November 23rd Deadline

Once again Senior Citizens and the military are coming under attack by Congressional members as the Super Committee wrangles with the fast closing deadline of November 23rd to make policy recommendations to their fellow members of  $1.2 trillion dollars in budget reductions. And once again it is becoming apparent that the wealthiest Americans are still off limits.


It baffles the minds of those of the middle and lower classes  as to why they are always the target of budget cuts and program reductions. Why is the military always thrown out as the bait to get us to understand the difficult decisions that lie before the policy makers? One must admit that while the middle and lower classes are the reason these politicians are in office, they are the one’s ignored. Remember, the middle and lower classes make up a majority of the voters, who by all counts, feel these members of congress are looking out for them and that’s why they vote they way they do. It is also important to realize that the military is doing all the dirty work and keeping us safe so we can continue to elect these misfits. But if the mainstream American is voting on emotion only without really looking closely at the policies of those running for reelection, I guess we shouldn’t complain when our taxes are increased and our entitlements are reduced.


Why doesn’t it anger the American people when a deadline, as important as this one, is once again ignored and congress can take a week off. Obviously they feel they can reach a consensus in ten short days and Americans should not worry. They are, after all, looking out for our best interest because they owe us for their elected position and everyone knows it’s the American people they care most about and not the “fat-cats” of Wall Street or the special interest groups or the richest of us all. No, they are only concerned with us mediocre and common citizens. Yeah, right. And oh by the way, they had better hurry so they aren’t late for their annual Thanksgiving break as well.


And, one more thing, no matter what happens in this vote or when these members of congress come up for reelection, one thing is certain, even if they are not reelected they still will have the healthcare insurance and retirement pension to count on. 

Myths and Truths About Social Security

Exploding 5 misconceptions that threaten the system

Reprint from AARP Bulletin of 11/1/11: by: Jane Bryant Quinn 

It happened during the stock boom of the 1990s, and it is happening again. Social Security is coming under attack. The first challenge arose from hope — that savers would get more retirement income for their money if they bought stocks. But the idea of privatization was not popular with the public.

See also: Social Security recipients welcome 3.6 percent COLA.

Now, the attack comes from fear ­ ­ — that Social Security has serious financial problems and can only fail. Younger people lean more toward change than older people do. A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll conducted a year ago found that 60 percent of adults who aren't retired expect to get nothing — zero — from Social Security in their older age.

Myth No. 1: Social Security is going bankrupt. No, it's not. Even in the unlikely event that nothing changes and the program's entire surplus runs out in 2036, as projected, checks would keep coming. Payroll taxes at current rates would cover 77 percent of all the future benefits promised. That's true for young and old alike, and includes inflation adjustments.

Myth No. 2: I'd be better off if I'd kept my Social Security taxes in my own investment account. Hmmm ­ ­ — you're saying that you'd faithfully put that money aside, every year of your working life, in a mix of stocks and bonds, without ever skipping a year, drawing on your nest egg or selling when the market dropped? Few such paragons exist.

You'd need to invest far more than you probably realize to match the benefits Social Security pays. As an example, take a 65-year-old couple with a single breadwinner who earned the average wage. At retirement, they'd currently get about $2,170 a month, plus inflation adjustments, for life, the Urban Institute reports.

To equal that sum in private savings, they'd need to have about $580,000, says Michael Kitces, director of research for Pinnacle Advisory Group, and the money might last only 30 years. How many average earners are likely to save that much?

Myth No. 3: In 1983, Congress made changes to Social Security to build a fund that would pay for boomers when they retire, so it's not fair to change benefits now. No, Congress did not intend to "advance fund" the boomers, according to a study of the record by Charles Blahous of Stanford University's Hoover Institution. It raised taxes and cut some future benefits to cure an imminent insolvency. The trust fund reserves — now $2.6 trillion — were a by-product of the decisions made. Congress never veered from its vision of intergenerational compact: Working people pay for those who don't, or can't, work anymore. On the flip side, the compact requires older people to make some concessions so that younger people can afford it.

Myth No. 4: You should get out of Social Security the amount you put in. No. Social Security is not an individual investment program (see Myth  No. 2). Your taxes paid for the earlier generation of retirees. Current workers are paying for you. The total amount of your benefit depends on how much you earned, whether you get a spousal benefit, when you retire and how long you live.

