Subj : Social Security Going Bro To : ALL From : BOB KLAHN Date : Thu Aug 29 2013 23:48:14 Hey Earl, you are an economist, would you try to explain to Richardson how he got this completely wrong. Explain to him how social security was set up that way from the begining. Explain to him how drawing off all that money to spend without having to raise income taxes was behind the Reagan Administration's increase in Social Security taxes in the mid '80s. Explain to him how the same theory applied to the Bush Administration and the republican congress in 2006 when they required the post office to pre-fund employee health care for 75 years ahead. Explain how that gave Bush more money to spend without raising taxes at all. Explain how most current employees of the post office won't live another 75 years, and no retirees will. Explain how almost half those being born this year won't live 75 years. Explain to him that is pre-funding health care for workers who haven't even been born yet. No private company in the country has to do that, but the republicans forced the post office to do so. Oh, and explain to Richardson that Alan Greenspan supported Bush's tax cuts, rather than Clinton's plan to pay off the national debt, because he did not want to pay off the debt. Explain to him that would take all that money from the trust funds away from the republican government they were planning to be permenant when they passed those laws. Go ahead, Earl, put on your economist hat and explain that to Tim. Oh, and when you get done explaining government health and retirement trust funds to him, explain to Tim how private sector retirement funds don't have actual cash in them either. Explain how many of them even invest in the same IOUs, US Treasury obligations, that the govt trust funds invest in. Take care of that, will you, Earl? After all, you are the economist in Fidonet. TR> Remember all those times in recent years politicians have TR> lamented how `Social Security is going broke'? How it needs TR> `fixing' (say some pols), and how it `doesn't need fixing' TR> (say other pols)? And of course everyone knows that if you TR> actually looked `in' that so-called `Social Security lock TR> box' that was a big buzz-phrase in both the Senate AND the TR> House some years ago, there's nothing IN there but a lot of TR> IOU's, because they've been taking money out of it all the TR> time to make up budget short-falls (that is...pre-Hussein TR> Obama, when they used to actually HAVE a budget as per the TR> Constitution). TR> And now...they've gotten to a point where today's workers TR> who pay into the Social Security fund are actually paying TR> for the monthly checks of recipients, and there isn't any TR> `surplus' in the fund to speak of. The Congress in other TR> words have `spent' *our* retirement and benefits money TR> almost as fast as we paid into it for many years, now, such TR> that what we paid for may not BE there for future payees! TR> Thats pretty much the same as stealing our retirement TR> investment on us. And it is an investment that was TR> *compulsory*...not `voluntary'. In other words...we were TR> FORCED to make this investment in our future retirement by TR> the power of the U.S. government. But it turns out that the TR> U.S. government was diverting this money from its proper TR> purpose, into its own spendthrift projects and pork barrel TR> uselessness (bridges to nowhere...etc etc). TR> In a corporation or company...when such financial TR> shinanagans occur, its called `embezzlement', or `fraud' TR> (AKA stealing!)! TR> If it is traced to one or more individuals...there is TR> usually prison time and restitution meted out. In the case TR> of just the corporation or company entity, restitution to TR> stock holders and\or customers, plus a severe fine and\or TR> penalties are meted out. ... BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg] * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 Join Us: www.DocsPlace.org (1:123/140) .