Home Blog Page 2473

Obama, Warner Making Weird Mistake on Key Social Security Issue

By
Goldmanusa
-
4

( – promoted by lowkell)

by Paul Goldman

President Obama and Senator Warner are smart, Harvard lawyers. Thus, their position on a key Social Security is strangely so wrong as to make my head spin.

I don’t get it. Surely, they read the US Bureau of Labor Statistics stuff at the White House and in the Senate Office Building. In recent years, their computers have been humming to develop something called CPI-E, aimed at trying to determine the real level of inflation experienced by Americans 62 and older. This is different than the CPI- Consumer Price Index, used now as the basis for the COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment) that annually adjusts social security payments upward to reflect inflation.

The President and the Senator say using the CPI isn’t an accurate measure of inflation. Instead, they want to use “chained CPI,” which is a different CPI measure and comes in somewhat lower on an annual basis due to its methodology in determining the cost of goods and services used by most Americans.

One of the great achievements by Democrats is not merely Social Security, but passing the law that helps adjust the payments for inflation. Many of the people on Social Security are elderly widows living on a very small amount of money a year — far less than members of Congress make every month when you include their benefits and pensions.

The Social Security COLA has been one of the reasons many of the elderly have not become destitute, as was the case when FDR fought to pass it in the 1930’s. Back then, it was estimated that half of the nation’s elderly – if they were lucky to live to 65, which was higher than the average life span – lived in abject poverty. It is almost impossible to overestimate the amazing vision of FDR, a man whose legend is really yet to be appreciated in my view.

 

The term “Social Security” was not Roosevelt’s; he saw the program as a way to insure the elderly had at least a little dignity in their later years. In the beginning, Social Security covered fewer than half of American workers: few women, even fewer minorities. And without the COLA, the program would not have been what it is today, one of the great progressive achievements in modern civilization.

Unfortunately, the politicians in Washington several decades ago decided the way to cover their deficit spending was to appropriate the Social Security surplus – the program had a net revenue flow of payroll taxes over payments to beneficiaries – and leave special U.S. government IOU’s in the so-called “lock box.” The amount of those IOU’s, growing into the hundreds and hundreds of billions, didn’t matter as long as the Social Security program was revenue positive. They were just pieces of paper IOUs gathering dust. But the politicians knew that at some point, the Social Security program would start becoming revenue negative as the money paid out to beneficiaries began exceeding the payroll tax revenue coming in.

In the early 1980’s, then President Ronald Reagan broke his no-tax pledge and agreed to support the largest payroll tax increase in history in order to put the program on a sounder financial footing. Democratic Senator Pat Moynihan helped convince Reagan to, in effect, save Social Security.

But as the years passed, great advances in health care have expanded the average life span further and faster than had been anticipated. Health care costs likewise have grown far faster than the average index in consumer prices (HOLD THIS THOUGHT IN MIND BECAUSE IT WILL KEY SHORTLY IN THE DISCUSSION) due to the unique dynamics of the health care industry.

Meanwhile, as Congresses have created trillion-dollar deficits, there has been a lot of pressure to look wherever possible to reduce the costs of all government programs to make it easier to balance the general fund of the US Government, the pool of money which pays for its operations and capital investments.

HOWEVER – and this is key – Social Security is NOT SUPPORTED BY GENERAL FUND TAXES, but rather has its own dedicated revenue stream, SS taxes.

THIS IS BY FDR’S DESIGN! He intentionally rejected the use of any general fund tax money to support Social Security, opting instead for a payroll tax system to cover the program at 100%. In doing this, he rejected the dominant model at the time, which had been developed by the Germans in the 1880’s. Their model, which used a combination of general fund taxation and special payroll type of taxation, had been a breakthrough achievement against the Social Darwinism of the time.

FDR feared that if Social Security was seen as funded in any way by general taxation – as opposed to 100% contribution by employees (the employer share was seen then and now as really monies that would otherwise have gone to an employee raise) – then future generations of politicians would raid the funds.

