President Obama insists that he is a really bad negotiator, therefore the deal he got on the two-year extension of the Bush tax cuts and the one-year extension of UI benefits was the best that he could do. This package also came with a one-year cut in the Social Security tax.
This cut will seriously threaten the program’s finances if next year, the Republican Congress is no more willing to end a temporary tax cut than this year’s Democratic Congress.
The logic here is straightforward. Under the law, the Bush tax cuts were supposed to end in 2010. Tax rates returned to their pre-tax cut levels in 2011. However, the Republicans maintained a steady drumbeat about the evils of raising taxes in the middle of a downturn, even if the tax increase would just apply to the richest 2 percent of the population.
As we saw, President Obama and the Democratic Congress could not muster the votes needed to overcome the Republicans and ended up extending the tax cuts for the richest two percent of the population. The Democrats will be faced with a similar situation at the end of 2011 when the Social Security tax cut is scheduled to expire, except that this time the tax cut in question will apply to overwhelming majority of working people.
Also, the House will be controlled by the Republicans and the Senate will be considerably less Democratic. This raises the possibility, if not the likelihood, that the tax cut will remain in place indefinitely, more than doubling the size of Social Security’s projected long-term shortfall.
Before we even get to this juncture the Republicans will have another opportunity to impose a really bad deal on President Obama. Sometime in the spring the government will run up against its debt ceiling. This will prevent the government from any further borrowing.
Since the government has a substantial deficit, with spending exceeding revenue, hitting this limit would mean that the government would not have sufficient funds to pay for all its programs. It also would mean that the government could not pay interest or principal on debt that is coming due, in effect requiring it to default on its debt.
The prospect of the U.S. government defaulting on its debt creates the sort of end of the world scenario in which Congress rushed to pass the TARP in 2008. Back then, President Bush, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and all sorts of other luminaries told members of Congress and the public that we would have a second Great Depression if the Wall Street banks were not immediately bailed out, no questions asked. And the money flowed.
The prospect of defaulting on the debt will create a similar outbreak of shrill warnings of disaster. This would likely to lead to scenario in which President Obama signs whatever debt ceiling package House Republicans hand him, even if it includes the privatization of Social Security and Medicare and major cuts and/or elimination of other important programs. The argument from the administration will be that they have no choice.
In order to avoid this train wreck, supporters of Social Security and Medicare have to restructure the options. They have to push President Obama to announce in advance that he will never sign a debt ceiling bill that includes cuts to Social Security and Medicare, the country’s two most important social programs.
These programs are crucial to the financial security and health of tens of millions of people. If there are to be changes in these programs then they should occur after a full public debate in the light of day, not as the result of Republican trickery and parliamentary game playing.
This would be a hugely popular position since not only Democrats, but also independents and even Tea Party Republicans overwhelming support Social Security and Medicare. Furthermore, the gun, in the form of a potential debt default, is actually pointed at the Wall Street banks, not the public.
A debt default would be a very bad situation and one that we absolutely should try to avoid. But the day after the default, the country would still have the same capital stock and infrastructure, the same skilled labor force and the same technical knowledge as it did the day before the default. In other words, the ability of our economy to produce more than $15 trillion in goods and services each year will not have been affected.
One thing that would not be around the day after a default is Wall Street. The default would wipe out the value the assets of the Wall Street banks, sending Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and the rest into bankruptcy. The recovery for the economy from such a situation will be difficult, but the shareholders of the Wall Street banks would be wiped out and their top executives unemployed.
For this reason, the threat of a default is a gun pointed most directly at Wall Street. Given the power of Wall Street over Congress, is inconceivable that they would ever let the Republicans pull the trigger.
This means that if President Obama is prepared to take the right and popular position of supporting Social Security and Medicare, he will win. This is both good policy and great politics. The public just has to force President Obama to stand up and show some leadership.



118 Comments

If we’re going to come up with a useful remedy, we need accurate diagnoses.
With all due respect, I don’t agree with your premise:
“As we saw, President Obama and the Democratic Congress could not muster the votes needed to overcome the Republicans and ended up extending the tax cuts for the richest two percent of the population.”
Barry Obama didn’t use all his power to muster votes: instead, he cut out Congresscritters and directly negotiated his own capitulation to the Rethugs.
It’s a done deal, Dean. You and Mark have been relentless in showing the myth of the Social Security crisis but no one in the MSM cares to talk about it with the exception of David Cay Johnston.
This was why Obama was selected by the oligarchs and nothing is going to stop him, or them, from getting what they want.
it will be expense saving by pretending the payroll tax is not a dedicated tax and is instead just part of revenue, as he cuts Social Security guaranteed benefits to make the rich happy and offset those lower tax rates for the rich. Medicare will not be helped by a national medical option – a public option – but instead we will continue with insurance company death panels via making needed services too expensive – thereby stopping that type of care as we move the country into third world status with protected corporations and protected rich by our pretend Democratic President.
The tax cut stimulus had only a few changes from the current situation as the “tax cuts” and “unemployment” were just continuation of current policies.
The added a one year depreciation tax cut (immediate expensing” for business and few minor tweaks), and a one year payroll tax cut of 2% worth $112 billion – half that as the number feels like a 2 year number – is the stimulus.
