The latter part of a wise person's life is occupied with curing the follies, prejudices and false opinions they contracted earlier.
Jonathan Swift
Obama Sets a New American Record Federal Deficit for FY 2011
After Obama's setting a new spending record with a $1.4T deficit in FY 2009, an improving economy slashed the deficit to $1.3T in FY 2010. The CBO now projects that the current fiscal year deficit, nearly half over, will approach $1.5T. Obama credits Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi for their invaluable assistance in setting the new all-time record.
Sunday Talk Soup
I'm sure in his mind, David Gregory thinks he's being evenhanded. But when Gregory failed to get Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid recently even to acknowledge there were serious unfunded liabilities with social security (not to mention Medicare) with the largest generation in American history starting to retire, with the same retirement ages despite significantly longer lives and hence a larger number of social security payments and a smaller number of workers (roughly about 3) available to support each new retiree, Gregory simply doesn't have credibility.
Let's suppose, for a moment, that David Gregory did due diligence and actually read last August SSA trustee's summary report. He might have noticed the following:
The Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Fund, however, is now projected to become exhausted in 2018, two years earlier than in last year’s report. Thus, changes to improve the financial status of the DI program are needed soon.Social Security expenditures are expected to exceed tax receipts this year for the first time since 1983. The projected deficit of $41 billion this year (excluding interest income) is attributable to the recession and to an expected $25 billion downward adjustment to 2010 income that corrects for excess payroll tax revenue credited to the trust funds in earlier years. This deficit is expected to shrink substantially for 2011...After 2014 deficits are expected to grow rapidly as the baby boom generation’s retirement causes the number of beneficiaries to grow substantially more rapidly than the number of covered workers. The annual deficits will be made up by redeeming trust fund assets in amounts less than interest earnings through 2024, and then by redeeming trust fund assets until reserves are exhausted in 2037, at which point tax income would be sufficient to pay about 75 percent of scheduled benefits through 2084.
I'm not going to tell Republicans how to respond to these questions, but I would make the following points. First, the President's own bipartisan deficit reduction commission agreed on the necessity of social security reform and specifically introduced steps like increasing the retirement age and reforming benefit increases, passing their recommendations by a clear majority vote. Second, this is a retirement system, not a social welfare program paid out of general revenues. Participants have paid into the system under the expectation of drawing upon that income stream; you do not change the rules after the game has been played (e.g., means testing). Furthermore, I reject any attempt to institute a back-door class warfare general tax increase (i.e., lifting the income ceiling to pay for other beneficiaries). We must also insist on the concept of shared sacrifice, and we must not allow a morally hazardous situation whereby people who did not save for their retirement are rewarded and those who did are penalized. Third, we have an obligation to solve this problem now; it's morally unacceptable that we collect, say, way beyond what we put into the system on the backs of the younger generation, exhausting their own reserve. What Harry Reid and other liberal Democrats are doing is nothing short of a moral outrage by perpetuating a Ponzi scheme. We cannot shift our own bills onto the backs of future generations whom need to cover their own government obligations.
I Have a Beef With Taco Bell...
I really should have put this item in my nutrition blog, but I can't resist the opportunity to mock the situation: it really reflects the impact of Big Sis and predatory lawyers, which are a drag on our economy.
Most informed consumers know how to read product names and labels. In particular, if I'm looking to purchase wheat bread, I know there are all sorts of label gimmicks. I know to look to check for "100% whole wheat bread", with the first ingredient listed as whole wheat flour. I don't fall for "whole wheat bread" or "made with 100% whole wheat", either of which implies a blend of flours, including (less nutritious) enriched flours ("whole wheat" might reflect a blend that is mostly whole wheat). (Most wheat products are based on the endosperm, not the nutritious bran or germ.) Of course, let us read a typically readable FDA source:
Does the term "whole grain" mean the same as "100 percent whole grain"? If a product is labeled as "whole wheat bagel" or "whole wheat pizza," how much whole wheat should it contain? What is graham flour?
