscience to better understand the disease so I could help her more. 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 22:28 | Link to Comment Element
Element's picture

I think we can improve on that with a self-administered lethal dose of barbiturates in the woods, but yeah. The idea that we are chattels of the State, and that to top our self is a crime against the State, is really the ultimate in Govt arrogance and power over-reach.

 

(Well, besides the drafting and brainwashing mere kids to fight needless and pointless wars of utter butchery against some other state’s ‘chattels’).

I don't remember signing my freedom to chose what I do over to some State, ... but they sure want me to think that I did.

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 09:09 | Link to Comment pan-the-ist
pan-the-ist's picture

I think I might find a nice snowbank to fall asleep in when I am old enough to permanently retire.  Before then, I'd like to think that I could burden my children a bit.  I did wipe their asses when they were babies.

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 15:19 | Link to Comment DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

and they'll do the same for you someday. The circle

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:46 | Link to Comment wiskeyrunner
wiskeyrunner's picture

They will make younger workers pay into it knowing they will receive nothing, hey thats stealing.

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 00:51 | Link to Comment chinaguy
chinaguy's picture

Jesus tap dancing Christ - Obama is NOT going to announce cuts to SS. I mean - fer fucks sake- take a breath & weight the odds.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 23:21 | Link to Comment strannick
strannick's picture

Put yourself beyond the power of the corrupt politicos, and safeguard the children in the snow with some gold and silver

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:11 | Link to Comment High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

Getting rid of the old and the invalid. This is called Obama heath care.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 18:49 | Link to Comment Horatio Beanblower
Horatio Beanblower's picture

Bill Gates has a plan for that - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03MZG9vK0W8

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:37 | Link to Comment benb
benb's picture

Good link… Gates’ true mission is as a eugenics front man for the scientific dictatorship. Funding involuntary sterilization, depopulation, genetically modifying mosquitoes to give you a brain damaging vaccination…that’s what this monster is all about. I suppose there are a lot of people who believe the propaganda that this little scumbag ‘Made it on his own’ and now wants to help his fellow man. Not true.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:50 | Link to Comment Translational Lift
Translational Lift's picture

Me thinks Billy G has outlived his usefulness.......time for him to go and thanks to con-gress the US will get 35% of his estate.....that should help the defecit for a couple of days......

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:28 | Link to Comment Sig Sauer
Sig Sauer's picture

Sorry, but the US will likely get 0% of Gates' estate.  It will go to his foundation and/or Buffet's foundation, and escape taxation altogether.  He's probably already using other strategies such as GRATs to provide funds for his heirs, which will also escape estate taxation.  Wouldn't surprise me if the taxman gets less than 1% of his wealth, if any at all.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:02 | Link to Comment Translational Lift
Translational Lift's picture

"the teleprompter in chief is expected to announce cuts in Social Security"

This fucker has a death wish........Unless of course his intent is to eliminate benefits to illegals and others that have not paid into SS.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:43 | Link to Comment StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

Sorry to burst your bubble there, but EVERYONE that gets a paycheck has Social Security and FICA taxes withheld from them.  Illegal aliens don't get a chance to collect on their "investment" though -- in fact, this is the dirty little secret that the Govt won't reveal:  They're counting on "other" contributions (from illegal aliens!) to partially fund the shortfall, which is why the Govt is always dragging its feet on enforcing the Border(s) and immigration law(s)!

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:56 | Link to Comment -Michelle-
-Michelle-'s picture

I've often wondered what happens to those funds from illegals.  If they steal someone's social, wouldn't the contributions go to that person? 

Does anyone wind up getting an unusually big monthly payment and wonder how it came to be?

Or do the Feds know exactly which withholdings are illegitimate and use those to fill the slush funds?

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 22:24 | Link to Comment QQQBall
QQQBall's picture

There have been attempts to get bennies for Messykins that used stolen or "broowed" SS numbers. The movement would have their bennies send directly to Messyco.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 22:25 | Link to Comment QQQBall
QQQBall's picture

There have been attempts to get bennies for Messykins that used stolen or "borrowed" SS numbers. The movement would have their bennies send directly to Messyco.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 20:49 | Link to Comment tip e. canoe
tip e. canoe's picture

bingo.   what happens when the pink elephants leave the building in droves?

oops.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 20:45 | Link to Comment daveeemc2
daveeemc2's picture

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJeFrqBJF6E

Ole George was ahead of his time....n-joy!

 

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 03:28 | Link to Comment SmittyinLA
SmittyinLA's picture

Its just business, the Democrats see the elderly as a declining vote dying off & getting smaller every year,  as well as not paying theri vig at all any more, they'd rather pander to the broke humping masses, even if they can't get the alien invader's parental vote they can get their anchor baby kid's vote(s) which is a far bigger number anyway, besides they also have the alien parents vote through benefits paid to them for their anchor kids, its not like ID is checked when you register to vote anyway, they can do whatever they want through fraud RIGHT NOW. 