ButObama did not cave because Obama got what Obama always wanted – tax cuts for the rich so as to please the GOP and get more donations to his campaign in 2012. The first time he did this – the public option – one could say it was not planned , but the second time this type of behavior occurs, we either go with stupid or a liar – and Obama is not stupid.
The coming State of the Union will try to lock down those lower rates for the rich, killing the problem of a temp law that expires in two years, as Obama pushes even lower rates as “tax reform” – reform recommended by the conservatives on his deficit commission. He will ignore the fact that going back to the Clinton rates cuts the deficit by $4 trillion over 10 years, and instead tout the $1 trillion saved via “loophole closing” (loopholes that favor the middle class) as he drops the top rate to 24%.
“They have to push President Obama to announce in advance that he will never sign a debt ceiling bill that includes cuts to Social Security and Medicare, the countries two most important social programs.”
[snip]
“The public just has to force President Obama to stand up and show some leadership.”
We’ve already seen how far we can trust Obama’s announcments.
Show leadership? What a novel idea. Not. Gonna. Happen.
Who knew in 2008 we would have a Democratic President trying to offset tax cuts for the rich recommended by a deficit commission by making the payroll tax produce a bigger “surplus” that can be used to offset the revenue lost in thos tax rate reductions?
Who knew Obama wanted to cut Social Security so the payroll tax could be used to fund the government’s military spending – and allow Obama to not ask the rich for their fair share of the cost of those wars?
Hey, when Congress would not put together a commission to his liking, Obama selected his own.
Congress did set up a commission, it is just not being made public.
They all intend to cut out the social programs because they are Fascists. I have said already I am tired of the slow boil they are giving us. Why don’t they go ahead and do it? Do they not have all their security in place yet? What’s the hold up?
http://www.change.org/petitions/view/president_obama_shut_down_the_catfood_commission_now
also go to http://www.democratz.org
FDL had their own petitions and I’ve signed them. Sorry, but none of it will be heard in DC. They dance by their own bells.
Come on. No more lies. This is being too kind to Obama. He’s not on the verge of ‘getting trapped’ into cutting SS. He’s not powerless before Republicans. He’s going for a rewrite of Reagan’s ‘shrink government’. If I want to find out their/Obama’s next move, I just have to read the WSJ editorials.
The search continues for the one good bone in OBAMA’s Body! :)
the last 20 months = the following
Dems control WH
Dems control Senate
Dems control House
what do progressives get for helping DEMS control DC
1. Hoover Economic Policies
2. Bob Dole Health Care Bill
3. Bush Tax Cuts
4. “Coming Soon OBAMA GUTS Social Security” 2011
Nothing = Nancy Pelosi passing 400 Bills and Harry Reid killing Nancy 400 bills
the last 20 months the republicans who control nothing in DC got the following!
1. Bush Tax Cuts
2. Bob Dole Health Care Bill
3. Hoover Economic Policies
Obama, Harry, and Nancy = Pure Evil
Obama is not getting re-elected, he knows this!!! A Black Candidate that is hated by the LEFT has no shot at getting re-elected President. Enough Already! (black candidates with better political skills than OBAMA lose re-elections statewide)
Progressives must attack the only crooks trying to get re-elected, the 23 Dems in the Senate
We must give every Dem in the Senate and the House, the Obama Necklace, if you vote with OBAMA, you must wear the OBAMA necklace in 2012
“This package also came with a one-year cut in the Social Security tax.
This cut will seriously threaten the program’s finances if next year, the Republican Congress is no more willing to end a temporary tax cut than this year’s Democratic Congress.”
In order to save SS we should insist that next year the payroll tax should go up by 4% in order to make up for this years 2% cut. Pre-emptive strike!
Yes.
Two things to do: (1) Find a progressive/socialist alternative to run against Obama in the Primary; (2) Bring a million people to march on DC demanding that he is not to touch social security. Real, substantial political threat is the only language spineless incompetent and dyed-in-the-wool opportunists like Obama would understand.
Articles like this scare the bejesus out of the older and disabled folks like me. What would all this mean to the size of our already barely liveable size checks ?
For the last couple months I have heard that SS was secure for 10 to 20 yrs to come before we would be taking in less than paying out, now this AM I heard that we are already having to borrow money to make the SS monthly payments. What is the “real” truth and should we start to panic yet ?
Please friends, when writing diaries like this please fill in those gaps if possible. Thanks.
Obama is the stupidest genius to walk the face of the earth.
“The public just has to force President Obama to stand up and show some leadership.”
Obama DOES show leadership. ::sigh:: It’s just not for us but for the oligarchs.
It’s a pipe dream that we are going to change Obama’s mind on this. He will continue to ignore us.
Focusing on Obama is a mistake. I believe we need to focus on the entire system, not just the system’s man caught up in the system.
Clapping!
“One thing that would not be around the day after a default is Wall Street. The default would wipe out the value the assets of the Wall Street banks, sending Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and the rest into bankruptcy.”
Good riddance to bad rubbish.
