Obama Flips Social Security Off Again.
Okay, if I know that Social Security has nothing to do with the $1.4 trillion deficit or the $13.8 trillion debt, President Obama certainly knows. In fact, he knows the SS surplus has funded President budgets for decades! Why? Because, once again, I know, and I'm not exactly the brightest bird in the flock. I didn't even have to look it up...I just knew.
Yet, despite his obvious intelligence, he continues to make statements like the following:
"Actually, I think that if you talk to economists, both conservative and liberal, what they'll say is the problem is not next year. The problem is, how are we dealing with our medium-term debt and deficit, and how are we dealing with our long-term debt and deficit? And most of that has to do with entitlements, particularly Social Security and Medicaid." - President ObamaYou see, Social Security and Medicare represent the last vestige of an American society governed by the people and for the people...or at least, as much as that statement has ever held any truth. Therefore, they remain the targets of the Republican demolition squad. Why? Because to completely unravel the remaining tattered threads of the people’s “safety net" - those same threads that former President Roosevelt’s New Deal and former President Johnson’s Great Society wove together that created a network to cushion the blows that can result from occurrences beyond our control - completes their agenda to eliminate protection for the people. But, President Obama is not a Republican. He is a Democrat...one, who promised he would work on behalf of the people for a change.
He knows we the people are already suffering from an economy that has devastated our savings, home values and retirement security, so why is he trying to impose measures aimed at cutting working-class living standards? And falsely citing Social Security and Medicare as the biggest problems in dealing with the long-term debt and deficit? Especially, when it's not true. Moreover, why has President Obama tried to put Social Security on the chopping block (Conrad-Gregg Commission) from the moment he took office?
Anyway, here's the truth: The $1.4 trillion deficit nor the nearly $13.8 trillion debt have anything to do with SS. SS has taken in more revenue each year than it has paid out in benefits for the last 30-years. The excess revenue has been invested in U.S. government securities that the federal government "borrows" from to spend on other things.
Yet, despite the innocence and contribution of social security, increasing the retirement age to 69, making citizens work longer so they pay more into the system, and then, in turn, giving them less when they retire, ranks up there as one of top solutions offered at the expense of the American public.
4 comments:
In The Architecture of Modern Political Power, Daniel Pouzzner outlines the tactics employed by the elite to maintain their dominance.
"Ostensible control over the knowable, by marketing institutionally accredited science as the only path to true understanding"
Obama, as part of the ruling class discourages independent reason by encouraging magical thinking.
Magical thinking consists of anything Obama says, no matter how little sense his lies make.
Here is something else to ponder: Our blind reverence to science.
Epistemology is the study of the nature and origin of knowledge. This elite monopoly of the knowable, which is enforced through INSTITUTIONAL SCIENCE, could be characterized as an "epistemological cartel." The ruling class has bribed the 'bookkeepers' (i.e., natural and social scientists). Meanwhile, the masses practically deify the bookkeepers of the elite, and remain ignorant of the methodology of the bookkeeping.
Biases and presuppositions pervade the very fabric of the elite's epistemic autocracy. Academia itself has become the official church for this cult of epistemological selectivity.
Consider Christian philosopher Ravi Zacharias who personally encountered the enormous prejudicial hurdles of scientism during a casual conversation with a few scholars, wherein one scientist makes a confession:
I asked them a couple of questions.
'If the Big Bang were indeed where it all began, may I ask what preceded the Big Bang?'
Their answer, which I had anticipated, was that the universe was shrunk down to a singularity. I pursued,
'But isn't it correct that a singularity as defined by science is a point at which all the laws of physics break down?'
'That is correct,' was the answer.
'Then, technically, your starting point is not scientific either.'
There was silence, and their expressions betrayed the scurrying mental searches for an escape hatch. But I had yet another question.
I asked if they agreed that when a mechanistic view of the universe had held sway, thinkers like Hume had chided philosophers for taking the principle of causality and applying it to a philosophical argument for the existence of God.
Causality, he warned, could not be extrapolated from science to philosophy.
'Now,' I added, 'when quantum theory holds sway, randomness in the subatomic world is made a basis for randomness in life. Are you not making the very same extrapolation that you warned us against?'
Again there was silence and then one man said with a self- deprecating smile,
'We scientists do seem to retain selective sovereignty over what we allow to be transferred to philosophy and what we don't'
This selective sovereignty, vigorously enforced by the epistemic autocracy of the elite, effectively marginalized dissenters and consummated the apotheosis of the "bookkeepers."
“The cryptocracy has successfully harnessed to its own ends the huge potential for promoting secret political-occult agendas to the public, by presenting them as unassailable 'objective scientific truth.'
Since the bogey of 'science' instills in secularists a sort of blind reverence, opponents of political and occult agendas promoted through the propaganda of scientism are quickly stigmatized as Neanderthal, especially with regard to their opposition to Darwinism, a dogma proved false by Norman Macbeth in his magisterial Darwin Retried and exposed as a cult by Gertrude Himmelfarb in Darwin.”
Suddenly, 'ostensible control over the knowable' became the Divine Providence of god-like 'bookkeepers.'
Meanwhile, their opponents became heretics and were 'burned at the stake' (i.e., marginalized by academia and other secular institutions)
“The doctrine of man playing god reaches its nadir in the philosophy of scientism which makes possible the complete mental, spiritual and physical enslavement of mankind through technologies such as satellite and computer surveillance; a state of affairs symbolized by the 'All Seeing Eye' above the unfinished pyramid on the U.S. one dollar bill.”
With the inculcation of the masses into scientism, the unfinished pyramid is almost complete.
Well, lawmakers raised the payroll tax in the 1980's (a disproportionate amount of which is paid by the lower and middle classes) and created a Trust Fund into which surpluses would be placed and saved in order to keep the system solvent during the lean years of the baby boomer retirements. However, Bush, who promised not to touch the social security trust fund began raiding the trust fund and the surpluses in his first months in office, and continued to do so throughout both terms.
According to the Congressional Office of Management and Budget to cover the cost of his tax cuts, Bush had to spend the entire projected Social Security surplus of $2.4 trillion.
And I remember the following question was asked: Will the American people allow the same politicians whose policies raided the trust fund, ran up the deficits, and shrank the revenues necessary to pay them down, claim that the deficits are to blame for the impending massive cuts to entitlements, and not their own fiscal strategy?
Hi, i just want to say hello to the community
Post a Comment