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:06 | Link to Comment D-Falt
D-Falt's picture

Everything our government is doing to drive intelligent money into commodities and thereby drive up the cost of eating and driving to work does far more to destroy fixed incomes than what pResident Obama will propose in his STFU address.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 14:49 | Link to Comment Rusty Shorts
Rusty Shorts's picture

Excuse me, but I would like to "opt Out" of the SS system, and please return the money that I have paid into the SS, plus any interest you fuckers have made off my back. I can handle my own retirement, fuck you very much.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:06 | Link to Comment Landrew
Landrew's picture

I would like money from you to cover all those in your family that received benefits for disability, retirement, death benefits etc. Did you forget we all have families that are covered? So you plan to take care of BoBo and Bettie Sue yourself?

FU very much

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:17 | Link to Comment yakmerchant
yakmerchant's picture

"I would like money from you"

 

Really?  Nice argurment Marxist d-bag.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:18 | Link to Comment Rusty Shorts
Rusty Shorts's picture

Do you really believe this is sustainable?

 

BoBo and Bettie Sue can take care of themselves, it's called taking responsibility. In the event that they cannot, then of course it's the families responsibility, not the gooberment. 

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 09:14 | Link to Comment pan-the-ist
pan-the-ist's picture

Yes it is sustainable.  Medicare, not so much, but that is because of the health care market's fanciful pricing on their goods and services.  The real crime is, as Bernie Sanders pointed out, the defunding of Social Security with a one year tax break.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:45 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

So you plan to take care of BoBo and Bettie Sue yourself?

Why would he when the government is taking care of them so well? It's not like Obama is going to stop cost of living increases or cut benefits, right?

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:20 | Link to Comment Bearster
Bearster's picture

ding ding ding! +10

One cannot speak of a "profit" in armed robbery.  Second, one cannot speak of a profit in a regime which forces all private businesses with revenues over a low threshold to use the ACCRUAL METHOD OF ACCOUNTING and yet the government quotes its "profits" using the CASH METHOD OF ACCOUNTING.

Accounting for dummies: if you give me $1 this year for a promise that I will pay you $10 next year, THEN I HAVE NOT MADE A PROFIT!!!

SS is bankrupt.  Spare us the altruistic, crocodile-tear-crying, hate the "golden guys" pap.  What cannot be paid will not be paid.  Rousing up righteous class warfare does not change these two facts.

And class warfare BS does not change the fact that the only way to extend-and-pretend that SS is solvent for a while longer is to keep looting (and increase the amount) of productive people.

I stand with Rusty.

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 09:23 | Link to Comment blindfaith
blindfaith's picture

with all due respect to you and Rusty...

next time you drive down the freeway remember that SS money made that possible, and a lot more.  There is nothing wrong with SS, what is wrong is the government "borrowing" SS money (at interest rates IT chooses to pay)...and then doesn't pay it back, but rolls it over with cheaper dollars!  (and, oh yes, lets put those retirement dollars in the bogus stock market and let Goldman or JPM manage it because you will not be able to...are you nuts?). 

You want to see where the real crime is, go look at government retirement plans, which get supplemented by your income tax( not so with SS), because the payments they pay are a fraction of the cost.  If those SOLID GOLD benefits don't make you ANGRY, then you are just another FOX news/Republican cheerleader who can't see truth and doesn't want to either.

As for my President, likely if the Democrats don't run him, the Rupublicans will.  Who needs Sara when you have Obama.  AND, YES...I am changing parties...like so many elected Democrats I don't want to be caught 'on the wrong side of this fence'.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:56 | Link to Comment minus dog
minus dog's picture

"Excuse me, but I would like to "opt Out" of the SS system, and please return the money that I have paid into the SS, plus any interest you fuckers have made off my back. I can handle my own retirement, fuck you very much."

I hear this a lot.  You didn't "pay into" anything - you paid a tax.

The government already spent the money you "paid into the SS", at the time you paid them.  You're money is right there - in the subsidized housing, the food stamps, the roadways, etc.  Welcome to the Ponzi scheme.  

Not saying you don't have my sympathy here, but those with 20-30 years of payroll taxes down the drain have had all that time to notice and do something about this.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:22 | Link to Comment linrom
linrom's picture

Is that you Karl Denniger, duchebag.

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 06:20 | Link to Comment Judge Smales
Judge Smales's picture

You only misspelled the target of your insult and the insult itself.

Other than that, fantastic post.

Another potentially great ZH thread steered straight into the damn ditch.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:30 | Link to Comment razorthin
razorthin's picture

so much for the "lock box"

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:49 | Link to Comment StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

True enough, but how, short of medical x-rays, does one determine if elected officials running for office, have the spine it takes to actually cut/reform popular spending programs?

Respect for religion must be reestablished. Public debt should be reduced.
The arrogance of public officials must be curtailed. Assistance to foreign
lands must be stopped or we shall bankrupt ourselves. The people should be forced to work and not depend on government for subsistence. - Cicero, 60 B.C

When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald
the end of the republic. — Benjamin Franklin

As you can see, this is an ages-old political problem!