“The recovery for the economy from such a situation will be difficult, but the shareholders of the Wall Street banks would be wiped out”
? As you stated, the economic infrastructure, workforce, etc., would still be in place. Shareholders would only be wiped out to the extent their portfolios are in WS Banks; if they have all their holdings there, they’re too stupid to be rich anyway. Yes, there’d be a hit to pension funds, etc., but would it be worse than the one they took in ’08?
“and their top executives unemployed.”
Not a moment too soon.
Maybe if we let Wall Street fail and take their phony derivatives profits and bubbles with them, Main Street would have a chance to recover.
True enough. President Obama can be plenty tough on progressive members of Congress. We’re forced to conclude that the administration is in fact getting exactly what it wants.
While I appreciate the heads up, there is nothing we can do to stop this. To somehow believe that “if only” we could play the game more effectively, we can somehow stop the Republicans and Obama from flushing our country down the toilet is the height of denial.
The Republicans control all three houses of government including the presidency and they will get what they want despite the consequences. Wake me up in ten years when the revolution begins. Until then, I plan to sit back and laugh at my once beloved country and hope that I live long enough to see the ignorant Americans come to their senses.
remember Obama lied his way to the WH!!!
Progressives have got to use the ART of the VEAL PEN.
All war is base on deception! SUN TZU
Any candidate that campaigns against OBAMA will win, without having to act or behave like a hard core liberal.
Obama taught us all one thing!
Say and do anything to get elected and once elected become your true self, and OBAMA case he became Clarence Thomas.
***”the Republicans maintained a steady drumbeat about the evils of raising taxes in the middle of a downturn,”***
For Republicans, there’s NEVER a good time to raise taxes.
“Downturn” = oh, scary, scary taxes will make it worse.
“Recovery” or “boom” = oh, scary, scary taxes will kill it.
Seriously, is there EVERY a time to raise taxes in the Republican book?
Why don’t Dems get wise to this bullshit?
One thing we can do to fight back is take our 2% payroll tax cut the government is giving us and save it for when we’ll need it at retirement (especially if they succeed in gutting SS).
Show them it doesn’t have the stimulating affect they planned, so there’s no use in extending it next year.
It is not the “Republicans”. It is the system and PTB that they all work for. Most of them don’t even know that. Barry was chosen to do exactly what he is doing.
Go back in time and examine everything that has happened. There is a timeline. The evidence is out there.
“The public just has to force President Obama to stand up and show some leadership.”
He has not and he will not. He doesn’t know how.
Why do “progressives” hate their parents? Why are they so committed to the state being the source of their parents’ retirement income? Didn’t their parents provide the food, lodging and nurturing for the first 18 years of their life and more? Don’t offspring owe their parents anything?
Face it, we elected a Republican.
Sam, I too am on social security.
I think the Obama plan is to make this “far enough in the future” — i.e., no cuts to “current” recipients — to avoid lighting a firestorm of protest.
But you should worry, as I do, about your kids, grandkids, and anyone else who might want to claim benefits 5 to 10 years from now, or beyond.
This is both good policy and great politics.
Yes, that has worked really will in the past. This is a done deal, did you miss the email? wall street wins and serfs die.
There’s enough money for Iraq & Afghanistan.
There’s enough money for tax cuts for millionaires.
There’s enough money for agribiz.
There’s enough money for Billy Tauzin/Pharma.
There’s enough money for pork.
But there’s not enough for Social Security. Isn’t it obvious?
Sort of, but much more dangerous than Thomas. He is enabling the complete deconstruction of this country one step at a time…with “audacity”.
Yes very true and he knows he’s one term then on leactures and comfy office. Jeb/Betrayus 2012 and beyond.
The only leadership Obama has shown is how fast he can lead the sycophantic veal pen to the right.
“A debt default would be a very bad situation and one that we absolutely should try to avoid. But the day after the default, the country would still have the same capital stock and infrastructure, the same skilled labor force and the same technical knowledge as it did the day before the default. In other words, the ability of our economy to produce more than $15 trillion in goods and services each year will not have been affected.
“One thing that would not be around the day after a default is Wall Street. The default would wipe out the value the assets of the Wall Street banks, sending Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and the rest into bankruptcy. The recovery for the economy from such a situation will be difficult, but the shareholders of the Wall Street banks would be wiped out and their top executives unemployed.”
It is tempting to wish for just that!
It doesn’t matter–and won’t faze Republicans–no matter what Obama announces in advance. He will ALWAYS back down rather than put up a fight. He did so on the tax cuts for the rich, on closing Guantanamo Bay prison, on Iraq war withdrawal, on the public option, etc.
Obama is a wimp who always takes the path of least resistance.
***”One thing we can do to fight back is take our 2% payroll tax cut the government is giving us and save it for when we’ll need it at retirement (especially if they succeed in gutting SS).”***
And where the fuck are we going to put that $$$ — in a mattress?
You get less than 1% if it’s in a bank, and I’m not investing in stock or mutual funds, thank you very much.
I agree that we should save, but unless there’s rampant deflation, inflation’s going to eat up the value of your savings.
Why do “progressives” hate their parents?
I would guess bad parenting.
I agree jedimsnbcko19, yet fear that if our masters want Obama to be re-elected, then he will be re-elected.
The group that has control over the voting machines owns the election.
