bush is bad
i'm just sick of him. his politics are bad. i hope he gets imprisoned at the hague for committing atrocities of war. because he is guilty of atrocities of war. and anyone who forgives it as necessary needs schoolin' in the religion they claim to follow. honestly, i've never seen people so blindly supportive of a dictator since watching historical footage of hitler inciting the nazis. and i dont' want to understate hitler, but bush is an inhuman monster. i want him to consent to a dna analysis because i'm sure he's actually some kind of mythological demon/creature sent to stir up discord. and i tell you, he's doing it. look at the discord all over the place. but his people are oddly unified behind his every bad idea. and let me end by saying privatizing social security is like stealing from old people. hell, it's stealing from every working person. not just figuratively stealing, actively taking the money out of the trust of treasury bonds and putting upwards of thirty percent of it in the hands of the moneyhandlers (i.e. investment administrators) who will be required in order to move the money around (if of course the people do what they are supposed to do, put their money in high risk (potentially high yeild) investments that they dont' know anything about) ... if they do privatize it.. please, for your own sake, just put the money back in treasury bonds. you might be saved. but this crap won't work. it's all a big scam. and who makes the money in the end? him and his friends. so please, come to your senses. if you were good at investing, you'd already be doing it. if you aren't doing it, you're too busy to, and it will be a disaster. in britain where they did this 25 years ago, any retired person who relies on their national pension also requires welfare. and wasn't that what you wanted to avoid anyway? please.. don't let him push you around. don't let him dupe you. please.
4 Comments:
Joe Klein, the columnist from TIME magazine who also wrote Primary Colors, was on the Daily Show yesterday (Thursday) and he explained what the whole social security privitization plan amounts to. Basically, instead of the government having a savings account for each person, the government now gives the money in your savings account to the investors in the form of an annuity. Then the investors do what you said for like 30-some odd years and then the money goes back to the government to dole out in little piddling amounts back to you JUST LIKE THEY DO NOW. Jon Stewart said something to the effect of "So what exactly changes?" and Klein was all (and I'm paraphrasing): "Well, if you make a ton of money, like the Bushies do, you might get a little more back than normal. But other than that, the only things that really change are that your money is in an private annuity rather than a government-run savings account-type-thingy and that Bush will orchestrate it so he can take away a bunch of benefits from everyone who needs them because it will be a 'privitized' thing." Thanks, Gee Dubya!
I'm with you on SS privatization, brogger, though not for the same reasons. It isn't stealing from anybody, it's just useless and inefficient, with far-reaching consequences for people who won't ever need the security provided by the program. Privatizing social security would massively distort the financial markets by driving up demand for stocks. No one can say with confidence what that would do to the poor suckers who are saving and investing so that they don't have to survive on Social Security benefits alone when they retire. Since the program is all about creating a secure financial floor for the elderly, tweaking benefit eligibility would suffice to keep the program fit for that purpose. Why would middle-class or wealthy people need welfare (after all, it isn't insurance, it isn't a pension, it's welfare)?
Your rabid comments on Bush will be appreciated by your other fans, no doubt, but "atrocities of war?" Give me a break.
-Voice
hmm. interesting interperetation on privatization... i see the point about distorting the markets.. but i will not give up that there is a significant increase in unnecessary handling of the money, which costs money.. and i think that's like forcing someone to spend more than would have been necessary, and they dont' get a choice not to. SS is a tax. we have to pay it. then we have to pay to have it administrated in a less efficient way? it sounds like something conservatives accuse liberals of. doesnt' it?
as for bush being an inhuman monster. again, it's an opinion. he doesn't even try to excuse or apologize for torturing innocent people. one is too many. we said we'd play by the rules and not torture people. bush sr. had congress pass a law in our country to make it illegal (let alone all the much older international laws against torture).. bush the lesser reinterpreted these laws to say that torture is legal, and so they do. i believe this betrays my country. i believe he's betraying congress and the american people. just my opinion.
Like you, I see no need for more money-handlers in the SS system. And yes, it does seem that many politicians have reversed their traditional roles when discussing SS reform. The system was designed from the start to be so politicized as to be unassailable, so economists go unheard and politicians argue whichever point gives them the best short-term advantage.
You and I have different definitions of torture.
-Voice
Post a Comment
<< Home