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 11:51 | Link to Comment TJ_is_annoyed
TJ_is_annoyed's picture

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald
the end of the republic. — Benjamin Franklin"

 

And that is exactly what we see.  We (society in general) like to think that we are so enlightened, and people of times past (founders) didn't have a clue.  I suspect that were the founders to see what has become of their creation, the revolution would begin immediately.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:12 | Link to Comment High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

You can't opt out. Social security is about much more than just helping a person out when they get old. It all about control.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:32 | Link to Comment cxl9
cxl9's picture

Not true, strictly speaking. Some Amish, for example, do not have to pay into the Social Security ponzi scheme.

[ from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish ]

In 1961, the United States Internal Revenue Service announced that since the Amish refuse Social Security benefits and have a religious objection to insurance, they need not pay these taxes. In 1965, this policy was codified into law.

Also from Wikipedia, amusingly:

Claim that it is a pyramid or Ponzi scheme

One criticism of the analogy is that: Ponzi schemes and social security have similar structures but different transparencies; The true Ponzi scheme proffers a mythical source of revenue-generation,while social security payments have always been openly underwritten by tax revenue.

This is priceless! The rebuttal to the charge of Social Security being a ponzi scheme is that it cannot be since participation in the scheme is forced at gunpoint! Who came up with that explanation? Krugman?

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 20:01 | Link to Comment -Michelle-
-Michelle-'s picture

Not just the Amish.  Many public system retirees are exempt as well. 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:16 | Link to Comment jackpile
jackpile's picture

Here here! I've been thinking the same thing for quite awhile. In fact, I'd like to open a class action lawsuit if I don't ever get back all of the money I paid in at inflation adjusted dollars plus 8% annual interest. This SS program was a complete disaster from the start and FDR I'm sure knew this was simply another way to steal more wealth from the population and control it at the same time. I want to opt out of SS. I can manage my own retirement plan thank you very much. I mean, look at how they are not even giving SS recipients cost of living increases. The whole USG will implode any month now anyway.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:31 | Link to Comment rwe2late
rwe2late's picture

 Logically,

you must also contend that billionaires should not be taxed at all, because they have no need to be provided with government services they can afford themselves.

In short, only the poor should be taxed, since they are the ones most likely to need government assistance.

By the way, there are roads I do not use. I don't want to be taxed for their upkeep. And I only want to pay for police and fire protection in my neighborhood.

And if you get sick and lose your job, I don't want to help you or your family either.

It's all against all. No more cooperation, just let the "market" decide, that's the ticket.

Of course, we'll need government to enforce property laws, especially my property, divine rights and all, and ..

 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:50 | Link to Comment cxl9
cxl9's picture

you must also contend that billionaires should not be taxed at all, because they have no need to be provided with government services they can afford themselves.

No. But billionaires should not have a greater tax burden than any other citizen. Even a flat income tax is unfair: someone making $1M/year should not pay to the government 100x that of someone making $10K/year, even if he can afford it. The only fair income tax would be a flat head tax. Say, $1000/year for every adult. Government wants to raise the tax? No problem. They do it for all 200 million adult citizens. No exceptions, no deductions, no exclusions, no rebates, no subsidies.

That would help starve the beast. Modern centralized nation-state governments have been able to become the vast, murderous leviathans they are today only because of their ability to raise huge sums of tax revenue. The only way to ever get them under control again, and to restrict their ability to murder and oppress, is to starve them of revenue. I dispair of that ever happening, but I can dream.

 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 17:22 | Link to Comment rwe2late
rwe2late's picture

 My comment was a sarcastic reply to those who wish to "opt out" of paying taxes for programs they do not personally benefit from.

Your individual "head tax" idea disregards a number of valid questions concerning income, such as difference in the social worth between wage and rentier income,

 and the possible social value in preventing too great an accumulation and concentration of wealth and (political) power.

Restricting government income alone may only result in the most deplorable programs being continued at the expense of the most worthwhile.

 

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 01:29 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

My comment was a sarcastic reply to those who wish to "opt out" of paying taxes for programs they do not personally benefit from.

 

Please send me all your money. I assure you that you will derive no benefit. Here's your chance to prove what a good and smart person you are.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 18:13 | Link to Comment MagicHandPuppet
MagicHandPuppet's picture

Logically, only those who opt for having a gun held against their head with the threat of themselves being put in gubmint rape cages should be taxed.  Everyone else who desires freedom from being robbed at gunpoint shouldn't be taxed.  Does that help clarify your sarcastic follies?

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 18:49 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

It's all against all. No more cooperation, just let the "market" decide, that's the ticket.

 

"All against all" is the philosophy behind the entitlement society. Free markets depend on voluntary cooperation. When you attack freedom you support tyranny.

 

 

Of course, we'll need government to enforce property laws, especially my property, divine rights and all, and


What makes you think that rights would not be protected far more consistently and efficiently by free men rather than by political pawns?

