Miller: Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional

[Joanne98]

Run time: 01:57 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJgBL9ykQ9s   Posted on YouTube: August 29, 2010 By YouTube Member: ThinkProgress2 Views on YouTube: 271   Posted on DU: August 29, 2010 By DU Member: Joanne98 Views on DU: 1175

 

[gadjitfreek]

1. Yep! Create a whole new pool of monies...

...for Wall Street to lose for us. Nice plan, bonehead.

[mrcheerful]

2. This is the guy the Tea bagging nit wits who only last summer were crying for government to keep its

hands off their medicare put in place? A guy who not only wants to take their medicare but also wants their SS check too? Can you say DOH?

[Hulk]

3. The more exposure this idiot gets....the better chance my pet dog could win....

Alaska can't have it's head that far up it's ass to send this clown to Washington. I've never been there...and I only know of palin....but the state has to have more smarts than that??

God help us, if clowns like this get to Washington. We are truly f*cked!

[lib2DaBone]

4. Yes.. there is a solution Mr. Miller..

Keep your rotten stinking hands off Social Security. Don't touch ANYTHING.. don't TWEAK, don't FIX don't privatize...sanitize or sterilize. Don't do a damm thing.

TeaBaggers are Republicans running from the stench of George Bush... with the I.Q. of a box-of- rocks

[Enthusiast]

5. He is saying what

Wall Street wants to hear. Good campaign strategy yet. I hope he fails.......miserably

[MrMickeysMom]

6. Mr. Miller... shut up and listen to this from Op Ed today-

From the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, courtesy of letter writer Daniel Sleator of Squirrel Hill. Mr. Sleator was basically giving the Post Gazette some red ass for running a column from Amity Shales. Mr. Shales August 22 piece "Doctrine Heir" was a compilation of a disorganized list of irrelevant information designed to confuse readers. This same bullshit flows from the mouth of Miller, who would rather not recognize why Social Security was the best economic policy to come out of the New Deal.

"... Social Security is a very simple system. Payroll taxes are collected and go into a Social Security trust fund (now valued at $2.5 trillion). After people retire, they draw a monthly payment form the trust fund as long as they live.

The trust fund is kept in the form of government bonds. The government must eventually pay this money back to the Social Security system, just as it must eventually pay back China or any other creditor.

As things stand, Social Security will be able to pay all benefits until 2037, and after that it will be able to continue to pay 78 percent of benefits. These are undisputed facts from the report of the trustees. And this very far off event can be pushed much further into the future by small changes to the system now, such as having high-income workers contribute a little bit more.

This op-ed is just a small volley in a sustained and determined effort to kill or drastically change Social Security. There are many reasons behind this effort. One is that Wall Street is salivating at the prospect of getting its hands on the Social Security trust fund.

Another factor is that Social Security is a highly successful and popular example of government intervention, and it's one of the few programs remaining form the New Deal. This clear refutation of "the government is the problem" is highly annoying to conservatives.

So the strategy is to obscure and confuse and obfuscate, and this op-ed piece is a perfect example of this."

[kag]

7. Thanks for posting this.

It gives me warm fuzzies that Alaska won't elect this idiot. Who's the democrat? Is he/she any good?

[RBInMaine]

8. Typical of today's TeaRadical RePukelican Party. They must be BASHED up side the head bigtime !

[bulloney]

9. Going to war without Congressional declaration is unconstitutional,

but I don't hear teabaggers bitchin' about that.

Having the Federal Reserve issue currency instead of Congress can be considered unconstitutional, but I've heard little outrage from the teabaggers on that fact, too.

[liberation]

11. The whole PATRIOT act is a whole unconstitutional mess...

... I see the only time these "teabaggers" care about the constitution is when the Federal government may be in "danger" of helping its own citizens.


Before these fools talk about restoring "dignity" "honor" "charity" etc, maybe they should at least find out what those terms mean.

[Crowman1979]

10. Yet when you talk about cutting the unconstitutional war on terror...

...they go apeshit and start foaming at the mouth.

[activa8tr]

12. This man has NOTHING to offer, and is LYING, too about Soc Sec paying out more than

it is taking in.

This guy is totally nuts, protecting big money tax cheats and tax avoiders, and waving a flag and the Constitution.

I guess Sarah Palin opened the floodgates to those who lie and don't know the fact and want to screw America to make the rich richer.

This must be the year of the Palin-styled stupid candidates.

[Historic NY]

13. They want to get back to basics.. I guess that included slavery too...

What happened to "promote the general welfare"?

[SanchoPanza]

14. Just I.O.U.s.

Heh. That always gets me. Self-acclaimed pure adherents of the Constitution not understanding what "full faith and credit" or "validity of the public debt" means.

Interesting Fact: That the SS Trust is now entirely composed of Treasury securities, those worthless I.O.U.s upon which the Federal government is required by law to pay interest, was brought about by the consensus recommendation of a 1983 Bipartisan Commission set up by Ronald Reagan and chaired by Alan Greenspan. The purpose of this policy was to provide the Social Security Trust Fund with the most reliable funding stream possible.

The reality is that this stream is only jeopardized if the U.S. government defaults on its debt obligations. Something that, under the Constitution, it cannot legally do.

[abrysta1]

15. America needs Social Security

There has never been a plan on the table for government health care. People in america never do their own home work. FOX news and way too many politicians practice the art of deception as do many many many shareholders.

There has never been a plan on the table for free medical insurance. Medicare insurance is not free. Never has been as far as I know. My parents have been paying for years.

IMPROVED Medicare Insurance for ALL has never been introduced as free insurance.

But IMPROVED Medicare Insurance for ALL would far less expensive than medical insurance has been in the last 30 years. AND it would be the best coverage on the planet in our history.

It would look something like this:

A family of four making the median income of $56,200 would pay about $225 - $300 per month and would NOT be limited coverage.


* long term care such that cancer would require
* prescription drugs
* hospital
* surgical
* outpatient services
* primary and preventive care
* emergency services
* dental
* mental health
* home health
* physical therapy
* rehabilitation (including for substance abuse)
* vision care
* hearing services including hearing aids
* chiropractic
* durable medical equipment
* palliative care



IMPROVED Medicare Insurance For ALL ends deductibles and co-payments.



If a deductible and/or co-pay policy is in effect on a policy today this usually indicates under-insured/limited coverage.

[Green_Lantern]

16. everything he said is based on his own personal opinion

And not the US Constitution or what the founders wanted.

They think the Constitution can only mean what they say it means.