Obama Administration and Wall Street Predators Target "Entitlement Reform"

[bottomtheweaver]

Very trenchant essay by Black Agenda Report editor Bruce Dixon, 18 February 2009:

When the corporate media, Wall Street predators and their favorite politicians talk of "entitlement reform," they are not referring to their bonuses, or tax breaks, golden parachutes or consulting fees. They mean to "reform" your Social Security, your Medicaid, your Medicare, all of which they view as "fiscally irresponsible." When President Obama endorses a bipartisan summit on "fiscal responsibility" it's time to look out.

Not satisfied with its multi-trillion dollar raids on the US Treasury, predatory bankers and the Wall Street investor class have in sight their next target of opportunity. It's what their bipartisan pundits and politicians call "entitlement reform." It's what the rest of us call Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security, and their "reform" is our ruin.

Wall Street is nothing if not bipartisan on this issue. The 2008 election marked a decisive shift in campaign contributions away from Republican presidential candidates and toward Democrats. Obama's economic A-Team is composed of former execs of firms like Goldman-Sachs that benefited most from the housing and dot com bubbles, and faces like those of Paul Volcker and Robert Rubin, who helped create it. But now that thieves have cleaned out the Treasury, they are ready to lecture us on "fiscal responsibility." The bailouts have blown a gaping hole in the federal budget, a hole that has to be made up for somewhere else.

Ominously, President Obama is talking about Medicare and Social Security in their language, as places where sacrifices will have to be made, and budgets will have to be cut for the sake of trimming the nation's multi-trillion dollar deficit. Words, in the worlds of politics and public policy mean everything, especially when they don't mean exactly what they say. Forty years ago public figures who opposed school desegregation would define themselves as being "against forced busing." Today's economic reactionaries, whose aim is the repeal the last remnants of the Great Society and the New Deal, claim to stand for "entitlement reform."

more: http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1031&Itemid=1
..................
Prescient, isn't he? This was BEFORE we heard about those universal savings plans.

[FrenchieCat]

1. So much disinformation....

so little time, hey?

Facts about Pres. Obama, Social Security, Medicare, and Tax Free Savings Accounts
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Facts-about-Pres-Obama-S-by-FrenchieCat-090226-443.html

[bottomtheweaver]

8. What specifically do you think he's wrong about?

It turns out he was righter than he knew!

[AllentownJake]

2. Stay the fuck away from Social Security Barack

Don't fuck with what FDR created....its half the reason we are in this mess to begin.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. You mean raising the cap on FICA so more people pay into the system is a bad idea?

That is actually part of the solution. Wonders never cease

This frame is EXACTLY what those who'd have to pay above a certain percentage WISH for... working as expected

[AllentownJake]

4. That I don't have a problem with

and increasing benefits, but other than that stay the fuck away from it.

[FrenchieCat]

5. He's also going to reform Medicare Part D

Which we want! :)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8206100

[AllentownJake]

6. Just fucking scrap that legislation and start over

Through my church when that legislation came out I helped the elderly enroll...it was a collosal rip of and a gift to big pharma.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Yeah but the frames around SS are being put by people who want you to sink it

think about it

Oh and do some research onto what is actually going on

As to Part D, ideally you;d scrap it, but that;s not the reality in DC

So you "reform it"

Depending how deeply that goes, it effectively could be a scrap and start from scratch.

This is when we have to pay close attention and read these things for ourselves

[AllentownJake]

9. This year all I want him to do is three things

Regulatory reform on the banks, brokerage, and insurance companies, Real Healthcare reform outside of medicare and medicaid, and a vast investment in alternative energy.

[bottomtheweaver]

10. No, splitting off payroll contributions into an "optional" USAs,

their cute name for "universal savings accounts," which are basically investment accounts like 401ks, is a terrible, terrible idea, and not an new one.

[FrenchieCat]

11. He's not going to propose that. You are making shit up!

And you've been singing this song since yesterday,
and pretty soon, you are going to be swallowing your notes!

