Welcome to the American Revolution II

Welcome to the American Revolution II
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.
"We face a hostile ideology global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose and insidious in method..." and warned about what he saw as unjustified government spending proposals and continued with a warning that "we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex... The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist... Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."Dwight D. Eisenhower
Showing posts with label Social Security. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Security. Show all posts

Sunday, April 11, 2010

United States Monetary Tsunami

The Coming Entitlement Tsunami, By the Democratic Party:

by Michael D. Tanner

Michael Tanner is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and coauthor of Leviathan on the Right: How Big-Government Conservatism Brought Down the Republican Revolution.

Added to cato.org on April 7, 2010

This article appeared in the Daily Caller on April 6, 2010

Now that we've finished creating a new $1 trillion health care entitlement program, Washington has suddenly discovered that we are facing a crisis with—surprise—entitlement programs.

No one should be shocked to learn that government spending is out of control. In fact, last year, federal spending topped 24.7 percent of gross domestic product last year, the highest peacetime percentage in U.S. history. That compares to an historical average of roughly 21 percent. Meanwhile, federal taxes have traditionally run at around 18 percent of GDP. (Currently, they are down around 16 percent as the economic downturn—though that lower percentage has predictably become fodder for those looking for any excuse to ratchet up tax rates and depress the economy further). Thus, our current budget deficits.

Even President Obama has recognized the problem. Well, sort of: after presiding over an orgy of federal spending that could even put George W. Bush to shame, he has promised to freeze discretionary, non-defense spending…next year.

No one should be shocked to learn that government spending is out of control.

But our current budget squall is nothing compared to the tsunami to come. And the big wave has almost nothing to do with the 12 percent of the budget that Obama may or may not freeze after the next election. Our major entitlement programs, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, are all careening toward insolvency.

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgA9hR5gVKyhV1iqdkX3uOhzySa4nSTxV3PeO2fgctzKxZRgvF0TuqqRDiLsb_Sv8cpbSeHEIJYzPXDrZv4E-9mjqn1jXpIFokYRcBzz2TvzTYFsTAxEAHSH0Ps-vmPcr0qgfVVRaXdeZZ9/s1600/SocialSecurity.jpg

Social Security faces unfunded liabilities of more than $15.8 trillion. And while that sounds like a lot of money, it is dwarfed by Medicare's looming budget shortfall of between $50 and $100 trillion, depending on which accounting measure is used. Because of its funding mechanisms, Medicaid does face the same type of accounting shortfalls, but it will soon add hundreds of billions of dollars to federal, not to mention state, spending.

As the full force of entitlement programs kicks in, the federal government will consume more than 40 percent of GDP by the middle of the century. Half of that will be taken up by just those three entitlement programs. From there, it only gets worse.

Faced with this rising tide of red ink, the traditional response in Washington is that we must have the "courage" to raise taxes. But think about how much taxes would actually have to be raised to pay for all the government spending to come. And it's not just the "rich" who would get soaked. In fact, if you confiscated the wealth of every person in the United States earning over $1 million per year, you would barely make a dent in our future obligations.

If we really wanted to pay for the amount of spending to come, we would have to raise both the corporate tax rate and top income tax rate from their current 35 percent to 88 percent, the current 25 percent tax rate for middle-income workers to 63 percent, and the 10 percent tax bracket for low-income workers to 25 percent.

http://www.cato.org/people/images/hires_new/tanner.jpgMichael Tanner is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and coauthor of Leviathan on the Right: How Big-Government Conservatism Brought Down the Republican Revolution.
More by Michael D. Tanner

In theory that would eliminate the deficit, but as a society we would be much poorer. After all, every dollar that government spends is a dollar that is siphoned off from American workers regardless of whether it is raised through debt or taxes. Both divert money from more efficient uses in the private sector to less-productive uses in the public sector. Both mean fewer jobs and less economic growth.

More importantly, we should remember that every dollar the government spends is one less dollar that you can spend on food, clothing, housing, charitable contributions, or other goods and services of their choosing. It is, after all, your money.

What's missing in Washington is not the courage to raise taxes, but the courage to cut spending. Unfortunately, that type of courage truly remains lacking—on a bipartisan basis.