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:26 | Link to Comment rufus13
rufus13's picture

I would like to "opt-out" of Social Security FICA taking pay from me in the future. In return, I will opt out of all alleged benefits that might be added to my "account". I will invest the 15% for my own benefit. . 

They can keep the money already stolen!  It's gone anyway. 

I am 43 and have plenty of time before I die to save some money of my own.  Retirement is not really an option as long as I am 80% functional and don't have 100 years wages saved in the bank/PM's/good ag land.  My Grandparents all lived into their late 90's, in good health after working with asbestos/smoking/drinking/eggs-bacon every day. 

Of course, they can not agree to this. They will increase the rate of taxation (while giving head-fake on "employee withholding") on all paycheck- workers until workers can not afford to feed a family or live in decent housing. I will work ever harder to support the 6 leeches who are unwilling to work or self-caused-unable (drugs/alcohol abuse) in addition to legitimate retirees. 

 

Gone Galt. 

 

Cheers.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 14:53 | Link to Comment Jupiter
Jupiter's picture

 

Actually, this is good news, and should be supported.

As much as people may dislike Obama as president, if there are changes made to the failing SS system, they should be lauded.

This is politically very difficult, and I'm actually rather surprised. 

 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:09 | Link to Comment Apostate
Apostate's picture

I'll celebrate it when they eliminate the tax and let the banks fail so that people can repossess their homes.

Until then, I'll dub this the gratuitous enabling of further looting.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 14:52 | Link to Comment Djirk
Djirk's picture

That job sucks, he is ready to go, write a couple books, cash out and run a foundation funded by all those he made boatloads for. In and out done!

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 14:56 | Link to Comment almost_have_a_name
almost_have_a_name's picture

 "I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your President."


Sun, 12/19/2010 - 14:59 | Link to Comment Rusty Shorts
Rusty Shorts's picture

Harumph

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:41 | Link to Comment knukles
knukles's picture

Here, here.  Jolly good, old boy.  Kepping with the finest of democratic traditions.  Well done laddie.  They say the wars in the East go well, eh what?

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:19 | Link to Comment breezer1
breezer1's picture

there is no president. just competing crime gangs.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:50 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

 "I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your President."

 

So they're going to trot out Humphrey again?

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:26 | Link to Comment Bam_Man
Bam_Man's picture

No, this time it's "crazy Joe" Biden.

"Congratultions President-elect Palin on your victory." 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 17:40 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

Can't we dig up Pat Paulsen?

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 00:44 | Link to Comment palmereldritch
palmereldritch's picture

Frankly I'm a little disappointed about O'Blivion, the first fully organic natural spawn of the CIA delivered as US President and after all this...he's just going to be a bag man and take the money and run...such is the history of the agency I guess.

But to leave us with a lobotomized reality show MILF Oval Office...Wow. That's just cold.

 

What was that quote? Something about the democracy or the tyranny you deserve?

Oh well.  Guess it doesn't matter.

The gulag WILL NOT be televised.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 18:05 | Link to Comment Things that go bump
Things that go bump's picture

That quote was from President Lyndon B. Johnson, a man so crass he was known to slap his dick on a table and invite other men to show him theirs.  He wanted the presidency so badly he may even have played a part in the assassination of Kennedy.  He got what he lusted after, but it turned to ashes in his mouth.  He was unelectable for another term and he knew it.   Another Texan.  

 

Poor old Hubert Humphrey died a disappointed man.  

 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 18:33 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

Poor old Hubert Humphrey died a disappointed man.

 

Because he couldn't set the table as lavishly as LBJ?

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 23:23 | Link to Comment Things that go bump
Things that go bump's picture

No doubt.  

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 09:49 | Link to Comment bigdumbnugly
bigdumbnugly's picture

if it's true that the size of a man's earlobes is any indication...

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 14:59 | Link to Comment Royal Fleming
Royal Fleming's picture

 "I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your President."

clap,clap,clap,clap

 

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 11:57 | Link to Comment Bicycle Repairman
Bicycle Repairman's picture

+11/22/63

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:04 | Link to Comment onlooker
onlooker's picture

First off Politico is a somewhat to the left group that was started to assist Obama in his bid for President. The thrust is the advancement for the Democrat party, not the welfare of the USA or the general population of the USA.

 

Second is a question. I think that some of the Municipal, State, and Federal workers may have retirement plans that are not 100% social security, maybe some that are 0%. Maybe government retirement folks will escape the knife? In California, many retire at close to full pay, esp. prison and law enforcement.

 

Politico’s fear of major damage to Obama may be overstated. Most of the older population is not in the Obama camp, now. And the older Black population does not have major numbers to do anything, UNLESS the NAACP might step in--- I don’t think so. The younger population has known for years the SS was not going to be there.

 

What it could do, if the Republicans want to pull the “compassionate conservative mask” back out of the bag, is to give the Republicans an opportunity to espouse that the survival of the fittest is no longer their mantra.

