Skip to main content

View Diary: Simpson Comments Highlight Battle of Democracy vs. Plutocracy (23 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  ...another Republican talking point... (0+ / 0-)

    "The trust fund is accounting smoke and mirrors."

    No it's not. It's the law. And they tell us exactly how much we are owed every year.

    And a politician who disparages it as a 'cow with 310 million teats' is no fair arbiter.

    Nor do I think those who say they want to "protect Social Security" have anything more in mind than privatizing it to Wall Street or the TBTF banks.

    It's motivated by greed - a huge transfer of over $2.5 trillion in wealth into the hands of the very people who practiced no due diligence in the face of no prudent reserves over the past thirty years.

    The Republican wrecking crew bequeathed an economic disaster whose toll has not even begun to be measured. It started in 1982 with Garn-St.Germain which gave us the S & L crisis. It continues unabated since 1999's Gramm-Leach-Bliley, and CFMA in 2000 and the fraud of unfunded CDS...valued at $600 trillion by now.

    Perhaps you have 'skin in the game,' an agenda as a bank executive, a stock exchange trader or something. But I doubt that you are really conservative, or that conservatives want to conserve anything at all.

    Indeed, "conservative" is a misnomer. Sorry, I have to respectfully disagree based upon the evidence as I see it.

    ...'06, '08, and ...'10? 'It was a trifecta of the peoples' outrage against Republicanism!'

    by ezdidit on Thu Aug 26, 2010 at 10:36:31 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Likewise, respectfully disagree (0+ / 0-)

      I think we just have a different view of what is "in" the trust fund.  I don't think the trust fund is real -- the money isn't there and it's not a guaranteed benefit. It only remains a benefit while the law says it is a benefit. The SS laws can be changed at any point -- and poof the $2.7T is gone.

      And for the record, I have no "skin in the game."  My retirement accounts are nearly dry so if I don't do some alternative planning all I will have is SS. That's not something I look forward to.

      •  What changes to SS would you suggest? (0+ / 0-)

        I mean, what exactly bothers you about the current structure of it? Is it a problem that the government is in charge of it? Or, is it that the government is not suifficiently in charge of it?

        (I know it provides insufficient benefit, but it was never meant to replace pensions.)

        ...'06, '08, and ...'10? 'It was a trifecta of the peoples' outrage against Republicanism!'

        by ezdidit on Thu Aug 26, 2010 at 09:28:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  .or, would you just prefer that Obama resign now? (0+ / 0-)

          On August 6th, you said this...

          He should be bold and announce no 2nd term

          There are a variety of things Obama could do that would mark him as a historic president: it won't happen, but I think he should rennounce [sic] running for a second term and then take hard decisions.  Lay it on the line for the American people: the US needs to withdraw from Afghanistan; deep and unpopular (to special interest groups) budget cuts need to be made; perhaps some taxes need to be raised or established (I think a VAT is more sell-able than income tax hikes which could be detrimental).  This WH will not make the hard, unpopular decisions right now because it is too concerned about 2012.  

          I, for one, would have more appreciation for this WH if it started to make the hard decisions that matter for peace and justice rather than posturing for 2012.

          You're a Republican, aren't you?

          ...'06, '08, and ...'10? 'It was a trifecta of the peoples' outrage against Republicanism!'

          by ezdidit on Fri Aug 27, 2010 at 08:39:30 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site