Concerted action is difficult because of our competing versions of the President. We’re like a man with double vision trying to take aim.
We can’t even agree on what, politically speaking, Obama is. There are still lefties who seriously say Obama is doing a great job–or at least the best possible job.
This is Obama the Frustrated Progressive, stalemated by a corrupt system, unable to deliver the wide-ranging liberal policies he so yearned to provide.
Stop laughing–some of our colleagues really say this is the deal. They often imagine Obama as being terrified of the CIA, or with a metaphorical gun to his head. These people may watch too many movies.
Currently, the most popular version of Obama is Obama the Centrist, thogh this one works best if you define “centrist” as “way the hell to the right of Ronald Reagan.” The centrist version of Obama also fails to account for his record on human rights, which is truly frightening.
We also have Obama the Corporate Shill–embodying the profound cynicism Obama has left in his wake. I expect the story of Barack Obama is a bit more complicated than that. But I must admit, the guy has yet to do a single thing which is inconsistent with this view.
My version of Obama is that he is an extraordinarily right-wing guy who is posing as a centrist Democrat. This version of Obama has the advantage of explaining why we have these different versions of this most confusing leader.
Eat the Elite
For a large march, buses would have to be provided from all parts of the country – those of us working may not be able to go for fear of job loss and the jobless who could go, cannot afford the travel expense. Aside from Soros, who could afford this?
Yeah, that’s kinda the responsibility that parents take on when they, you know, make children.
True.
It’s like trying to help a compulsive gambler. The first step is to find out when they gamble.
Counselor (Co): What do you do when you feel happy?
Client (Cl): Go celebrate at the casino.
Co: What do you do to deal with sad feelings?
Cl: Oh, I go to the casino to cheer myself up.
Co: What would you do if you were lonely?
Cl: Oh, the best thing to do when I’m lonely is go be with people at the casino!
Co: How do you like to entertain friends?
Cl: Take them to the casino.
Co: What would you do if you had a lot of money?
Cl: Probably Black Jack.
Co: What would you do if you were broke and in debt?
Cl: Borrow money and do poker, that’s my best game.
Blue Texan’s regularly scheduled post is ready: 60 Minutes” Gov. Chris Christie Recites GOP’s Mantra: Austerity for Thee, But Not for Me
Besides, the “state” isn’t the source of their income. They PAID that money into it. I paid that money into it. That’s MY money, not the “state’s” money. You might want to at least learn the basics before you come here and make yourself look foolish.
Then why do they want me to subsidize their daycare? And school lunches? And all the rest?
The idea of adult children taking care of their parents during old age was THE way we dealt with seniors until FDR.
Guess what. It didn’t work. Too many seniors didn’t have children to take care of them or could take care of them.
That’s why we invented Social Security. That way all the adult children of seniors, living or dead, took care of all seniors in common. Wow. It seems we’re in this all together. That’s why Social Security is the most popular government program in history.
The numbers don’t add up and you know it.
Aww! Poor you! Having to pay taxes and all. Why, it’s socialism!
*yawn*
Oh? Care to provide a link?
“…committed to the state being the source of their parents’ retirement income?”
SS is state revenue? In my world SS is essentially deferred compensation. I’ve paid into SS my entire working life. Those payments go to pay SS benefits to those currently eligible to receive them. None of that money comes from general tax revenue. Ever heard of the SS Trust Fund? Why is it reichwingers continually float the lie that SS comes from general tax revenue? Willful ignorance or just plain pathologically lying?
The best place to look is here–
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/cgi-bin/ops_period.cgi
The ss site gives the actual dollars and cents. Presently, social security has more income than payouts. Just mosey around that site for awhile and be informed.
It didn’t work for how many thousands of years? And even today, there’s no such thing as an indiviually financed government administered retirement program for the majority of the earth’s population.
S/he will provide a link to a blogpost from Michelle Malkin or RedState, you betcha.
No. Obama is anything but a wimp. He instead is a wily politician with steel resolve who plays his base by pretending to support their positions while he works for the exact opposite. He has proven he will fight, but it has always been against us.
What has happened now is that a large group of people who want to support Obama no matter what are now buying into the excuse that he is a wimp with a good heart.
I don’t understand this. I was one of those who worked for him and contributed monthly for him in ’08. By Spring of 2009 I had recognized that I got played. Why do so many others still believe in this guy at some level?
You’re admitting that the funds you’ll collect will be more than the funds that you contributed, made up by the workers of the future. That’s the definition of a Ponzi scheme. Everybody’s heard of the SS Trust Fund. Where is it? Where’s the money? Is there a big silo in D.C. full of that money? The famous “lockbox”. Go find it. Take a photo of it and post it here.
It’s our way of getting back at narcissistic reichwingers.
My sentiments exactly.
The pain that would occur if Wall St collapsed would be difficult but temporary.
To continue on the path we are on now will be difficult and permanent (or at best, difficult, ‘pert near impossible, to undo).
I helped my parents by paying social security taxes.