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 09:35 | Link to Comment blindfaith
blindfaith's picture

bve carefull what you wish for.  Ol' Newt down in Georgia was for national health care when he was in congress ( so was Nixon and Esinhower, as well as several other national programs to benefit the nation as a whole)  They all believed that a strong health people was the basis for a strong health nation.

So what happened?

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:17 | Link to Comment blindfaith
blindfaith's picture

bve carefull what you wish for.  Ol' Newt down in Georgia was for national health care when he was in congress ( so was Nixon and Esinhower, as well as several other national programs to benefit the nation as a whole)  They all believed that a strong health people was the basis for a strong health nation.

So what happened?

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:03 | Link to Comment GreenSideUp
GreenSideUp's picture

Raise your hand if you didn't see something like this coming.  Next up, confiscation of 401-ks and IRAs, for our own good.  There's plenty of stuff to cut: how 'bout those endless wars, bases all over the world, foreign aid/bribery, corporate welfare, subsidies galore, 100% of the Departments of Education (sic), Energy and probably 20 others.  And that's just for starters. 

I'm all for getting rid of entitlements but for God's sake, people have been stolen from for years to "fund" social security.  At the very least, the stolen funds should be returned to their rightful owner. 

Chalk another one up in the "they don't give a damn about us" department.

 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:24 | Link to Comment Bearster
Bearster's picture

Mostly good reply Green.  But one error: people have not "paid in" to "fund" anything.  They have *paid out* to older people in the great pyramid scheme.  Like with any ponzi scheme, the money is destroyed.  It's gone.

Now the only debate is whether they take those losses, or whether they get the government to rob me so that I can pay for their losses.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:38 | Link to Comment GreenSideUp
GreenSideUp's picture

I most completely and thoroughly understand the ponzi that SS is; thus I put "fund" in quotes. I'm also self-employed so I'm acutely aware of how much is stolen from us.

My "argument" is mostly emotional, yes.  I'm pissed off that it's always us little people who are first in line to take it up the a$$, meanwhile, not one peep comes out of the District of Criminals regarding cutting any of the other massively wasteful programs, most certainly not for cutting the welfare for the banksters or Big Anything; those who line their pockets. 

It's beyond sickening. 

 

 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:58 | Link to Comment NumberNone
NumberNone's picture

It's always that way.  When local governments run into financial issues it's always the police and fire departments that get threatened first.  This is no different than mafia protection money..."Better keep the money coming or we might not be able to keep an eye on things and something bad might happen to you or your family". 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 20:48 | Link to Comment zero-g
zero-g's picture

Isn't that the sad truth. One thing that doesn't come to the front enough is the fact we spend now over 50% of our budget on the ultimate sacred cow of the US, the military industrial complex. BTW, that doesn't count their 'black budgets', which are funded by alot of shady stuff, like running Afghani herion, and the normal drug trade in the US. Just think, we could cut 70 or 80 percent and still spend way too much to defend our country, the purpose of the military, or at least it used to be.

 Oh, you thought drug running was a one time thing just for the Iran-Contra affair, right.................

There is plenty of evidence linking the CIA to drug running, try and prove me wrong.

sorry for the rant

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:11 | Link to Comment rwe2late
rwe2late's picture

 For decades, SS has run a surplus over payments. The surplus collected has not been invested but deceptively "loaned", and tossed into general receipts, there to be used to pay for militarism, pork barrel etc.

In short, it has been misused to disguise a regressive income tax.

Only now, when payments are beginning to catch up with receipts, do the plutocrats begin to talk of "unsustainability", and defaulting the bonds (loans) they were so free in borrowing.

Heaven forbid they should first have to reveal and cut back global militarism, plutocrat tax breaks, and bankster largesse, before examining what this nation can "afford".

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:28 | Link to Comment Bam_Man
Bam_Man's picture

Heaven forbid they should first have to reveal and cut back global militarism, plutocrat tax breaks, and bankster largesse, before examining what this nation can "afford".

That ain't the way the game is played, son.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:03 | Link to Comment Blano
Blano's picture

Just separate Social Security back out of the budget like it used to be.  Quit using the SS surplus to fund other shit.  Problem solved.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:04 | Link to Comment Croesus
Croesus's picture

 

MUST SEE conversation with Barack Obama:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9b7RmJJP5uM

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:04 | Link to Comment midtowng
midtowng's picture

How come the Republicans never seem to elect presidents that betray their own supporters, but Democrats do?

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:09 | Link to Comment tmosley
tmosley's picture

You think the Republicans for the last 50+ years haven't been betraying their supporters?

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:15 | Link to Comment Croesus
Croesus's picture

Was that a general statement, or directed at me?

I don't even bother voting any more, since I don't really see any difference between Republicans or Democrats: Corrupt is corrupt, any way you slice it.

Betrayal runs deep in both parties, yet the voting public in this country keeps electing assholes who promise the moon, but just deliver "More of the Same", which serves the interests of campaign contributors and lobbyists in direct proportion to the amount of money they contribute. 