Myth No. 5: Social Security helps old people, not younger people like me. Wrong. It provides income support to qualified widows and widowers with young children, as well as orphans. Just as important, it saves young families from the cost of supporting older parents who, without Social Security, wouldn't have enough money to live on. It also provides benefits for workers who become disabled.

My final point … and it isn't a myth, it's a fact. If young people switched their payroll taxes into private accounts, the government would have to borrow $6.5 trillion or more (depending on the details) to keep paying out benefits to current retirees.

That means higher deficits, higher income taxes, further slashes in spending, or all three. It's smarter — and cheaper — to fix the current program and put everyone's mind at rest. 

Who is really at risk for 2012?

The upcoming 2012 elections may arguably become the most important opportunity for the American people to voice their concerns and displeasure of the current state of affairs in Washington, DC. That is if the people can recognize the cloud of fluff currently being offered.

The Republican led House, with John Boehner at the helm, has vowed to block any campaign President Obama introduces to create jobs, cut spending, balance the budget or create revenue. The Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell has threatened to use the filibuster to prevent any ideas from the Democrats. Instead of offering ideas or God forbid, compromising, they would rather become the second “do-nothing Congress” since Franklin Roosevelt incumbent Harry Truman ran for reelection.

It is the republican belief that with high unemployment, high debt, failed health care reform, Obama is a lame duck. Their continued political bantering while raising money and looking for support for the upcoming primaries is based on an ineffective President that can’t lead the nation back to prosperity. However, with all their finger pointing and arguing about which Republican candidate has the best “new” tax plan, they seemed to be as dysfunctional as a tiger kidney in a human body. It’s there, but it hasn’t solved the problem.

Obama is an intellectual and as such could use this to bolster his campaign and up his approval rating significantly if he truly wants a second term. No, Obama is not a true leader in the sense that Kennedy was, or as ruthless as Clinton or as likeable as Reagan, but he is charismatic and if he can perform as well as he did in 2008 by “informing” the American people of the Republican based congress, he still might have a chance. Let’s face it, there is no clear front runner in the Republican race and with their fractured approach to the economy and jobs creation, their convention might just end up as the best comedy on television next summer.

Everyone agrees that the Republicans took over the House Majority and won just enough seats in the Senate to create a stalemate for majority votes and apoplexy in government as a result of the terrible economy. But instead of job creation, they've busied themselves focusing on trying to defund Planned Parenthood, protecting Americans from the imaginary threat of Sharia Law, and fending off non-existent attack on the use of "In God We Trust." The Republican controlled House hasn't voted on a single job creation measure since John Boehner and his colleagues took power last January.

Even in the “Super Committee”, Republicans are unwilling to ask millionaires to pay to help jump start America’s economic house. They want to restrict the power of the EPA and restrict funding for contraception. In fact Mr. Boehner and his team published a House schedule for 2012 that has the House in session only 94 days out of 366, (yes it’s leap year), a whopping 75% of their year off with pay.

Instead of having demonstrations about re-distributing the wealth, how about we ask Congress to actually go to work in 2012? Just this once, let’s ask them to be responsible.

Apathy: The Reason We Never Change

When it comes to this country and the lack of change it becomes apparent that apathy is a strong motivator. Why do anything when it's easier to complain about the lack of leadership in Washington, rather than actually making a physical and mental effort to promote change.


It's not our fault Washington can't fix the country, after all, we elected the representatives from our district to fix all our problems and keep our interests first and foremost above all others. It's their job and if they don't do it right, we have the right to sit back and complain. They promised us they would do it and they should. Why should we get involved? Why should we have to make an effort to let them know what they promised and haven't delivered? They should know and they should fix it. 


But I digress, it should be clear as day. I created a petition that could possibly fix the problem, hold Washington accountable and limit their  stay in the Capital if they don't. But once again, apathy has played a big part as to the politico never having to be held accountable. We live in an apathetic time with a questionable attitude that says if they want our names and emails, they will come after us. It's not like this country was founded on the premise that there could be a better way to live.


No, society has become selfish and lazy to the point that why do anything at all when we can just sit back and point fingers and cast blame on those WE elected to fix our country and system. GOD BLESS AMERICA and the right to be apathetic.


http://wh.gov/ToU