Some thoughts on political mislabels, and (lack of) presidential leadership. And note the latest rube who has become disenchanted with the president.
10 thoughts on ““Liberals,” “Progressives” and “Reactionaries””
Comments are closed.
Some thoughts on political mislabels, and (lack of) presidential leadership. And note the latest rube who has become disenchanted with the president.
Comments are closed.
“Liberals, Progressives and Reactionaries! Oh my!”
I ask this question all the time of young “Progressives”; after you tax the rich and take all their money, who are you going to take from next? Blank looks and stammering are a common answer.
Reactionaries lacks zing.
When did Social Security and Medicare become “entitlement programs”? We pay for both over our working lives and quite a lot more if you want Medicare Part D and more than 80% coverage on Part A at age 65.
Now, we may not be paying enough for this government run Insurance Policy but that is not our call – it belongs in Congress.
One wonders where we would be if the congress had not raided the SS funds for other purposes.
Now, Medicaid is an entitlement program and Mr. Ryan’s Block Grant idea has merit.
Two areas of government that deserve a long hard look are the DoD and the DHS. Both departments seem to be spending like it’s going out of fashion. Mr. Gates already recognizes this as a problem but there has been no comment from DHS. Just how much do they need to make our lives more “interesting”?
Social Security was sold to the public as an insurance program but was implemented as a Ponzi Scheme. In 1960, the Supreme Court ruled that the government can deny SS benefits or modify the program in any way at any time. In the 1960s, Congress began spending the SS surpluses and replacing the money with IOUs. The fact that today’s SS taxes are going directly to pay today’s beneficiaries makes it not an insurance program but an entitlement program. I think the main reason why the government went after Bernie Madeoff so hard was they hated the competition.
People who have never paid into SS can draw SS benefits such as wives who never worked but are willing to draw benefits in their husband’s name. SS goes to more than old people. Anyone who can qualify for disability payments can get money from the program, to include not only the truly handicapped but alcoholics, drug addicts, and kids with “ADHD.” These things put SS into the entitlement category.
As for Medicare, a court ruling last month asserts that the only way a senior can decline Medicare coverage is to also withdraw from Social Security and to pay back any SS benefits.
A recent court ruling has helped President Obama push ahead with a mandate that all citizens be required to have government health insurance.
In a March 16 decision, U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer — who previously served as general counsel of the National Labor Relations Board — ruled that seniors who elect to opt out of Medicare coverage must then forfeit their Social Security benefits as well and repay all past Social Security benefits prior to opting out.
The ruling relates to a lawsuit filed in 2008, when, in Hall v. Sebelius, several senior citizens challenged a 1993 Clinton administration program rule and sued the federal government for the right to opt out of Medicare without losing their Social Security benefits.
The plaintiffs all paid their Medicare taxes throughout their employment histories and did not request reimbursement of this money. These individuals simply wished to engage other health insurance plans that they believed would provide better coverage than that of the government Medicare program. In addition, these seniors contributed to Social Security while they were working, and accepted these benefits upon retirement.
Dana Milbank reports on the progressive budget alternative:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/if-progressives-ran-the-world/2011/04/13/AFD7YtYD_story.html
These people are nuts!
Progressives know that giving people “free stuff” is what gets them elected. To them, reality is just another word.
“Liberals,” “Progressives” and “Reactionaries”?
The rest of the planet calls them “socialists”
Socialism has two main groups of supporters:
1. Lazy people who want something for nothing.
2. Academic types who want power.
Neither are to be trusted nor given power.
While we’re yanking the English language back from bastardization, is it possible to recover “anarchy” from the violent lemmings who have misappropriated the word? (no? damn)