How to reduce the Deficit! Cut "Sen.Trash Mouth's" Government Pension.

[sabrina 1]

The Commission everyone is talking about was set up to offer recommendations on how to reduce the Deficit amongst other issues dealing with the Fiscal responsibility of the Government.

Stacked with Republicans the Commission naturally and immediately went off-track and like a moth to a flame zeroed in on the huge Social Security Fund which by now everyone knows has nothing to do with the deficit.

It cannot be repeated often enough. SS did not cause the deficit. And cutting SS benefits will not reduce the deficit.

There is absolutely no good reason for cutting benefits. All it would do, if the law is followed, is to increase the already huge surplus in the SS Trust fund. And it would leave seniors who depend on their retirement benefits, with even less money to survive on.

They (our overlords) of course, are hoping to dip into those funds to cover their own debts as they have been doing for decades. And the bigger the surplus the more they can take.

Since they owe the American people for the money they already took does it make any sense to give them more? To increase the debt they already have? A debt they are doing their very best NOT TO PAY BACK? Would you lend a friend who already owed you money and refused to repay it, MORE MONEY?

So why are they even suggesting taking money away from the elderly and disabled? It doesn't make sense. But cutting Government Pensions such as those being paid to Sen. Alan Simpson eg, would reduce the deficit.

William Greider from the Nation in this scathing article on Alan Simpson, the Commission and the media coverage of this issue, makes the suggestion that 'Senator Guttermouth's' pension be cut at least as much as they are proposing to cut from SS benefits.

I think it's a great idea with a direct effect on the Deficit. Is anyone wondering why they have not suggested it themselves???

Alan Simpson, Senator Guttermouth, Spews Again

Meanwhile, if people want to get nasty in return, they might direct some tart reform suggestions to Sen. Simpson and his commission colleagues. In the interest of fairness, for instance, why not cut Simpson's government pension benefits as much or more than they intend to cut Social Security benefits. After all, he can afford it. And Simpson likes to talk about his new knee--recently replaced with a $70,000 operation. Did he pay for his new knee or did the taxpayers? It would be fun to find out.

Nasty? I don't think that's nasty! Nasty is taking away the only means of support, already barely enough to survive on, from the elderly and disabled. Mr. Greider is too nice. He doesn't seem to realize what an excellent idea he has come up with.

But back to the Commission. I was stunned by this casual statement by Greider regarding what the President's plan is regarding Social Security:

Every savvy player in the Capital knows what the president has in mind--whack Social Security benefits to lure Republicans into a grand deal on raising taxes. As I have written more than once, when Washington talks up bipartisan compromise it usually means the people are about to get screwed.

That train is rolling down the tracks now, but don't expect major media coverage to alert the populace. The prestige newspapers are on board for this deal and Obama's commission won't reveal its recommendations until right after the election. Too late for folks to make a stink.

I admit, I had no idea that this was the plan. But it would explain the reluctance of Democrats to come out swinging against even the suggestion of messing with Social Security.

Is this a done deal then? A bi-partisan agreement that the WH gets tax cuts in exchange for letting them get their hands on Social Security? And to do it after the election?

Regarding demanding the removal of Alan Simpson from the Commission, Greider has this to say:

Senator Trash Mouth keeps messing up the plan, however, by provoking outrage with his tasteless zingers. Most recently, Simpson compared Social Security--the federal government's most beloved program--to "a milk cow with 310 million tits." Instead of yuks, the senator got angry blowback--congressional demands that he resign or be fired by the president. Important liberal groups like the AFL-CIO joined the chorus of complaints. Simpson apologized, the Prez stood by him. Personally, I hope Simpson stays on the commission and continues to speak out. He's doing more harm than good for Obama's sleight-of-hand politics.

I agree. Without him we probably would not have a clue what they are up to. I am for disbanding the entire Commission.