[bottomtheweaver]

12. He proposed it Tuesday night. You heard him, so did I:

To preserve our long-term fiscal health, we must also address the growing costs in Medicare and Social Security. Comprehensive health care reform is the best way to strengthen Medicare for years to come. And we must also begin a conversation on how to do the same for Social Security, while creating tax-free universal savings accounts for all Americans.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/24/obama-speech-tonight-vide_n_169671.html

"Creating tax-free universal savings accounts." Ipsissima verba my friend, and we'd better deal with the facts instead of denying them if we don't want to lose Social Security, and we don't.

[FrenchieCat]

13. You are making shit up.

He states that he is going to strengthen Medicaire and Social Security for years to come....."While" creating Tax Free Savings accounts.

He didn't say, he was going to convert social security into tax free universal Savings accounts.

I gave you quotes of his ideas as to what he believes and his proposals, and yet you continue to ignore all of his statements so that you can scream FIRE in a crowd.

Who in the fuck are you? and why are you here?

[EraOfResponsibility]

14. Consider the source, Frenchie: Black AGenda Report

they're the black version of Freeperville.

[bottomtheweaver]

16. Only if you consider social justice a "freeper" issue.

Anyway, you're wrong.

[bottomtheweaver]

15. I think we'll have a better discussion if we focus on the policies

and not the personalities. Social Security is one of the most Democratic pieces of legislation ever signed, and the predator drones have been bombing it continuously since the day it passed the Senate with one and only one Republican vote. To ignore these attacks is to effectively assist in its destruction, and that's not a very Democratic thing to do.

[FrenchieCat]

17. I think we could have a great discussion, if you didn't make shit up.....

[bottomtheweaver]

18. I wish I were. But we both heard the speech. n/t

[EraOfResponsibility]

19. No, you heard what you WANTED to hear

not what was actually said.

[bottomtheweaver]

20. The USA idea isn't new, and a key component is investing S.S. funds in the stock market.

And that's a fundamentally terrible idea, popular though it may be among in the so-called financial services industry. Here's how Clinton's 1999 USA plan would have done it:

"Clinton Proposal: The President's proposal, while not yet fully detailed, is composed of two parts. First, the President proposes transferring 62 percent of projected budget surpluses over the next 15 years to the Social Security system. A portion of those assets (less than one-fourth of the transferred surpluses) would be invested directly in the stock market."

http://www.ici.org/401k/arc-news/99_pres_soc.html#TopOfPage

"Investing a portion of the transferred surpluses in the private sector to achieve higher returns for Social Security -- just as any state or local government, or private pension does -- after working with Congress to devise a mechanism to ensure that the investments are made independently and without political interference. We will support using a broad-based neutral approach managed by the private sector with minimum administrative costs."

http://clinton2.nara.gov/WH/SOTU99/sss.html

Social Security funds do not belong in the stock market or any other private investment scheme, and they most assuredly would NOT achieve "higher returns." Hint: 2008.

[FrenchieCat]

21. You are grasping at straws......

and you think we will believe that President Obama is like Bush, and would offer nefarious programs that would gut social security.

I've had it with you talking out of your ass. You are gonna have to talk to yourself and other paranoid and uninformed dittoheads.

But as for those of us who are informed, You fool and confuse none. Anyone reading these exchanges understand that you are either paranoid, or you found a forum to troll in December. Take your pick. I'm outta here.

[bottomtheweaver]

24. Holy cow. Did you read the material I just posted?

The 1999 USA plan was Clinton's, not Bush's, and as bad as it was, at least he proposed it in an environment of budget surpluses that could, conceivably, be used to fund it. There are no such surpluses now, and there's no getting around the facts that (a) USAs would be a huge unfunded mandate for which (b) there is absolutely no necessity.

If people want to invest their money in the stock market, they don't need the government imposing a payroll deduction that would inevitably -- particularly now -- become an alternative, not an addition, to S.S. And in the absence of a budget surplus, there is simply no credible rationale for such a program, since we already have a highly efficient mechanism for providing retirement pensions that is NOT tied to the stock market.