Recently, Rep Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.)—one of the youngest members of Congress at age 40, but seemingly one of the few adults left in Washington—put forward a comprehensive proposal to reform entitlement programs and bring government spending back down to historical levels. His plan attracted fewer than a dozen co-sponsors. No one from the Republican leadership backed it; they were too busy complaining that the Democratic health care bill cut Medicare. (It actually won't, unfortunately.)

And the Democrats? Their latest contribution has been the aforementioned health care bill, with its unprecedented level of budget chicanery to hide its true costs.

It has long been a truism that "if something cannot go on, it will eventually stop." In Washington these days, Congress seems determined to prove that wrong.

Michael Tanner heads research into a variety of domestic policies with a particular emphasis on health care reform, social welfare policy, and Social Security. His most recent book, Leviathan on the Right: How Big-Government Conservatism Brought Down the Republican Revolution (2007), chronicles the demise of the Republican party as it has shifted away from its limited government roots and warns that reform is necessary to avoid continual electoral defeat.

Under Tanner's direction, Cato launched the Project on Social Security Choice, which is widely considered the leading impetus for transforming the soon-to-be-bankrupt system into a private savings program. Time Magazine calls Tanner, "one of the architects of the private accounts movement," and Congressional Quarterly named him one of the nation's five most influential experts on Social Security.

His other books include, Healthy Competition: What's Holding Back Health Care and How to Free It (Second Edition, 2007), The Poverty of Welfare: Helping Others in Civil Society (2003), and A New Deal for Social Security (1998). Tanner's writings have appeared in nearly every major American newspaper, including the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal, and USA Today. A prolific writer and frequent guest lecturer, Tanner appears regularly on network and cable news programs. Before joining Cato in 1993, Tanner served as director of research of the Georgia Public Policy Foundation and as legislative director for the American Legislative Exchange Council.


Media Contact: 202-789-5200
To Book a Speaking Engagement: 202-789-5226
E-Mail:

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Chairman Obama Social Security Conundrum

Silver Tsunami: The Social Security Conundrum
By Paul Menchaca

Last May, Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue met with Financial Planning during a trip to New York to promote the $250 recovery payments that were being issued to people who receive Social Security and Supplemental Security Income.

Astrue emphasized the importance of reforming the government insurance program, but also sought to dispel the common notion that Social Security is in danger of going bankrupt.

Using the latest figures, Asture said that Social Security is expected to be solvent until 2041, but even when it reaches “insolvency” there will still be money to pay out benefits. These benefits, however, would only be roughly 78% of the current benefits.

Not great, but also not nearly as dire a scenario as many had been projecting.

But two significant factors appear to be accelerating the projection for when the program will reach insolvency since our interview with Astrue last spring.

One is a better understanding of the extent to which the recession took a toll on the retirement system. Secondly, growing concerns about the impact a massive wave of retiring baby boomers will soon have on Social Security.

Of course, experts have been concerned about boomers impact on our retirement system for decades, but the unease has only intensified since the first wave of boomers started collecting Social Security three years ago.

So where does the program stand today? Social Security’s surplus is now expected to last until 2037, four years fewer than Astrue estimated in May. In addition, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported in September that the program will be operating at a deficit in 2010 and 2011 — the Congressional Budget Office sees costs exceeding tax revenues by $10 billion this year and by $9 billion next year.

The onsalught of ominous data carries with it a flood of dire media reports. Astrue maintains that a crisis does not loom and others agree.

“Alarmists who claim that Social Security won’t be around when today’s young workers retire misunderstand or misrepresent the [Social Security and Medicare Board of Trustees’] projections,” Kathy Ruffing, of the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, told CNBC.

But despite these assurances, Americans should be concerned about the future of Social Security. The recession, which has led many to retire early and claim benefits, has certainly hurt. The millions of boomers heading toward retirement no doubt have to be taken seriously as a problem to be dealt with. But what is most alarming about the future health of Social Security is the current health of Congress.