Finally, as Greider points out, we The American People are the 'government's biggest creditors, bigger even than China'

This vast wealth belongs to the working people who paid it--not to the federal government or Congress. Naturally, many politicians would like to get out of paying it back, but that constitutes a massive bait-and-switch swindle of working people. Bai and many other reporters of the mainstream media have been assured by their sources it is impossible to pay back that money, but that is a political choice, not a fiscal requirement. It would make working people pay for Republican gravy that went to someone else.

Another way to understand the swindle is to think of working Americans as the US government's largest creditor, even larger than China.

As Michael Moore said in 'Capitalism, A Love Story' ~ We want our money back!

And since no one seems to be on our side, it is entirely up to us to get it back and to make sure they do not take any more. How to do this, I don't know. But we could start by calling them and letting them know that if they do not stand up for the American workers, we will not be standing up for them anymore.

[DCKit]

1. Teh Dick's SS detail costs could provide sustenance for several dozen families.

It's not OUR fault he's the most hated VP in history. The MF EARNED that title. Let him pay for his own damn security from his Halliburton earnings.

[sabrina 1]

5. Did you ever wonder why there are so many Dicks in the

Republican party?

Dick Cheney
Dick Morris
Dick Nixon
Dick Armey

I know there are more of them, but that's just off the top of my head.

And you're right. Cheney's medical bills alone, and the protection he is provided with, probably raised the deficit by several million dollars. Then add in the Wars he promoted, and I think we found the main culprit responsible for the deficit.

[DCKit]

6. And that's just the ones out in the open.

There's another two dozen on the down-low - and that's just the ones named "Richard".

Preverts.

[sabrina 1]

9. Lol!

[Hannah Bell]

2. exactly. they want to keep the surpluses flowing into the Trust Fund so they can keep "borrowing"

them.

& since simpson doesn't like teat-suckers, cutting his pension is just what he asked for.

[sabrina 1]

7. It's amazing that the first thing they think of is to

slam the poor and the elderly.

I wonder how many former politicians are being supported by the government and ho much we could save by cutting their government benefits?

Maybe I'll write to Paul Krugman and ask him if he knows.

I think we need to help this Commission do the job they are pretending to do with a few suggestions as to where they can start cutting spending.

[DCKit]

8. The formerly elected do not compromise a constituency...

Their ranks are probably only equal to the number of lobbyists in DC at this point - if you get my double meaning.

Most people on Social Security, on the other hand, don't have a second, even more lucrative job than the one they actually worked 20 plus years to retire from. No doubt an alien concept to the Lords and Ladies of the House and Senate.

They ain't skeered of us yet folks... we're not doing OUR job.

[sabrina 1]

10. You're right, we are not doing our job. But without

leadership fighting for us, those we elected, we do not have much influence. They don't seem to care anymore whether we vote for them or not. They must know that if they mess with SS, especially Democrats, they will lose half the party at least.

Maybe that's what it will take to start changing things. Enough people no longer willing to keep giving them second chances. A New Democratic Party based on the Old Democratic Platform could emerge.

If it's true that Obama has already made a deal with Republicans, or thinks he can and is willing to sell out on Social Security, that will be the final straw for many people.

[iamtechus]

3. It's our money. PAY IT BACK!

[sabrina 1]

12. That is the most important message that needs to sent

They always say 'there is nothing in the SS trust fund but IOUs'. That is the rightwing response to the fact that SS has a huge surplus.

But they never explain that those IOUs are in the form of Treasury bonds, worth $2.5 trillion and will double by 2023. And mostly they never explain that the government owes the SS Trust Fund money and they are trying to get our of paying it back. Because one of the ways to pay it back is to tax the rich and that to them, would be a crime. Better to take it from the poor so they can keep borrowing and spending.

So, yes, make them PAY IT BACK! And then pass a low that forbids Congress from borrowing from SS fund ever again.

[Lasher]

4. We can get deficits under control without stealing from widows and orphans.

It's just a matter of priorities.

[sabrina 1]

11. I don't see why so much money is spent on these

former politicians. I bet they have Secret Service protection, medical coverage and a pension. I thought they were supposed to serve their country for a few years and then go home.

I'm sure there are is some money that could be saved as most of them have received lucrative jobs as a result of being in Congress. That ought to be enough.