I think that there is a larger point here. Back in the year 2000, Investment firms were talking about there being a decade long recession starting in 2008. The recession was occurring because the baby boomers would begin retiring faster than the baby busters would be entering the workforce. These retiring boomers would be pulling their money out of wall street faster than the busters would be adding money to the market. One solution, privatize social security. By dismantling social security, the door is paved to ‘privatize social security.’ The privatized social security would begin adding money to wall street. Wall Street’s problems would be solved. Obama is just the corporate lackey who is opening the door to dismantling the security from social security.
If I buy a share of stock for $10 then sell it for $15 that’s more than I paid for it. It’s called an investment.
I know you know all this stuff but just want to scream and yell about it. Tell ya what, when you hit 65 make sure you don’t sign up for Medicare and when you hit 70 make sure you don’t sign up for SS. You’ll sleep better and we won’t have to listen to your horseshit.
Well then you should petitiion the government to take more than 6% of your pay in payroll taxes since you get such a good rate of return on your money from the government.
I’m not so sure about this one term business. I suspect his plan is to swoop in and save the country–yet again–from those terribly loony and worst of all, un-hip, repubs. And chunks of the electorate will buy it.
Yeah, that’s it. The Bismarckian state takes over family obligations. What “progressives” are all about is dodging responsibility.
Very interesting? do you have some of the original sources on this/ Would love to read more into it.
Actually, the ss trust fund is still being paid interest at 6% on some long term bonds.
Not a very good analogy. In actuality, your SS payroll deduction is used for government expenses, perhaps paying the principle and interest on a T-bill held by Goldman Sachs. The Feds are just hoping they’ll have the funny money printed to pay your benefits when they come do, but it doesn’t really matter to them because they won’t be around. It’s amazing that you have so much trust in the government. Ask the Indians about it.
That whole thing about the 2% is such garbage…
O expects me to believe that if we get to keep 2 bucks out of every hundred that it will somehow jump-start the economy? I call bullshit.
Obama did the 2% deal because he wants to remove all types of assistance to the non-elite public. With a complicit media helping him, he is likely to succeed.
We have been paying in nearly double the needed amount to sustain Social Security since 1983. That was done specifically to cover the Boomers. That money has been earning interest in “Special US Treasury” bonds backed by the full faith and credit of the US.
The Federal Government has been borrowing the money from us and now it’s time to pay it back.
Again. It must really suck to be you. Having to pay taxes to help support the society that allowed you to accumulate and retain your wealth. What a fucking nightmare!
You need to provide some substantiation on the paying govt expenses claim. You’re already in troll territory so make it good.
Yawn…mmmm…these cheetos are so good…social whatity..
Because in America:
Ego rules,
being wrong means being weak,
might makes right,
and I’m busy trying to decide what color to dye my hair.
Wall St. needs mo’ money? Sure…take hard-earned wages and “invest” them in the biggest proposed Ponzi scheme in history, privatized social whatever you call it…more cheetos?
It’s right here. I would’ve taken a screenshot for you as you requested, but it didn’t seem to work.
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/cgi-bin/ops_period.cgi
I dunno. I don’t personally know anybody who still defends him though there are several still on the tubz.
“The default would wipe out the value the assets of the Wall Street banks, sending Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and the rest into bankruptcy.”
Then there is absolutely no chance–zero–that Obama will allow a government default. Given a choice between Goldman Sachs and millions of sick, old people, he will choose Goldman Sachs. You can count on it.
“…always takes the path of least resistance.”
The more I watch, the more I believe that the “path of least resistance” is the path that leads to exactly where Obama wants to go. Any protestations to the contrary is just misdirection to deceive the masses.
“The Office of Management and Budget has described the distinction as follows:
These [Trust Fund] balances are available to finance future benefit payments and other Trust Fund expenditures – but only in a bookkeeping sense…. They do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits. Instead, they are claims on the Treasury that, when redeemed, will have to be financed by raising taxes, borrowing from the public, or reducing benefits or other expenditures. The existence of large Trust Fund balances, therefore, does not, by itself, have any impact on the Government’s ability to pay benefits. (from FY 2000 Budget, Analytical Perspectives, p. 337)”
Dean, usually I find substance in your posts.
This one is rather thin.
Just what leverage, specifically do the “people’ have through which to pressure anyone in the political class (which includes the media) … including Obama?
Better that now you say to people something like this: Look, any economic systrem is a GAME, devised by PEOPLE, not by Gawd’s “unseen hand” … that means that people can change it, taht they have the RIGHT, in a democracy to change it … and perhaps, no, let us be blunt … human beings DO have and obligation to themselves, to each other, to their progeny for generations and to the planet itself to develop sustainable and humanly responsible econnomic systems.
Our economic system, called “capitalism” has failed. Utterly. Totally. AND disasterously. It must be changed, it cannot be “fixed” any more than it already is.
Economics will either be, deliberately and by intent, essentially concerned with distributing the wealth of society in such fashion that all within that society benefit or in a fashion which benefits only some or a few.
Gawd does not make this choice … people do.
And when an economic system fails, Gawd will do nothing, for ONLY people may do so.
Enough of the myths, let us get down to truth.
DW
So you want to see the US Government default on its obligations?
Got it
Why do you hate US citizens?
Clinton’s OMB? Yeah, that’s a great source. Gotta do better than that.
See, here’s the thing. It’s not our responsibility to disprove your assertions, it’s your responsibility to prove them.