To understand how far away we appear to be from seeing serious Social Security reform, we need only look back to the last time the program faced a major crisis. In 1981, President Reagan and Congress assigned a bipartisan commission with the task of saving Social Security from bankruptcy. The National Commission on Social Security Reform — or the Greenspan Commission, so named because Allen Greenspan served as its chair — issued a report in 1983 that became the basis for a $168 billion package signed into law by Reagan.

The amendments passed that year not only stemmed the short-term crisis of funding that loomed over Social Security, they also assured that 1983 would be the last year Congress cut benefits. The program has run on a surplus ever since.

What is astonishing to consider in this era of unprecedented political partisanship is the degree to which the amendments Reagan signed off on forged a compromise between the wishes of both Republicans and Democrats. Not only did the package include a cut in benefits, it also came with a tax increase.

Fast forward to today and the U.S. Senate voted last month against a proposal to form a bipartisan commission that would look into concerns over Social Security’s solvency—not to mention the fiscal problems facing Medicaid and Medicare. The same kind of bipartisan commission, mind you, that President Reagan and Congress formed to essentially save Social Security back in the 80s.

Meanwhile, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., has unveiled his seemingly Newt Gingrich-inspired “Roadmap for America’s Future” which seeks, among other proposals, to privatize Social Security. This is a plan that failed President Bush in 2005 and will likely fail Ryan as well.

Critics of the privatization plan see it as being akin to playing poker with people’s savings. The market collapse in 2008 will only add fuel to the opposition’s fire.

Astrue is probably correct when he says that Social Security is in no imminent danger. Its long-term solvency, however, is going to require that Republicans and Democrats sit down at a table together and hammer out a solid plan for reforming the program. Which is why the endless political dogma driving Congress today could be the real threat to Social Security’s solvency.


Tuesday, October 20, 2009

I wrote to the White House Mr.President Obama

The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Subject: I'm moving the family to Mexico.

Dear Mr.President Obama:

I'm planning to move my family and extended family into Mexico for my health, and I would like to ask you to assist me.

We're planning to simply walk across the border from the U.S. into Mexico and we'll need your help to make a few arrangements. We plan to skip all the legal stuff like visas, passports, immigration quotas and laws. I'm sure they handle those things the same way you do here. So, would you mind telling your buddy, President Calderon, that I'm on my way down?

Please let him know that I will be expecting the following:

1. Free medical care for my entire family.


2. English-speaking government bureaucrats for all services I might need, whether I use them or not.


3. Please print all Mexican government forms in English.


4. I want my grand kids to be taught Spanish by English-speaking (bi-lingual) teachers.


5. Tell their schools they need to include classes on American culture and history.


6. I want my grand kids to see the American flag on one of the flag poles at their school.

7. Please plan to feed my grand kids at school for both breakfast and lunch.


8. I will need a local Mexican driver's license so I can get easy access to government services and be able to vote.


9. I do plan to get a car and drive in Mexico, but, I don't plan to purchase car insurance, and I probably won't make any special effort to learn local traffic laws.


10. In case one of the Mexican police officers does not get the memo from their president to leave me alone, please be sure that every patrol car has at least one English-speaking officer.


11. I plan to fly the U.S. flag from my house top, put U S. flag decals on my car, and have a gigantic celebration on July 4th. I do not want any complaints or negative comments from the locals.


12. I would also like to have a nice job without paying any taxes, or have any labor or tax laws enforced on any business I may start.


13. Please have the president tell all the Mexican people to be extremely nice and never say a critical things about me or my family, or about the strain we might place on their economy.


14. I want to receive free food stamps.


15. Naturally, I'll expect free rent subsidies.


16. I'll need Income tax credits so although I don't pay Mexican Taxes, I'll receive money from the government.


17. Please arrange it so that the Mexican Gov't pays $ 4,500 to help me buy a new car.


18. Oh yes, I almost forgot, please enroll me free into the Mexican Social Security program so that I'll get a monthly income in retirement.


I know this is an easy request because you already do all these things for all his people who come to the U.S. from Mexico .


I am sure that President Calderon won't mind returning the favor if you ask him nicely.


Thank you so much for your kind help. You're the man!!! This is were I will live.

http://sites.google.com/site/mslinman/mexicoNeighborhood.JPG

Thank You

USA F
amily