Say not, when I have leisure I will study;
you may not have leisure.
The Mishnah
The End of the Democrat Ponzi Scheme Cometh
Gary North, "Obama Admits That Medicare and Social Security Are Going Bust": Thumbs UP!
First of all, I have to quibble a bit with Gary North. I'm frankly a little bored and tired of hearing libertarians treat the GOP with the same brushstrokes as Dems. This quote from North is a classic example:
Will Republicans agree to the [lower inflation adjustment] cuts? Of course not. They will campaign against him for proposing them. Representative Greg Walden of Oregon, who is the head of the House Republicans’ campaign committee, told CNN that the budget was “a shocking attack on seniors.” Conclusion: “His words were interpreted as a signal that in the 2014 midterm elections Republican candidates will again accuse Democrats of trying to cut Medicare and Social Security. . . .”Okay, Dr. North: you should not confuse political spin with policy. The Democrats have been running against the GOP for decades on unfounded allegations of attempts to dismantle senior entitlements. First of all, many Republicans have paid FICA taxes for decades for a government commitment; my late maternal grandfather, a grocery store owner, was proud of receiving among the highest payments at the time in the social security program. One of my favorite former higher-level bosses (unsuccessfully) ran for the GOP nomination of an open Chicago area Congressional seat, and his signature issue was saving social security. Second, even after the Dems used unlikely-to-stick Medicare cost savings (think "doc fixes"), medical device surtaxes, and class warfare investment taxes to underwrite a portion of ObamaCare's costs rather than invest in real income-yielding assets, the Dems still ran against the GOP on Medicare. And, Dr. North, what did you think the fear-mongering Paul-Ryan-dumping-Grandma-over-the-cliff Dem campaign was all about? Or the fact that George Bush frittered away his reelection political capital in a quixotic attempt to fix social security, the so-called third rail of American politics?
So when Congressman Walden gets even the slightest opportunity to turn the tables on the Dems, he will take it. The fact that Obama for the first time is willing to consider a modest adjustment in entitlements might be viewed as hypocritical just like his 2006 vote against raising the debt limit. It's all about political posturing. I view it as classic Obama politics--he's willing to co-opt GOP talking points with watered down "reforms" (think of medical malpractice tort reform or Medicare fraud) but then will press for the GOP to cave on an upper-class bailout of the programs.
This idea of COLA reform has been pushed by fiscal conservatives, principally Republicans for years. Consider this excerpt a few weeks after last fall's election:
Seeking to jump-start stalled talks on avoiding the so-called fiscal cliff, House Republicans on Monday proposed a new 10-year, $2.2 trillion blueprint to President Barack Obama that calls for increasing the eligibility age for Medicare and lowering cost-of-living hikes for Social Security benefits.I'm sure that Walden is/was fully aware of Speaker Boehner's proposal. I have pointed out in this blog before that these reforms are, at best, modest reforms, little more than pocket change in confronting the Baby Boomer Tsunami.To his credit, Paul Ryan has suggesting converting Medicare into a subsidy system.
There is always resistance to change. Not to mention a state of denial. It seems every time I get my social security statement there's a prominent disclaimer about sustainable benefits. When people read that the reserve means that full payments are guaranteed through an eroding generation interim period before the exhaustion of the reserve, they may have a false case of security.
Think about what that means for today's 50-year-old female worker. She might live until the age of 88 or so. She'll be in social security just 5 years and there's nothing left that the government has put away for the rest of her life--and every penny paid by workers for FICA then will go totally for her (and others') checks, with nothing left for their own retirement. And even then, she'll only get a partial check.
What do you think is going to happen? Do you think the politically active Baby Boomers, whom protested the Vietnam War, are going to stand to see their checks get a 30% or so haircut? The reason why there's no money left is because of some combination of inadequate funding and/or unduly generous preceding disbursements during the working years of the 50-year-old woman.
What is likely to happen? Some combination of tax increases and/or money printing, which will adversely affect the economy and standard of living.
One might ask, if tweaking age limits and COLA's aren't enough, what kinds of ideas might build towards a solution?
These are just a few ideas off the top of my head:
1) allow professional managers, on a competitive bid basis, to invest say up to two-thirds of social security and other government reserves. The emphasis would be on market/asset-diversification with emphasis on income-production;
2) redefine social security as a supplemental income plan with a cap on distributions; allow beneficiaries to opt for lump-sum distributions
3) combine a high-deductible employee payroll tax (e.g., 60% of median income) with a small consumption tax; no cap on employer-paid FICA
4) cap government health care and delegate spending and authority to the states; provide catastrophic health coverage and admission to government healthcare programs under financial hardship
5) streamline government programs, e.g., elderly poverty in the context of a comprehensive decentralized poverty support program.