[Juche]

23. He could just be referring to his plan to match private savings

On his campaign he talked about how families that make $75k or less a year will have a 50% match on up to $1000 a year in retirement savings. It has nothing to do with privatizing social security.

he also talked about getting companies to set up pension plans and 401ks.

I do not think he is talking about privatizing SS. He seems to be talking more about using government and corporate funds to match private savings accounts to supplement the public SS system. Fine by me.

[bottomtheweaver]

26. What was new in his speech Tuesday was the phrase "universal savings account."

The USA is a device introduced in the 90s, also in the context of wholly unwarranted S.S. "reform," that would have transfered a portion of the federal budget surplus to the SSA, and from there to the stock market, for the purpose of starting such accounts, which would then be funded in a manner similar to S.S. payroll deductions, matched by the government, allowing workers to divert part of their earnings into private investment "products" like 401ks:

http://www.network-democracy.org/social-security/bb/proposals/usa_accounts.html

[Juche]

27. It seems like he is pushing USAs as an addition to SS

Alot of lower and middle class families do not have meaningful private savings. My impression is Obama wants to make corporations set up automatic 401ks and offer matching contributions (either from the employer or the government) so people get a private savings account on top of their public SS program. That is again, fine by me.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/seniors/

Barack Obama will protect Social Security:
Obama and Biden are committed to ensuring Social Security is solvent and viable for the American people, now and in the future. They are strongly opposed to privatizing Social Security.


Create Automatic Workplace Pensions: The Obama-Biden retirement security plan will automatically enroll workers in a workplace pension plan. Under their plan, employers who do not currently offer a retirement plan, will be required to enroll their employees in a direct-deposit IRA account that is compatible to existing direct-deposit payroll systems. Employees may opt-out if they choose. Experts estimate that this program will increase the savings participation rate for low and middle-income workers from its current 15 percent level to around 80 percent.

Expand Retirement Savings Incentives for Working Families: Obama and Biden will ensure savings incentives are fair to all workers by creating a generous savings match for low and middle-income Americans. Their plan will match 50 percent of the first $1,000 of savings for families that earn less than $75,000. The savings match will be automatically deposited into designated personal accounts. Over 80 percent of these savings incentives will go to new savers.




Obama has never come out in favor of replacing SS with a private system, and he has come out opposing the idea. Again, it sounds like he is just talking about promoting savings among the working and middle class with corporate and government subsidies for private savings.

[bottomtheweaver]

28. The problem is that these private savings programs are really retirement programs

The Clinton universal savings account for example forbade withdrawals before 65:

Withdrawal Rules. No amount could be withdrawn from a USA before age 65, unless the account holder dies.

And the Obama-Biden proposals you linked to are clearly retirement plans: "Create Automatic Workplace Pensions," "Expand Retirement Savings Incentives."

As such, all of these plans are basically privatized versions of SS, and would either lead to partial privatization of the SSA, and/or allow workers to opt out of S.S. altogether in favor of private investment products, depending on how the plans were administered.

So as innocent and praiseworthy as this all might sound, what we're basically looking at here are S.S. privatization schemes, and that's a huge problem.

[Juche]

22. We do need reform

I think its sad that reform has become synonymous with plunder and privatization. Bush is gone people. We really do need reform. Not so much for social security (it is fairly safe), but medicare will face about $50 trillion in unfunded liabilities over the next 75 years and something should be done.

Solutions include higher taxes, higher payments, investing in more cost effective medical care, lowering benefits, outsourcing, etc.

Something does need to be done though.

[bottomtheweaver]

25. Running Social Security and Medicare together in the same breath

is a way to insinuate that S.S. DOES need reform. Nothing could be further from the truth, and the motivation for such deception is to allow the predator class to avoid paying its fair share of the taxes the Treasury will need when its SSA trust fund obligations come due.