FAST FORWARD to the present. As a matter of law and Democratic history, Social Security should NOT BE PART IN ANY WAY of “fiscal cliff” negotiations. Why? Because Social Security de jure doesn’t contribute to the deficit in any way, shape or form.

BUT: Because the government used all those prior surpluses to hide the true size of its operational deficit, it now has to redeem all those IOU’s from this same general fund.

THUS: If they can figure out a seemingly “fair” way to reduce Social Security benefits, this de facto helps Washington avoid the price of its prior recklessness by reducing the amount it has to pay each year to cover its wasting the Social Security surplus. Ergo, the claim that using the “chained consumer price index” is a fairer measure of measuring real inflation, and thus a fairer basis for the Social Security COLA.

Senator Warner has made this part of his “Gang of Eight” talks, and now the President is saying the same thing They claim that the regular CPI used today is not as accurate a measure of real inflation as the chained CPI. This is true, but…

THE PRESIDENT AND THE SENATOR MAKE ONE BIG MISTAKE. If their goal is to have a “fairer” measure of inflation for the elderly, then why aren’t they calling for the use of the CPI-E measure created specifically to measure consumer price inflation related to the lives of the elderly? What could be fairer? Am I to believe I am the only one to actually have read the reports on CPI-E? Hardly.

I put it to the President and the Senator: Any fairer and more accurate measure surely has to be one that measures the real world of the real people at the heart of the debate. The lives of seniors relies far more heavily on goods and services whose prices rise faster than the chained CPI the President and Senator Warner claim is fairer.

Believe me, I get it: The President and the Senator are trying to do the right thing. They have a good track record in my book. They also have to deal with the Speaker and his posse. I feel for them.

BUT: The current Social Security COLA understates, not overstates, the true inflation faced by seniors. This is a proven fact. The question is, can we make fiscally responsible and prudent improvements to Social Security and Medicare? Yes we can, and Americans will support them.

Social Security didn’t cause the “fiscal cliff”: and it should not be used as a piggy bank any longer to cover the reckless spending on too many for too long in Congress.  

Poor widows on Social Security didn’t cause the nation’s fiscal problems. They raised the children, grieved for their sons dying in war, took care of the grandkids when necessary and buried their husbands. They built America. We owe them.

Let me be honest: For the life of me, I can’t understand why Democrats are hell bent to take $50 a year from these people this year, $50 more on top of that next year, until it really adds up a generation from now. How does this make America better? I don’t get it.

The elderly poor getting a Social Security COLA adjustment that the government’s own experts KNOW understates the real level of senior inflation is not the cause of our fiscal problems.

I know it is hard to deal with Mr. Boehner’s posse. I get that. But they lost the election: and that either has consequences, or why not just get rid of the vote and be done with it?

Days After Newtown Massacre, Rep. Bob BADlatte Vows to Block Any New Gun Legislation

By
lowkell
-
2

What a worthless tool.

“We’re going to take a look at what happened there and what can be done to help avoid it in the future, but gun control is not going to be something that I would support.”

Rep. Goodlatte is the incoming House Judiciary Committee Chairman, and it is highly likely that any new gun control bill would go through his committee.

WSLS has contacted Congressman Goodlatte’s office for a response, and we are waiting to hear back.

In other words, Goodlatte BADlatte is vowing to have the NRA’s back no matter what the (deadly) consequences. I realize this f’tard is in a solid “red” district, but in the country at large, I strongly doubt that BADlatte’s obstructionist, my-way-or-the-highway attitude is going to win him many fans.

Sen. Janet Howell vows to vote against Helen Dragas’ confirmation to UVA Board of Visitors

By
lowkell
-
0

The following statement is from State Senator Janet Howell (D-32nd district). I’m very happy to see this, as Helen Dragas clearly needs to be removed from the UVA Board of Visitors for incompetence and for damaging the great university she claims to care about. I urge EVERY Democratic member of the General Assembly to join with Sen. Howell on this!