Make no mistake: I don't underestimate resistance to change. People have been led to believe by demagogues like Bill Clinton and Barry Obama that they don't need to save and invest for a rainy day and retirement. The federal government can "invest" in green energy companies that professional investors don't see as profitable. With trillion dollar deficits almost 4 years into the Obama Recovery, we have a record number of Food Stamp recipients; hey, the government will even ensure a sexually-active woman that she doesn't even have to pay for her own birth control expenses anymore: "the other guy" will pay.
"The other guy" will pay for EVERYTHING. Obama could spend all the assets of all the billionaires in America and still not have enough to pay off one of his annual deficits. We could take all the income of all high income people and major corporations and not have enough. Even if you print money, you will have inflation--an indirect tax.
This is unsustainable, and it will end badly. I knew we were in a housing and credit bubble a decade ago and it would end badly. This in a sense reminds me of when I was a professor; even though I gave at least 3 weeks to do computer assignments, for the most part they would wait until, say, the middle of the last week; some would inevitably panic. But if you want a preview, take a look at recent California city bankruptcies; they were cutting even police and firemen, stiffing vendors, all to try to make pension payments.
Let me pose a question: Do you think young workers are going to pay more taxes for worse services just so they can pay hundreds of billions in debt service for past spending decisions or to make full payments to beneficiaries? We are likely to face a haircut, along with everyone else. It's immoral to shift our debt burden to younger generations. The sooner we start reform, the better: the compounding principle also applies to missed opportunities.
Do I blame the GOP for being gun-shy? No--how many times must Wile E Coyote suffer at the hand of the Road Runner before he catches on? These are Democratic legacy programs; it's Obama's move: he's seen what the actuaries have to say. He needs to act the role of leader. History will judge him not just for what he does, but for what he doesn't do.
The Kermit Gosnell Atrocities
Why has the story of the 72-year-old Philadelphia late-term abortionist gotten little, if any mention in the national media? Contrast the blanket coverage given Dr. Tiller's murder. I suspect in part you have the fact, as I have mentioned on multiple occasions the fact Obama blocked the Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act during his tenure in the Illinois Senate, even after the national bill passed without dissent (see Jill Stanek's website here).
Gosnell cleared over a million dollars a year (I read that he charged $3K a procedure); literally hundreds of babies were born alive after the pregnant women were administered meds to facilitate abortion over the tenure of his practice; the doctor and/or his employees would ensure the babies were dead: He is also charged with the murder of a patient, due to excessive anaesthesia or pain medication.
- A Pittsburgh medic has revealed horrifying details of the operating conditions of a Philadelphia abortion clinic, where children born alive were “beheaded”. Stephen Massof, 50, is standing witness in the trial of his former employer, Kermit Gosnell. And on 4 April, he told a court he routinely saw the murder of infants at the hospital. He also said the hospital once aborted a fetus at 26 weeks - this is two weeks beyond the permitted 24-week limit, which is in itself only to be used in extreme cases. Massof, who await his own sentencing hearing after he pled guilty to the murder of two babies claimed the clinic also cut out the spinal cord of nearly 100 living infants. And, for what it was worth, he said the clinic's instruments were rusty and unsafe. "It would rain fetuses. Fetuses and blood all over the place. It is literally a beheading. It is separating the brain from the body,"
- Investigators say the clinic smelled of animal urine and faeces, apart from having blood-stained furniture and bed sheets. It also reused disposable medical supplies. And amongst other shocking revelations was the fact the hospital stored fetal remains by stuffing them into "cabinets, in the basement, in a freezer, in jars and bags and plastic jugs".
- A Delaware woman who worked for abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell recalled hearing one child “screaming” after it was delivered during an abortion procedure at Gosnell’s West Philadelphia clinic.
- Lynda Williams, 44, of Wilmington, said Gosnell taught her how to flip a baby over and snip its neck with a pair of scissors to ensure “fetal demise.”Williams also testified that she followed Gosnell’s orders on one occassion when Gosnell was away either running, swimming or working at a clinic in Delaware, and took a baby that was delivered in a toilet and snipped its neck. “It jumped, the arm,” she said, showing the jury by raising her arm.
 |
| Grand Jury Phoro Via The Atlantic |
Political Cartoon
 |
| Courtesy of IBD's Michael Ramirez and Townhall |
Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young, "Teach Your Children".
The End of an 83-Year Marriage
 |
| Victoria and Steven Wrubel on their wedding day, Sept. 28, 1929 Courtesy of the Detroit Free Press |