 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:21 | Link to Comment Terminus C
Terminus C's picture

What is the point of "voting", they are all scum sucking, puss ridden salmonella filled leaches that need to be shot in the stomach and left to die in the hot desert surrounded by vultures ready to pick out their eyes.

Now that is hope and change you can believe in.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:01 | Link to Comment Real Estate Geek
Real Estate Geek's picture

Too bad that won't fit on a bumper sticker.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:35 | Link to Comment cossack55
cossack55's picture

WB7....hint,hint

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:34 | Link to Comment docj
docj's picture

That's some unintentionally hillarious stuff there, bucko.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:37 | Link to Comment mtguy
mtguy's picture

WTF? Do you actually think that people who voted for Bush don't feel at least a bit betrayed? For christ sake, he started 2 wars, Allowed more pork than Jimmy Dean could make sausages from (from both sides of the aisle)... There are lots of us who consider ourselves "conservative", but don't hang our hats on the Repubics as most are just as greedy and as the Dem's.

They are out of control and we've let them get that way by voting our stupid party lines and not thinking about the candidate that isn't looking for ultimate power, but rather the good of the people. Call me a dreamer, but this shit has got to stop or this country is going to go through complete destruction. I mean come on, the leading Repubic is Romney? People please do your homework! (Start randomly calling MA residents to see how that Romney-care is going. How's that helping their budgets?)

This is what happens when I stay home on a weekend instead of playing in the mountains - I get all grouchy! Think I'll hit the punching bag for a while...

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 17:19 | Link to Comment Croesus
Croesus's picture

Look at that: a Sheeple junked all of us. I thought ZH was a sheeple-free zone.

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 03:14 | Link to Comment midtowng
midtowng's picture

I definately got the feeling that Republican voters were fully on-board with Bush's wars. In fact, it still seems that the only fault that Bush made was not invading Iran too.

I also got the feeling that Republican voters were fully on-board with the enlargement of the police state, massive increases in defense spending, torturing prisoners, and tax cuts for the wealthy.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:08 | Link to Comment Terminus C
Terminus C's picture

Social Security is in surplus for the next 27 years

LOL what are these guys smokin? 

This is all political theatre, Obama keeps taxes lower - he is bad.  Obama cuts spending - he is bad.  Obama saves the world from a meteor by destroying it with his laser beam eyes - he is bad.

This "analysis" is garbage and a pointless distraction away from the real issue... giant vampire squids sucking the life out of the country and the world.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:37 | Link to Comment docj
docj's picture

This "analysis" is garbage and a pointless distraction away from the real issue... giant vampire squids sucking the life out of the country and the world.

Ding!  Gotta drain every last ounce of wealth out of what little is left of the middle-class before it all comes crashing down and TPTB jet-off to the pre-determined non-extradition treaty country of their chosing.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:40 | Link to Comment kaiserhoff
kaiserhoff's picture

Smoking hopium, what else?

1 Social Security went cash flow negative this year.  Politico's bogus accounting and gum pounding mean less than nothing. 

2 Social Security has been a fraud since its inception in the mid-30s.  It was inevitable that it would eventually be means tested, and admitted to be a welfare program for the elderly.  The "pension" facade is over.

3 The actuarial problems of Medicare and Medicaid make Socialist Security look almost tame.

4 Has anyone else noticed that political discourse here proceeds from the Dim perspective?  First Ilene, always leaning left.  Now Politico.  What's next, Move on.commie?  Maybe it's a New Yawk thang.

 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 17:01 | Link to Comment rwe2late
rwe2late's picture

 Ending the subsidies to the pharmaceutical, health insurance, and health industries would also end the "actuarial problems of Medicare and Medicaid.

Your mistaken complaint about SS has been addressed in preceding comments.

 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 17:36 | Link to Comment Greenhead
Greenhead's picture

I'd go for that plus ending the subsidies to farmers, banks, universities, and every other special interest group looking for a special deal and protection of its own position at the expense of the general public.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 20:51 | Link to Comment zero-g
zero-g's picture

+1

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 17:36 | Link to Comment Greenhead
Greenhead's picture

I'd go for that plus ending the subsidies to farmers, banks, universities, and every other special interest group looking for a special deal and protection of its own position at the expense of the general public.

sorry double post

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 01:05 | Link to Comment Rusty Shorts
Rusty Shorts's picture

No worries, it needed to be said again ... and again.

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 01:07 | Link to Comment Rusty Shorts
Rusty Shorts's picture

"I'd go for that plus ending the subsidies to farmers, banks, universities, and every other special interest group looking for a special deal and protection of its own position at the expense of the general public."

 

 - Greenhead

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 18:11 | Link to Comment kaiserhoff
kaiserhoff's picture

I'm very much in favor of ending subsidies for health care, but we also need to end the absurd monopoly powers and endless third party payment system.  Those will be long and bitter fights at best. 

As to my "mistaken" view of SS, what is it you don't understand about a Ponzi scheme?