One of the responsibilities of the legislature is to confirm appointments by the Governor.  As the ranking member of the Privileges and Elections Committee, I have a heightened responsibility. My usual approach is to support any governor’s selections unless the appointee has a conflict of interest or refuses to fill out required paperwork.

This year we face confirmation of Helen Dragas for a second term on the University of Virginia Board of Visitors. She does not have any conflict of interest and she is willing to fill out the paperwork.  Nonetheless, I will be actively opposing her reappointment  for the following reasons:

  • *The University of Virginia has a culture of self governance and democratic process.  The Rector’s actions were not in the spirit of that culture. The decision to remove President Sullivan was made without any transparency or full debate and, thus, was  out of line with the principles established by Mr. Jefferson when he founded this flagship university. The decision to remove President Sullivan was made without an in person meeting and vote by the full Board of Visitors. Rather, Rector Dragas solicited support in individual phone calls with Board members.  To this day,  information has not been forthcoming that would meet the standards for removal of the President.
  • President Sullivan  had been hired with much acclaim only eighteen months earlier. Dissatisfaction with her leadership had never been discussed in official Board meetings or with her, with the result that the President was  blindsided when  Rector Dragas told her  she had sufficient votes of Board members for her removal.
  • One of the core responsibilities of the Board of Visitors, led by the Rector, is to hire or remove the university  president. When the Board acts on that responsibility,  its role becomes critically important. It appears that the Rector and the Board did not discharge their responsibility  in this situation with an appropriate level of seriousness or professionalism.  The person who led the process should accept the consequences.
  • Ms. Dragas’ actions as Rector created turmoil for the University that was unnecessary and unhelpful in pursuing the University’s academic mission. The  action caused distraction, confusion and disbelief for students, faculty, alumni and donors who had no indication there were questions about the leadership of President Sullivan. The universal and overwhelming response from these groups in opposition to the decision suggests that Rector Dragas and Board members had limited understanding of the University culture.  The process of their decision making was, thus, a failure of professional leadership.
  • The  distraction, confusion and disbelief  of the summer’s events continues with the recent warning issued by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges.   Although the public position of the University  is that all parties  are now working together effectively,  I do not believe the various entities can truly move forward with Ms. Dragas remaining on the Board of Visitors.
  • On December 3, I met personally with Ms. Dragas.  We had a frank conversation.  It is my conclusion that she does not comprehend the damage done to the University of Virginia, nor does she accept responsibility beyond having poorly managed the President’s removal.

As a result of these factors, it is my intention to vote against Helen Dragas’ confirmation to the Board of Visitors and to move for a recorded vote by the Privileges and Elections Committee and the entire Senate.

Sen. Northam Rips Gov. McDonnell’s Guns in Schools Idea as “irresponsible….wrong for Virginia”

By
lowkell
-
1

The following statement is from State Senator Ralph Northam, a Democratic candidate for Virginia Lieutenant Governor.

Statement from the Office of Senator Ralph Northam on the Tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary and Governor McDonnell’s Suggestion to Arm Teachers

“As a children’s doctor, U.S. Army veteran, State Senator, and father of two, I have spent my entire professional and public life in the service of our children. In the wake of last week’s senseless tragedy in Connecticut, it is painfully clear that we need to do more to protect the most vulnerable among us. If we can’t keep our children safe, we are failing. We must reverse the cultural trends that desensitize our youth to violence. We must develop our mental health capabilities to identify and offer assistance to those at risk. And we absolutely must keep guns out of the hands of those who would use them for evil.

Instead of looking for common sense policies that help safeguard Virginians, Governor McDonnell has suggested an irresponsible approach that is wrong for Virginia. Guns don’t belong in Virginia’s schools, period. Our teachers are there to inspire, educate, and support our students, and we should be offering them more resources to do their job, not piling on the additional and grave responsibility of doubling as law enforcement.  As we struggle to understand how we as a culture are continuing to see these mass murders, putting additional guns into our schools not only increases the danger to our students but also sends the wrong message.