FDA has not defined any claims concerning the grain content of foods. However, the agency has established standards of identity for various types of cereal flours and related products in 21 CFR Part 137, including a standard of identity for "whole wheat flour" (§ 137.200) and "whole durum flour" (§ 137.225). Graham flour is an alternative name for whole wheat flour (§ 137.200). Depending on the context in which a "whole grain" statement appears on the label, it could be construed as meaning that the product is "100 percent whole grain." We recommend that products labeled with "100 percent whole grain" not contain grain ingredients other than those the agency considers to be whole grains. Consumers should be able to look at the ingredient statement to determine whether the predominant or first ingredient listed is a whole grain. We note that wheat flour should not be labeled as a whole grain flour because wheat flour is a synonym of flour (§ 137.105), and thus, the bran and germ have been removed. However, whole wheat flour (§ 137.200) should be considered a whole grain flour because it contains all the parts of the grain, i.e., the bran, endosperm, and germ. We recommend that pizza that is labeled "whole grain " or "whole wheat" only be labeled as such when the flour ingredient in the crust is made entirely from whole grain flours or whole wheat flour, respectively. Similarly, we recommend that bagels, labeled as "whole grain " or "whole wheat" only be labeled as such when bagels are made entirely from whole grain flours or whole wheat flour, respectively.Let me translate from legalese: The FDA standard for whole grain refers to the ingredient itself, not the finished product. It cautions the consumer reading the ingredient list that the ingredient "wheat flour" does not imply "whole wheat flour". Products labeled "100% whole wheat" implies the flour mix is exclusively whole wheat. It recommends, but does not mandate, that vendors not label their product "whole wheat" unless the underlying flour content is 100% whole wheat. In my experience, vendors will always label the product "100% whole wheat" if it's not a flour blend, and if an item is described simply as "whole wheat" or "made with whole wheat", I'll check the ingredient panel for a second flour not including the term "whole".
There's a reason I've been going through whole grain explanation: a similar situation exists for discussing meat products. Whether we are talking about hot dogs, mystery meatloaf at school or bargain meat patties at a supermarket, we are well aware they can include comparably inexpensive (high-carb, e.g., grain products) fillers, (egg) binders, various additives, flavor enhancers, mechanically deboned meats, and/or (non-meat protein) extenders. (If you have a nutrition label, it's fairly easy to tell: meat has no appreciable carbohydrate grams.) In a manner analogous to whole grain bakers, McDonald's particularly emphasizes its hamburgers are 100% beef (no fillers, extenders or additives).
A consumer rights class action suit was filed last week by by the Montgomery law firm Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles on behalf of Taco Bell customer Amanda Obney, claiming that the taco filling contains only 35% beef, the rest being fillers and extenders. The suit is not asking for damages, but insists on corrective advertising, claiming that Taco Bell's beef taco don't meet minimum USDA standards for being called "beef" and Taco Bell's lower cost filling in effect confuses customers in an apples-and-oranges cost comparison with other vendors selling "real" beef tacos. [According to the USDA food standards and labeling policy book, beef taco filling must be at least 40% fresh beef.]
Taco Bell responded strongly yesterday, insisting that its recipe consists of 88% of pure beef, with remaining ingredients being a mixture of water, spices, and only 3 to 5% fillers (oats, starches, sugar, etc.) It specifically refutes the allegation of extenders.
I haven't seen a breakdown of the sampling done or the results, but there is a nutrition label using the label "taco meat filling", with beef being listed as the first ingredient. (It is odd they label the mixture "meat" vs. "beef"...) I don't see any obvious extender, e.g., soy flour or concentrate. The soy ingredients I see are probably emulsifiers or binders. But given the fact that the label's leading ingredient is beef (unless test results show otherwise), I'm fine with Taco Bell labeling its taco as 'beef' or 'made with beef'. Of course, Taco Bell has been tweaking its humdrum hamburger rivals for some time. It might be fun for Wendy's to reprise the Clara Peller "Where's the beef?" ad at Taco Bell (or perhaps Sherlock Holmes walking past the Taco Bell on the way to Wendy's)...
Political Humor
President Obama made his annual State of the Union address tonight from Washington, D.C. It was on all the channels. One of the shows they pre-empted was an hour of "America's Biggest Loser," which means all those fat people exercised this week for no reason at all. - Jimmy Kimmel
[No. It's just the loser of the mid-term elections was giving a speech on TV... He managed to shed 63 Democrats, and nearly two trillion British pounds in additions to the national debt...]
Despite cutting half of the city’s police force, the mayor of Camden, New Jersey, says the city’s crime statistics will not be affected. When asked how that’s possible, he cited the new law that makes stabbing a misdemeanor. - Conan O'Brien
[The mayor went on to explain one of the officers laid off was the department's statistician.]
Musical Interlude: One-Hit Wonders/Instrumentals. I've been referencing a number of website compilations of cited categories (e.g., Tunecaster and Lyrics on Demand). Note that I occasionally quibble with categories. For example, most people remember Rupert Holmes' signature song "Escape/The Pina Colada Song", but I preferred his follow-up single, the jealous/slightly paranoid "Him".
Rupert Holmes, "Escape/The Pina Colada Song"
Rupert Holmes, "Him"