While I do agree that the next crises will come when they try and raise the debt I’m not sure if the sellout on Social Security will be then or this time next year.
With the passage of the tax bill Obama has happily started the process of defunding Social Security. In a year when the SS tax cuts and unemployment extension expires the Republicans will demand the cut be extended or claim before Obama’s re-election campaign that he’s raising “your” taxes and then offer a compromise – if he agrees to that they will exetend the Unemployment Ins. extension for another year. Of course Obama will cave once again and the cut will then be for 2 years – ultimately to become permanent. At that point in time you can kiss Social Security good-bye and it will have been Obama that killed it!
I know the Obama loyalist don’t like this but it will be Obama that destroys Social Security and those folks in the Democratic Party that still support him will have helped. Its time for all Democrats to realize that he will destroy the Democratic Party and all it has accomplished and all it stands for -
… only people may do “something” …
(I miss “edit”, ‘cuz muh fingers are in business for themselves and muh eyes is in cahoots with with them …)
;~DW
He’ll hit the stump and stir the pot with how creepy and evil palin/huckabee/rubio/demint/perry are. Tell us all how he saved social security, how he’s pulling out of afghanistan, how he saved GM, how he prevented a depression, etc., etc.
I hope he loses, but things can change fast in politics. Think back 2 years ago.
Exactly. But you watch. Obama will “cave” to conservative demands, so that he can avoid a Wall St collapse.
My analysis:
If Obama intended to prevent a Wall St collapse, then why would he cave to conservatives? Because it is not a cave-in at all. It is what he has intended to do all along. That’s why Obama keeps entering into secret talks with the conservatives. Secret talks during HCR, secret talks during Finreg, secret talks with tax cuts — and all without telling the Dems in Congress.
Because Obama’s agenda goes against everything a free society is supposed to be, he needs a foil. The Republicans are happy to provide that foil for him, and they get to call him a socialist while he throws us all into indentured servitude.
But if the Dems in Congress knew that Obama was working to further the conservative agenda, they would not support him as eagerly. They would demand their own piece of the pie. So, Obama’s talks with Republicans are secret.
That explains why the Democrats scramble and cave when Obama springs these secret backroom deals on them at the 11th hour, and
it explains why the Republicans so blatantly goad the Dems in Congress: The repubs have foreknowledge of the secret backroom deals, and can therefore do whatever they want in the halls of Congress because they know the fix is in. The Dems know that the secret meetings are occurring, but they don’t know what deals were made. That’s why the Dems scramble to cave when the deal is finally announced: They are trying to find out how much pie they can get on short notice.
I think this article was posted here before but it is worth a re-read. In my mind this explains Obama’s actions.
http://www.ianwelsh.net/obama-isnt-about-compromise/
Mods: I thought the rule is that we only post a link to our own individual sites, or youtubes once a day. Is that still the rule?
You will be fine. It will be like the 1983 Greenspan Commission – the changes will be phased in. Most likely the retirement age will be increased incrementally, to hurt younger people like me.
One thing that could effect you immediately is a change in the indexing formula from wages to prices. So instead of the amount going up X% per year it will be something like .6X per year over the next few decades. An easy way to hide large cuts, and all Very Serious Wonks think its the right idea.
SS is an “entitlement” – no votes from Congress are needed to keep SS going until 2037 with zero problems. The fact that the SSA is cashing some of those trust fund bonds now is not relevant, except in a media narrative sort of way.
There is NEVER a good time to raise taxes..yet it is ALWAYS a good time to cut spending, which is what Congress should be focused on..
Margaret, you’re still not working, I see..just wanting to live off of us workers!!!
After 8 years, Bush’s only regret is that he could not privatize Social Security.
Obama is finishing Bush’s 3rd term. He is disdainful of Progressive/Liberals who got him elected. In one of his press conferences, Obama said that SS was first set up to assist widows, blah, blah. He has already set the stage and has begun robbing our safety net.
This is what the Corporations want to happen. Get rid of that pesky FICA(ss, medicare, etc). They can make more bonus money.
Nice to sleep late, then get up and see that everyone here has already made, more than once, all the key points that need to be made about what this monster in the WH has in store for us. I wonder if some future historian will ever dig up the old posts and comments here on FDL and write about how perceptive we were. Maybe we’ll be quoted like Plato and Plutarch and Lincoln or FDR are quoted today.
WOAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH I thought you people believed that money was owned by the collective??? Make up your mind
That is mot why we invented SS. The Act is formally cited as the Social Security Act, ch. 531, 49 Stat. 620, now codified as 42 U.S.C. ch.7. The Act provided benefits to retirees and the unemployed, and a lump-sum benefit at death. Payments to current retirees are financed by a payroll tax on current workers’ wages, half directly as a payroll tax and half paid by the employer. The act also gave money to states to provide assistance to aged individuals (Title I), for unemployment insurance (Title III), Aid to Families with Dependent Children (Title IV), Maternal and Child Welfare (Title V), public health services (Title VI), and the blind (Title X).[10]
You have not paid into YOUR SS…You are completely uninformed and ignorant of the SS Act and how it works.