To make matters worse, the Governor’s budget has recommended an additional $1.5 million in cuts to our already overextended mental health system. We know from the tragedies at Virginia Tech and Newtown, Connecticut, that proper mental health treatment is essential to public safety. Governor McDonnell is jeopardizing our state’s ability to identify those at risk and get them the health care they need in a time when it is devastatingly clear we need to be doing more, not less.  I plan to go to Richmond this session to fight for common sense proposals that will protect our children, our schools and our Commonwealth. I can only hope the McDonnell-Cuccinelli administration will join us.”

Paul Krugman: “Obama needs to draw a line now…He’s already given too much”

By
lowkell
-
2

Paul Krugman nails it.

…all of a sudden it’s feeling a lot like 2011 again, with the president negotiating with himself while the other side enjoys the process.

So Obama needs to draw a line right now: no further concessions. None. He’s already given too much.

Yes, this probably means going over the cliff. So be it: it’s less bad than the alternative.

My feelings exactly. The only thing I’d add is this: President Obama, we worked our butts off to reelect you, we had your back when you needed it, now it’s time for you to have OUR backs and not back down to Republican extortion, bad-faith dealing, and hare-brained ideas, especially when you have all the leverage. Thank you.

State Senator, AG Candidate Mark Herring Announces Uranium Mining Opposition

By
lowkell
-
3

As State Senator Mark Herring explains, the bottom line is that it doesn’t appear possible that “uranium mining can be conducted in Southside Virginia in a safe and environmentally responsible way.” In the absence of that safety and environmental responsibility, the clear answer on this issue is not just “no” but “hell no.” Oh, and as an added bonus, all that money Virginia Uranium spent trying to persuade Virginia lawmakers to give them the green light (e.g., flying them on a boondoggle to France) does not appear to have paid off. So sad, boo hoo. 🙂

HERRING ANNOUNCES OPPOSITION TO LIFTING BAN ON URANIUM MINING

~ Will offer budget amendment to prohibit state funds from being used to circumvent the ban~

Leesburg – Democratic candidate for Attorney General State Senator Mark Herring (Loudoun & Fairfax) released the following statement today announcing his opposition to legislation that would lift the ban on uranium mining and milling in Virginia:

“Over the past year, I’ve had the opportunity to meet with interested stakeholders on both sides of the debate over whether to end the ban on uranium mining and milling in Virginia.  I have carefully considered their positions, as well as the scientific evidence, and I have concluded that ending the ban on uranium mining and milling is not the right course for our Commonwealth.

Therefore, I will oppose legislation during the upcoming 2013 General Assembly session that would lift the ban. Additionally, I plan to introduce budget language that would prohibit any state funding from being used to promulgate regulations designed to circumvent the ban.

The Governor should not be using taxpayer dollars and staff resources to create the regulatory framework for uranium mining, which is currently prohibited by state law.

The health and safety of the public, and of the environment, should be of paramount concern when considering issues such as this and I am simply not convinced that uranium mining can be conducted in Southside Virginia in a safe and environmentally responsible way. I take very seriously the concerns raised by citizens, business leaders and local officials in both Southside and Hampton Roads who have expressed to me their fears with regard to the potential for negative public health impacts, particularly water supply contamination.

I look forward to working with those same citizens, business leaders and local officials on ways we can improve and expand economic opportunity in Southside and diversify Virginia’s portfolio of domestic energy resources.”

Virginia News Headlines: Wednesday Morning

By
lowkell
-
4

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Wednesday, December 19.

*Gun trade faces challenges to financial, political power

*After Newtown, beating the NRA at its own game (How about we all invest our values by putting our money in companies we believe in, not just financially?)

*Biden to oversee White House effort to reduce gun violence

*Boehner veers off bipartisan course with ‘Plan B,’ shaking up talks

*A rough 24 hours for the White House (What I don’t understand is this: the White House had the Republicans in checkmate – game over. So why let them back in the game? The bottom line is that President Obama and the Democrats have all the leverage; no need to offer dumb concessions, especially ones that hurt Social Security recipients or impose austerity. Just really REALLY bad negotiating. Hello? Haven’t you guys learned anything from the 1st term?!?)