On balance, I agree with Dismal.  It's far too late for any reforms to prevent a financial collapse, so the short answer to your screen name is, yes.  The primary reason to hash out these issues now, is that there will be a morning after.  We need to identify and fix the economic falacies that led to this mess.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 20:03 | Link to Comment StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

Identifying and fixing economic fallacies implies some Intelligence in Govt can be found --- Bwahahaha!

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:13 | Link to Comment breezer1
breezer1's picture

not necessarily off topic...

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=Z2mf8DtWWd8

drive safely.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:20 | Link to Comment Steak
Steak's picture


These will be the last playlists I post for y'all. While it is not immediately apparent, there is a synergy between music and this site.  How that tradition will or won't continue in the future is something I'm not in a position to answer or influence, yet its my sincere hope that it does continue. To all y'all who have enjoyed these: thanks for clicking, dancing, contributing and coming to ZH in the first place.

Artist of 2010 - Arty: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=59866B8C070FA64C

Best of 2010 - Statica & Heatbeat: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=F79EBE9FB77C107C

Freshy Fresh (a freshened up from the last time playlist):http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=B64086D4A6EDA49C

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:58 | Link to Comment traderjoe
traderjoe's picture

Why last steak?

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:32 | Link to Comment Steak
Steak's picture

just one of those things when you know its time and something has run its course.  it was always nice hearing from ya traderjoe.  all the best to ya homie

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:49 | Link to Comment zero-g
zero-g's picture

Thanks for the music. I would have never heard great stuff like 'black is the new yellow' and the 'Prometheus' remix, which are awesome.

 

Thanks

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 20:23 | Link to Comment Bolweevil
Bolweevil's picture

Your contributions to ZH are greatly appreciated. Maybe some will rise to the occassion and drop some knowledge in your stead. Happy whatever you celebrate brother.

Mon, 12/20/2010 - 01:31 | Link to Comment Rusty Shorts
Rusty Shorts's picture

Steak, thanks for that "Freshy Fresh" ... good stuff.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:12 | Link to Comment tip e. canoe
tip e. canoe's picture

thanks for the vibes steak. 

agree that music is a critical linkage to this sordid tale.

hasta luego amigo.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:39 | Link to Comment Sisyphus
Sisyphus's picture

Steak,

If I read between the lines, I get a hidden message from your message. But, maybe I have been galivanting much and need to settle down to get my mind cleared. Are you indirectly, tangentially or diagonally hinting at a change/some changes that has/have taken place within the bowels of this site?

 

So long, Marla!

 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:20 | Link to Comment Jim Billy Bob J...
Jim Billy Bob James IV's picture

Same ol' same ol'.

When things get really bad, sometime the only solution is really bad.

A relevant example is the French Revolution. Bad behavior by the elite leads to bad behavior by the peasantry.

Same ol' same ol'.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:34 | Link to Comment Bahamas
Bahamas's picture

The French Revolution was orchestrated by the same Illuminati bankers and ended with the King beheaded, same as English revolution before and Russian Revolution after. All heads rolled to establish "democracy"......... ye right!

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:21 | Link to Comment blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

If you read it in Politico, it's probably bullshit.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:22 | Link to Comment Quinvarius
Quinvarius's picture

Soylent Ethanol!

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:29 | Link to Comment liberal sodomy
liberal sodomy's picture

I welcome the collapse.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:29 | Link to Comment Bahamas
Bahamas's picture

Webster Tarpley called Obama "the ventriloquist dummy", Mattias Chang named him "the mouthpiece", some other name I read was "the  hologram", but I think the "teleprompter in chief" is the best nick name so far!

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:45 | Link to Comment knukles
knukles's picture

There are a bazillion fucking things to cut before SS, Medicare and Medicaid.  Fucking bazillion.
But oh no, slice the shit outta the poor, weakest, sick, old and infirmed before the bankers, politicians, federal employee unions, uber rich.... 
More looting of the working class.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:06 | Link to Comment GreenSideUp
GreenSideUp's picture

+A fucking bazillion.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 17:13 | Link to Comment MagicHandPuppet
MagicHandPuppet's picture

Heaven forbid they cut military spending.  Then they'd have to let the free market and/or local politics determine which currency will be used for the sell of oil, natural gas, and other resources.  The mere thought of this may anger Management.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 19:33 | Link to Comment yabyum
yabyum's picture

Well said Mr.Zippy

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:52 | Link to Comment tahoebumsmith
tahoebumsmith's picture

It all spells one word...AUSTERITY. Just like the Euro Zone, it is now coming to America. The Corporations have sold us down the river so that an entitled few can make their 44 million dollar bonuses and the goverment has handed 13.5 TRILLION over to the Oligarchy. Now it's payback time and they are going after the very ones they stole it from. And you wondered why they included SSI tax cuts in the bill? To cover for their next move when they cut twice as much as they have given. This is what happens when a country is bankrupt and they continue to spend as if the problem will just go away. Things will continue in a downward spiral as the coffers continue to dry up. How long did you think they could pull this off anyway? I'm surprised they have been able to HOODWINK the masses for as long as they have. Then again 13.5 trillion buys you some time and lots of green shoots, unfortunately the game is catching up with them and sustainability will no longer be possible. Just look at the State of California, this will be what everybody else will look like before too long.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:01 | Link to Comment DR
DR's picture

Indeed!

