People People, Please...

not many people other than my friends tend to stop by my blog, and they already understand what i am about to share with the rest of you. if there ARE any of you. i hope there are. but maybe you get it too. but i'll press on, just in case, and go ahead and give me the benefit of the doubt on this one. in fact, give everyone the benefit of the doubt. its a good practice for all those who would like to fall under the rubric "decent human being".

people, please, don't assume that because someone has been elected to public office that they are smarter than you. in fact, these days, don't believe that they are smart at all. a safe assumption would probably be that they have enough brain cells strung together to understand that the hot tea is "hot hot hot" rather than cold. on a good day. after they've warmed up.

another important aspect of your basic public official is that they should have been disqualified from running for office, the minute they expressed interest in it. politics, as a rule, attract people who know how to play the game. in a word, that means that they know how to be on all sides of an issue, talk out of both sides of their mouth, and smile as they bend you over their desk and fist you, and then tax you for it. politicians need to be on good terms with everybody, and very often, that means swallowing pride and principles.

with all this in mind, it should follow that, when following politics or listening to an official make a speech, one should have a large shaker of salt handy. do not assume they are telling you the truth, and be warned and aware that everyone always has an agenda. politicians are not your friends. they are their own friends.

from all this, i shall take a small leap to the subject of:

SOCIAL SECURITY

read my lips. social security, is in absolutely no immediate danger. social security trustees say the program is solvent, and able to pay out full benefits until 2042. after that point, it will still be able to pay almost three quarters of current benefit amounts. these are not politicians, but the financial whizzes that have more intimate knowledge of the program than anyone else. them, i would trust.

another estimate on the long term solvency of the program comes from the congressional budget office. though these people are the scary politicians i have been talking about, this office is also made up of nuts and bolts money people, whose major task as u.s. representatives is to manage the funds we provide. they say the program is good to pay one hundred percent of benefits until 2052. after that, benefits would only drop a modest amount.

these estimates are coming from people whose job it is to know their shit, and to make long term plans and strategies in regards to the budget in general and the social security budget in particular. the only ideology governing them is to not go into the red.

due to the nature of social security, it is a program that requires constant tinkering. the ratio of the work force to the retired is constantly changing, and interest rates and living wages are also constantly in flux. the program will need to be tinkered with again, but generally speaking, it is one of the most stable, cost effective, and succesful government programs in existence. when bush needs to borrow money to pay for his budget deficits, the social security trust fund is what he borrows from.

in addition, a little research will show you why the program is so necessary; before social security, being old and retired was synonymous with being poor. the nuclear family unit of parents and children replaced extended families living under one roof largely due to the fact that social security allows the elderly to live on their own and be self-sufficient at all. unless you have the money and know-how to succesfully play the financial markets (and research again shows that most people who play the markets are already financially independent and upwardly mobile) social security is what keeps you from being destitute.

now, with all of the above in mind, lets address the president's plan to privatize social security.

first off, the privatization scheme is not new. it is a basic tenet of the neo-conservatism to which george w. bush and his accessories pledge fealty to. conservatives despise welfare of any sort, and many have opposed social security since it was begun by FDR. privatization, or "partial privatization", is only part of a greater overarching campaign to end social security, period. if you're a wealthy ceo or statesman with large financial holdings, you'll be fine regardless of whether the program lives or dies. not so for the rest of us.

in addition to being a first step towards killing the program, bush's plans depend to a large degree on borrowing trillions of dollars, at a time when our country's economy is struggling, our government is running deficits, and the debt is increasing by leaps and bounds, which in turn means that we are consistently borrowing huge sums of money from other countries, money that we will eventually have to pay back, with interest. now is not the time to take such a financial hit.

along with this, private accounts themselves are not a feasible solution. financial markets are dangerous places, and one is just as likely to lose money in speculation as one is to gain money. in fact, one is more likely to lose. people who have been playing the markets for their entire lives lose money. this does not in turn bode well for people who have never played the markets and suddenly find themselves with a few thousand dollars and the government whispering in their ear "invest, your old age depends on it"? it is a risky situation, and many people stand to lose their long run security. on the other hand, wall street and financial houses stand to gain a lot of money. unless you're working for wall street, you are getting a raw deal.

another point worth mentioning is that, by switching over to private accounts within the next few years, we will be short-changing social security and its current beneficiaries. leave it all alone, and benefits take a small hit forty years down the road. switching to private accounts right now will have the effect of reducing current benefits by a great deal. the money has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere will in part be the pockets of current social security recipients. the american association of retired persons is against it, and for good reason. their existence depends on the system.

the lack of an actual crisis, immediately reduced benefits, and and weakened fiscal security, both personal and governmental, are all reasons to oppose private accounts. unless you are willing to gamble with your later years, let your aging parents move back in with you because they cannot afford to live on their own any more, and saddle your offspring with the ridiculous taxes needed to eventually pay for all of this, you should be against the president's plans, which by the way, are supported with falsehoods and his amiable grin. by bush's prediction, social security will experience a shortfall of 10 trillion dollars an a timeline of infinity years. infinity is a long time. and small updates every few decades can keep the program solvent indefinitely. private accounts solve nothing, and indeed make things much worse.

so those are my feelings on social security. if you have questions, ask, or better yet look up some answers. excellent portals are listed below.

www.buzzflash.com
www.commondreams.org
www.talkingpointsmemo.com

educating yourself on issues is the only way you can make an informed and realistic decision, and if you are reading this blog, you are either paco or speech or kaspella or e., but more importantly, you have internet access, and there have a wealth of information at your fingertips. and unless you are extremely unfortunate, the issue of social security definitely will effect your life at some point. you need to care about it now.

i will now be finding a tankard of diet coke on which to gorge myself.