The Act is formally cited as the Social Security Act, ch. 531, 49 Stat. 620, now codified as 42 U.S.C. ch.7. The Act provided benefits to retirees and the unemployed, and a lump-sum benefit at death. Payments to current retirees are financed by a payroll tax on current workers’ wages, half directly as a payroll tax and half paid by the employer. The act also gave money to states to provide assistance to aged individuals (Title I), for unemployment insurance (Title III), Aid to Families with Dependent Children (Title IV), Maternal and Child Welfare (Title V), public health services (Title VI), and the blind (Title X).[10]
what tax cuts for millionairs are you talking about?
Since 1983 we ALL have paid in roughly double what was required for Social Security to be sustainable in order to accommodate the coming bulge of Boomers.
So yes, we HAVE been paying into OUR Social Security to provide for OUR needs as well as the current needs of others over the last 27 plus years.
You don’t mind being a condescending little troll at all, do ya?
“The default would wipe out the value the assets of the Wall Street banks, sending Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and the rest into bankruptcy.”
I have such a flash for them: the market has already marked the value of the assets to market whether the banks and Obama are willing to face reality or not. Why do they think so many foreclosed homes stay vacant for long periods; why do they think the real estate tax base has dropped so much in local governments who depend on real estate taxes to provide some basic services like waste and garbage disposal, sewage, roads, etc. We ain’t seen nothing yet. The states will likely be going belly up without some serious support from the fed. gov’t. They can’t tighten their belts enough to maintain even the barest of essential services. But that’s what happens when your intention is to starve the government, and it’s not going to be pretty. Furthermore, I would suggest that no one will like it. I would further suggest that the longer it takes for both the MOTU and Obama to come to terms with reality, the worse things will get.
We will scream and fight about any cuts to Medicare and Social Security, but you do realize Dean, that the writing is already on the wall. Not that it’s completely hopeless, but very close. The already rich want more of our money.
Obama has made his intentions well-known to those paying attention.
Mr. Baker stated: “In order to avoid this train wreck, supporters of Social Security and Medicare have to restructure the options. They have to push President Obama to announce in advance that he will never sign a debt ceiling bill that includes cuts to Social Security and Medicare, the country’s two most important social programs.”
But, as Jane Hamsher stated, “It’s a pattern: Big promises. Failure. Blame-shifting. Victim card.”
The President can yell from the rooftops what he “supposedly will do” but the pattern indicates that his rhetoric means nothing. In regards to actually helping “liberal” issues, the President is completely irrelevant. It would be best to concentrate on those in Congress and replace the President in 2012.
It’s scary , but your so right. This guy is a 100X’s worse then BV$H ever was because he has effectively neutralized the left with his silver tongue and dark skin. The very people who should be screaming bloody murder about what this klown is up to are almost totally silent. It’s as you say a done deal and nothing is going to stop them.
No that is not the definition of a Ponsi scheme – a ponsi scheme is not an insurance scheme where some get more and others less but all are protected from a risk – but Social Security is an insurance where we are protected from the risk of extreme poverty in old age.
You need to stop reading the Wall Street Journal and listening to Fox and instead studied a bit of finance including insurance.
Ponsi blows up mathematically as interest is paid from capital but the liability pretends the interest credited is still capital. Social Insurance never blows up – tax rates and and benefits are adjusted via projections that suggest what changes, if any, are needed to keep both tax rates and benefits stable over 75 years – and it has worked beautifully – with the 1935 projections for the situation in 1990 being spot on correct, and only a tiny bit off for 2010.
As to “lockbox” that term referred to not increasing the publicly held National Debt/deficit – paying down the debt held by the public so when it came to redeeming the Trust Fund bonds it would not strain the bond market. Bush blew that idea up.
Because government holding that individually financed retirement program was equated by the GOP to “socialism by the back door” when it was proposed in 1934, “pay-as you go financing was demanded by the GOP – and FDR made the idea work as a stable system by using actuaries to control a social insurance system.
I know you prefer “welfare” and the “poor house” but old age with dignity is preferred by the rest of us, and since individual savings does not work with the poor not having spare money and the rest not into forgoing a working car for some gold under the bed, only social insurance gives us old age with dignity.
Let’s not call what he’s doing “leadership” it’s more like he’s a low paid Corp. middle manager and he’s just carrying out his orders. He’s a friggin errand boy for the Oliogarchs is all he is. When do we get to see the real leadership of this country? Never, is my guess because their smart enough to stay hidden and let their paid for shills and flunkies like Barry do their dirty work for them. That’s what having lots of money is all about isn’t it?
Spot on comment – Jane and you are correct.
The tax cut stimulus is only the few changes from the current situation as to tax rates and “unemployment” – meaning only the one year of “immediate expensing” for new business investment and few other minor tweaks, plus a one year payroll tax cut of 2% worth $112 billion. For this tiny stimulus Obama caved – but actually Obama did not cave because Obama got what Obama always wanted – tax cuts for the rich so as to please the GOP and get more donations to his campaign in 2012. The first time he did this – the public option – one could say it was not planned , but the second time this type of behavior occurs, we either go with stupid or a liar – and Obama is not stupid.
