Originally Posted by Outlaw
..but the budget killer is actually entitlements such as social security, medicare, and medicaid. These three entitlements will amount to 80 percent of the US budget within the next 20 years. This is our real problem!
whether or not your statement is the total truth depends on which economists you choose to believe. when reading a report from an economist (or any article that pushes an economic slant) you should ask yourself two questions: 1) who is funding the economist? 2) who benefits from the results of their theories?
and it is safe to say that just because an economist is a professor at an ivy league school doesn't equate to them being right. for example: harvard has an endowment of $25 billion, Yale $15 billion, Stanford $12 billion. why do people and corporations donate this type of money to these schools? what do these donors expect in return? are we to really think that this type of money won't come with a few strings attached?
hell, here is a wonderful example of a harvard economist in action:
n. gregory manikow was a professor of econ at harvard and was appointed as bush's second chairman of the council of economic advisors (cea). bush's first cea chairman was glenn hubbard, a professor at columbia, who pushed through bush's first tax cut on corporate dividends and capital gains because he believed it would promote investment in america. how's that working out for us? but let's get back to manikow: manikow actually argued that the act of making a hamburger (yes, the dude making your hamburger at burger king) should be classified as a 'production' job, and not a service job. seriously. they decided that a dude who puts lettuce, tomato and onions on your burger should be put into the same classification of a person who is making a car. why? to make the stats for american production not look so fucking dismal in the day and age of outsourcing.
or, take a look at how a team of economists changed the methodology for calculating the unemployment rate, or the consumer price index
-- all for padding the stats to make it look like everything is just fine and dandy in america. woot woot! america is number 1!
and we sit here and wonder why people listen to and agree with glen beck? maybe it's because nobody else is giving them answers that make sense. and while beck is giving his audience crazy, shallow, and mis-leading answers, they at least match the emotional tonality of how americans are feeling - pissed off cuz something ain't right! and the happy-go-lucky-always-stay-rational-lacking-real-emotions, you know, the yuppies, just don't make sense right now.
anyway. these are the type of things our 'top' mainstream economists are peddling these days. if big money funds their 'research' you can bet that the policies and theories they come up with will directly benefit their donors. you can also bet that if they are getting a ton of airtime on corporate news channels and print they will 'never bite the hand that feeds them.' and, just because they work for the gov't surely doesn't equate to them being non-biased (as the example of bush's appointments of cea's can prove. and, don't even get me started on who obama appointed to his economic team). plus, time and time again the same people who are getting it absolutely wrong again and again and again, are the same people who get the most airtime on corporate news (surprise!), and who are same the fucktards who are now telling us that we need to get rid of social security and medicare to solve the 'real problem'. hmmm... why is that? and, just so you know, there are economists who have been getting it right for decades. michael hudson, paul craig roberts, peter schiff, ravi batra, joseph stiglitz, simon johnson, robert reich are a few people off hand (all of varying political stances) who have been getting it right for awhile now. so there are people we can listen to - if we STOP LISTENING to the hacks who continually get it wrong just because they are able to dominate the corporately controlled airwaves with THEIR neatly crafted talking points.
well, let's get back to social security and medicare.
i think your statement is missing some valuable information. why has social security and medicare become a problem? now, this in itself opens up a debate from the numerous sides of the political spectrum. but, again, i would point you back to the two questions that should be asked when reading a report from an economist. also, would any of these economists or media pundits bother to ask questions about who jimmy rigged the social security fund to allow them to blow it on general gov't spending (823 military bases), unnecessary wars and bailouts? this earmarked tax wasn't supposed to be spent this way ya know?
i think it is important to dig a little deeper to see which group of people are the ones pushing the 'we need to cut social security and medicare' meme. and forget about the bought and paid for politicians - the majority of these jackasses are in the back pockets of the certain groups of people who are shoving this meme down our throats!
here is a head start on the digging: read this article
and tell us that you already knew about how the social security fund had been robbed by previous presidential administrations and their teams of economic advisors. tell us that the american people should suffer by losing the social safety net that they paid into their ENTIRE LIVES because a group of ruling oligarchs have been fucking robbing the working men and women of this country.
the article was written by a former assistant secretary of the US treasury under the reagan admin, so he kind of has an idea of what happens behind the curtains.
We constantly hear from Wall Street gangsters and from Republicans and an occasional Democrat that Social Security and Medicare are a form of welfare that we can’t afford, an “unfunded liability.” This is a lie. Social Security is funded with an earmarked tax. People pay for Social Security and Medicare all their working lives. It is a pay-as-you-go system in which the taxes paid by those working fund those who are retired.
Currently these systems are not in deficit. The problem is that government is using earmarked revenues for other purposes. Indeed, since the 1980s Social Security revenues have been used to fund general government. Today Social Security revenues are being used to fund trillion dollar bailouts for Wall Street and to fund the Bush/Obama wars of aggression against Muslims.
i'm sorry to come down on you like this, and i'm sorry for my potty mouth. but i'm tired of hearing people regurgitate the ridiculous memes that continue to fuck over the good hard working people of america, while enriching the fucking bastards that are STEALING from you and I --- IN BROAD FUCKING DAYLIGHT!
So, yes! Let us all WAKE THE FUCK UP!