*Eric Cantor plays loyal lieutenant to Boehner (If Can’tor had done that the last time Boehner was in serious budget/debt negotiations with President Obama, Republicans would have ended up with a better deal – from their bizarre harsh perspective, anyway – than they’re about to get now. Brilliant Can’tor!)

*Neocons push against Chuck Hagel (Personally, I think Hagel’s a good man, I just think we should have a Democrat as Defense Secretary, as there are many good ones available. Also, Hagel has a right-wing, anti-LGBT, anti-environmental voting record. Why pick him exactly?)

*McDonnell suggests a discussion of arming school officials (Brilliant, huh? Of course, the Newtown shooter’s mother was armed to the teeth, and she still got murdered – by her own gun, surprise surprise.)

*McDonnell, O’Malley take opposing sides in response to Newtown shootings

*Survivors of Va. Tech tragedy share pain, send love

*Record day for Va. gun transactions after school shootings

*Editorial: Governor has teachers where he wants them (“After starving Virginia’s public schools, Gov. McDonnell tosses them a few crumbs. Next, he’ll seek to divert some of their funding to roads.”)

*Editorial: Scrooge lives, unrepentant (“An uncharitable remark from Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli gets a response from Catholic bishops.”)

*Schapiro: For McDonnell, uranium issue political and personal

*A start toward saving menhaden (Long overdue…)

*Legal battle with Virginia cost airports authority $1.5 million

*Hester sweeps to victory in special Va. House election (Congratulations!)

*Some top MWAA officials got big raises in 2012 (Big raises for running a corrupt cesspool of an agency? Nice.)

*Mike Shanahan can coach football – who knew? (Yep, when the ‘Skins were losing, Shanahan was an idiot. Now that they’re winning, he’s a genius. Gotta love sportswriters.)

Repeal the 2nd Amendment

By
bruce roemmelt
-
0

The time is long past.  Dump it.  We got rid of slavery, gave women the vote and a host of other things that were fine at the end of the 1700’s but in our world today are not.

Times and technology change.  We must change with them.

The Revolution was fresh in America’s mind and I think the intent was to make sure if those evil Brits came again we would take less time to rearm.  Turns out now we have 2.9 million uniformed people in the military, and we could probably take the Brits easily.  

Seems to me our obscene nuclear arsenal would trump any flint locks.

You want to own a gun, any kind of gun – state your reason and register it.  Period.

[poll id=”

111

“]

NO!!!! Israeli teachers are NOT armed.

By
ir003436
-
1

In the wake of Newtown — and now with No Jobs Bob McDonnell proposing we arm teachers and principals — we need to deal with an NRA lie that is ripping around the ‘net at the speed of light.

And that lie is that Israeli teachers are armed.  It’s a lie.

Here’s a link to an article by an Israeli who lays waste to this lie.  He also gives details on gun control laws in Israel, where very few people own firearms.

Read the article and be prepared for your rightwingnutjobs friends when they start the “Israeli teachers are armed” nonsense.

http://messiahsmandate.org/are…

There is a picture going around the Internet that I have seen about a dozen times today that claims that Israeli teachers are packing heat. Well, are they? The answer is “NO.” There may be some exceptions in dangerous areas like the West Bank (where five percent of Israelis live), but in general, Israeli teachers are not walking around like it’s the Wild Wild West, strapped with a six shooter. No, our teachers are not focused on shooting, but educating. That doesn’t mean, however, that we don’t protect young students.

Be honest: There is logic behind Gov. McDonnell saying arm school personnel.