The coming State of the Union will try to lock down those lower rates for the rich, killing the problem of a temp law that expires in two years, as Obama pushes even lower rates as “tax reform” – namely the reform recommended by the conservatives on his deficit commission. He will ignore the fact that going back to the Clinton rates cuts the deficit by $4 trillion over 10 years, and instead tout the $1 trillion saved via “loophole closing” (loopholes that favor the middle class) as he drops the top rate to 24%. Obama takes apart FDR as he pretends to be a Democratic President.
The “fix” is as they say already in. It was FDR that nothing of any consequence ever happens in DC by chance. The Plutocracy has decided that all entitlements so called have to be gutted if they can really finish off the so called middle class. What most people in this increasingly poverty stricken land don’t understand is that having a large middle class as we’ve had for the past 60 yrs. is a historical a nominally not the norm. The Oligarchs are very aware of this and have decided that it’s not only unnecessary anymore, but is actually a serious ongoing irritant. It’s far easier in their view to ride herd over a huge poverty stricken lower class , one that can be tortured and killed regularly to keep it under control. My guess is were in for a real ride down these next 30 yrs. and at the end of this whole cycle are camps and huge slums set off from walled cities and compounds of the wealthy protected by heavily armed militias. This is how much of the 3rd world already is and it’s coming home here soon. They know where they got it wrong in the 20th century and they intend to set things right ( far right ) in the 21st.
Zzzzzzzz….
Sorry, comment misplaced…
Herbert Hoover, is that you?
Agreed. I’ve lived as an expat for the last eight years in a third world country. My impressions of back home are second hand, but it seems to me so many folks are not aware what’s being taken from them – and how hard it will be to ever dig ourselves out of the hole.
Of course the most frustrating aspect is that large numbers of the American population seem to be cheering and promoting their ongoing enslavement. Have we become a nation of bootlickers? If a populace can become so easily swayed by propaganda and work against their own self-interest what hope is there?
William Graham Sumner tells all about it in “What Makes the Rich Richer and the Poor Poorer?” in this book of essays: http://books.google.com/books?id=i7OVMAjv34AC&printsec=frontcover&dq=William+Graham+Sumner+gold+standard&source=bl&ots=bbfEWuLMXG&sig=0APRaGD_LIPKRDFu7IlcT3yrQno&hl=en&ei=nQYQTd-RHcnsnQel78WYDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CFkQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q&f=false
“The public just has to force President Obama to stand up and show some leadership.”
We’ve already seen how far we can trust Obama’s announcments.
Show leadership? What a novel idea. Not. Gonna. Happen.
Oh I’m sure Dean already knows that, the cake is already baked. The only question is how spectacular a cave-in we get to see. The metaphor in my mind… an Air Force underground test-range.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1f6vbiuUt0
Dean is quite correct, Wall Street has more to lose here than anyone. Obama should be telling all his pals on Wall Street and at the Chamber of Commerce that unless they put the Republicans on a leash, as W. would say, “this sucker could going down”.
http://www.businessinsider.com/2008/9/bush-on-economy-this-sucker-could-go-down-
FDL has feckless petitions. Did you ever see an FDL petition or a moveon petition or a democrats.com petition with a boycott threat of of companies that gie money to conservatives?
Conservative economic policies put you in a noose
They come from the corporate right and
sucked up by the middle class conservative obtuse
Fuck the poor and the unemployed
those corporate masters of which morals they appear devoid
Fucking people under them getting Republicans to suck their Pink Floyd
But we can turn the corporate world upside down
by going on a selective purchasing strike
we can change Washington DC around
http://WWW.DEMOCRATZ.ORG will make progressive legislation abound.
T’was the night before Christmas and all through the House
The Republicans began cowering and began to grouse
Old http://WWW.DEMOCRATZ.ORG got on their case
he told people to boycott the conservative contributing companies that make up their base
No Rite Aid, No Jack Daniels, No Wendy’s, No Smuckers
If you buy these products you act like suckers.
Call these companies that give money to the RepubliKLAN Right
Demand the legislation from their CEOs and to all a good night.
Focus on the companies that give money to Blue Dogs and RepubliKLAN conservatives. Hold those companies legally hostage with boycotts. Companies need your money to survive. Make these companies get you legislation before you patronize them again. Get as many people as you can to do this and voila, peaceful revolution.
No expensive rallies and marches where employers will retaliate. No arrests because you will call these companies en masse from home.
http://www.democratz.org
As pessimistic as I am about Obama, I don’t think he will do this, at least not that way. First, Professor Baker says “privatizing social security,” later in his article he says “cutting” social security. That’s a big difference.
I don’t believe he would even try to cut it without a “consensus.” That’s what he was going for with the deficit commission, but clearly if anything the commission showed that no consensus exists. As the debate over immigration shows, the people’s views do have to be considered. As spineless as Dems are, the party would truly walk away from an Obama that unilaterally cut social security. Social security and medicare are signature programs and basically define the Democratic party.
Forgive me, cal222, however, the last two sentences of your second paragraph suggest that you are, actually, a stark, hope-waving, wild optimist …
All due respect, of course.
DW
Obama may think he has sold himself to the bankers, et al., & that they’ll support him once again in 2012, but they’ll drop him on the waste pile without blinking. They’ll have exhausted his usefulness by then.