AUSTERITY so bankers can have their bonuses!

What a country!

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:56 | Link to Comment virgilcaine
virgilcaine's picture

 Bohner would screw us all...the Repubs are a bunch of whooores as well. Just a different clientele. 

His crying every 5 mins  waah,.. is an embarressment.. Gulit has a way of eating your soul.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:52 | Link to Comment SlorgGamma
SlorgGamma's picture

[Sustained and hideous cackle of post-American doom.]

This country is coming apart just like post-Soviet Russia, only much faster. It took Russia eight years to melt down completely, but we're on track for total implosion in another eighteen months or so.

This is a failed Empire which borrowed trillions from the BRICs in order to piss it all away on the failed colonial wars and failed bankster scams which created history's most gigantic and bloated debt bubble. Raiding the $2 trillion or so in Social Security's vaults will do nothing to stop the implosion, but it will dramatically impoverish the 53 million Americans who depend on Social Security for their survival, reduce effective demand, and transform this country into a nation of a few oligarchs and many paupers.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:23 | Link to Comment ForWhomTheTollBuilds
ForWhomTheTollBuilds's picture

" Raiding the $2 trillion or so in Social Security's vaults will do nothing to stop the implosion, but it will dramatically impoverish the 53 million Americans who depend on Social Security for their survival"

 

Why should it be any different here than in Ireland?

 

I disagree about the collapse coming so fast, though I wish you were right.  A swift collapse would leave a significant amount of wealth in the hands of the non-elites - enough to make a new start.  Over the last few years the elites have demonstrated that more than enough mechanisms exist to drain nearly everything from every productive citizen on earth before the final collapse gets underway.

No...  Its going to be long, slow, and seemingly never ending.  The glee with which common people turn each other over to the state for trying to protect themselves will be the hardest thing for me to watch.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:37 | Link to Comment Bob
Bob's picture

What failed Bankster scams? Try looking through the eyes of a banker for a change.  I see nothing but exquisite success.  Victory

Mission Accomplished. 

Good thing they groomed Barry for his Great Rendezvous with Destiny.  Bush and Cheney could never have pulled this off.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 18:42 | Link to Comment The Disappointed
The Disappointed's picture

Agree totally!

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 15:55 | Link to Comment Real Estate Geek
Real Estate Geek's picture

Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) compared . . .

I just threw up in my mouth.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:02 | Link to Comment virgilcaine
virgilcaine's picture

Wait until they see the angry Mob with pitchforks (older folk can be ornery)... they think Obama can "sell" this BS to the public.. not going to happen. 

Celente is right about the riots coming.. its a coming.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:20 | Link to Comment Problem Is
Problem Is's picture

They won't overtly cut current retirees... Just back door stealth cuts the oldsters can't catch onto...

They will cut every future person who is going to retire... That avoids firing up the oldsters...

BTW: I agree with Celente. The G-man is a classic...

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:55 | Link to Comment MagicHandPuppet
MagicHandPuppet's picture

I agree.  The methods I expect to squeeze the supposed benefactors will be incrementally increasing retirement ages (that's going wonderfully in Europe ain't it?), and reducing, obscuring, or freezing inflation adjustments.  Those getting the checks will still get the checks, but as we know the buying power will begin to rapidly dwindle.

On a bright futuristic outlook, maybe one day they'll just send us all bags of coca-cola syrup as our social security "payments" to help kill us off faster once we no longer pay into the ponzi.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 16:02 | Link to Comment bankonzhongguo
bankonzhongguo's picture

The real scheme is to privatize social security.  The idea is to take the government default, cuts and/or freezes as compared to rising food prices and show a systemic failure, but to show how the stock market has kept pace with inflation and hence monthly paycheck social security payments need to be routed directly to wall street.  It is a mirror image of the individual mandate - just send your money to the Corporations and everything will be fine.

Obama.  What a complete turncoat Corporate shriv.

Bush/Cheney could have never perfected these crimes against American Citizens.

The true meaning of Wicked.

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 17:19 | Link to Comment ThirdCoastSurfer
ThirdCoastSurfer's picture

I second that! 

That's why Buffet says Dow 100,000 is neigh. 

Of course to make a $1 in the market you have to take it from someone else. So privatization will set up the ever widening gap of winners and losers and Goldman, et. al., never lose -not even for a day!

Given this, I can't imagine that Obama will possibly touch the third rail while it's still so electrified. Surely they are all defining the fight for 2012. 

 

 

Sun, 12/19/2010 - 23:51 | Link to Comment Terminus C
Terminus C's picture

They are proposing just this in Canada as well.

Silver bitchez!

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!