By
Goldmanusa
-
6

(Some seriously snarky snark from Paul Goldman, who’s somewhere out helping his fellow Virginians…be more snarky? Heh. – promoted by lowkell)

by Paul Goldman

I think it is time for ProgressVA, Lowell, and others to be honest: There is unassailable, mathematical logic behind the governor wanting to arm school personnel to prevent another Newtown. True, he only said he thought the idea of arming school personnel should be a topic for discussion. But as a general rule, governors don’t attach their names to ideas they feel have little merit.

TIME FOR PROGRESSVA, LOWELL AND OTHERS TO ADMIT IT: THE GOVERNOR’S SUGGESTION IS BASE ON INDISPUTABLE LOGIC.

Consider: If someone at Sandy Hook had been armed, he or she would have had a chance at stopping the Newtown murders that was self-evidentally not available to the unarmed school personnel, who apparently confronted the killer only to lose their lives.

SO: The Governor has his point and his detractors need to concede it.

INDEED: The Governor’s logic proves also that if there were 2 people at every school armed and trained to stop a murder-minded intruder, this would DOUBLE THE CHANCE of stopping the murderous intruder. Did the Governor really have to spell that out to folks with graduate degrees?  

INDEED PLUS: Taking the Governor’s logic further, having 10 people armed and trained at stopping a murder-minded intruder would provide 10 TIMES the chance of stopping any killing spree than just having one. Surely even a liberal gun control freak would concede this math.

IN FACT: If you armed and trained every teacher, this would logically provide FAR GREATER CHANCE OF STOPPING THE MURDER-MINDED INTRUDER than just one person.

IN FACT PLUS: With all due respect to the Governor, given the power of his logic, it makes no sense to arm only a few. The logic says you need to arm and train so many school folks that any intruder would be crazy to try a mass murder.

MOREOVER, THE GOVERNOR SHOULD NOT BE SO MODEST: Does not his logic as apply as regards every other venue that has experienced a mass murder attack? Come on, do you have to be Einstein to figure that out? It is pure math.

FACT IS: The logic of the Governor’s position suggests that the best way to stop all the killings, mass or otherwise, is to require every American over a certain age to be armed, and trained and required to carry a weapon on his or her person at all times.

THINK ABOUT IT:  If everyone is armed at all times, then everyone can kill any mass murderer. Indeed, why not require all of us to carry two weapons, thus DOUBLING OUR ABILITY TO SHOOT DOWN A MASS MURDER? How can ProgressVA, Lowell or anyone else argue with the math?

Moreover, if you don’t carry your weapon one day, and get killed; you are to blame, not the politicians, not the gun control laws, not the NRA, not a breakdown in morality or even the craziness of your killer. If you leave home without your two weapons, it is your fault if you get killed by anyone for any reason. That’s the logic of the situation.

CONCLUSION: It is, as Sherlock Holmes would have, elementary. The logic of the Governor’s position is unassailable as matter of deduction. If one armed person in any group of people increases the chances of stopping a mass murderer, then by definition the more people in the group carrying a weapon, the greater the odds of avoiding such a horrible crime.

The Governor is being modest. What other idea promises to offer a way for every American to confront such evil with a real chance of stopping it wherever and whenever it occurs?

Thus, with all due respect, I really can’t support the idea of only having one person per school armed at all times.

One has to be logical here. If America wants to get serious about stopping these massacres, then we all have to be armed at all times, we can’t just leave the job to one person.

In fact, why not arm us all with automatic firing weapons, this will increase the odds greatly of killing the mass murderer.

Strolling through the mall, everyone smiling, the Uzi bulging from behind a jacket or shirt or pants pocket, the outline of another full clip in the other pocket: I promise you, the last thing you will ever have to worry about is a mass murderer killing your ass.

Problem solved.

Now: Let’s talk about how we don’t need to worry about the Iranian A-Bomb if we would only make sure everyone in the region had nuclear weapons. Indeed, if every country had a nuclear bomb and ICBM capability, who would dare attack?

I ask you: Why do we make it so hard to solve these problems?

1...2,4722,4732,474...3,277Page 2,473 of 3,277












EVEN MORE NEWS

POPULAR CATEGORY

©