Greatest Hits: Will The Government Steal Your Savings? It’s More Likely Than You Think?

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Will The Government Steal Your Savings? It’s More Likely Than You Think? I also ran across the planned thievery of the Spendulous Maximus…

This has been a recurrent theme for several years.  It’s been simmering on the back burner, so to speak, but it continues to get some attention from time to time.  The issue is savings.  Whether it be your 401k, or your IRA, or even a savings account; the democrats has been eying them like a crackhead views their pipe.  Big government has wasted trillions on making more poor people, creating dependency, paying off contributors, punishing enemies, arming those that kill Christians, and trying to prop up their union buddies.  Now, after building up an unsustainable debt, they need another fix, and your savings is becoming mighty attractive to them.  Remember the old cartoons where two characters are starving?  remember how one character would look at another, and see a sandwich?  It’s kinda like that.  Doug Ross has the latest developments…

This didn’t just happen over night. The move to make this reality has been going on for quite some time. The first time it was mentioned publicly in any official capacity was at a 2010 Congressional hearing:

Democrats in the Senate on Thursday held a recess hearing covering a taxpayer bailout of union pensions and a plan to seize private 401(k) plans to more “fairly” distribute taxpayer-funded pensions to everyone.

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee heard from hand-picked witnesses advocating the infamous “Guaranteed Retirement Account” (GRA) authored by Theresa Guilarducci.

In a nutshell, under the GRA system government would seize private 401(k) accounts, setting up an additional 5% mandatory payroll tax to dole out a “fair” pension to everyone using that confiscated money coupled with the mandated contributions. This would, of course, be a sister government ponzi scheme working in tandem with Social Security, the primary purpose being to give big government politicians additional taxpayer funds to raid to pay for their out-of-control spending.

You’d think that such an idea would be immediately dismissed by the American public, but it has only gained steam since, as evidenced by a 2012 hearing held at the U.S. Labor Department:

The hearing, held in the Labor Department’s main auditorium, was monitored by NSC staff and featured a line up of left-wing activists including one representative of the AFL-CIO who advocated for more government regulation over private retirement accounts and even the establishment of government-sponsored annuities that would take the place of 401k plans.

“This hearing was set up to explore why Americans are not saving as much for their retirement as they could,” explains National Seniors Council National Director Robert Crone, “However, it is clear that this is the first step towards a government takeover. It feels just like the beginning of the debate over health care and we all know how that ended up.

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Such “reforms” would effectively end private retirement accounts in America, Crone warns.

A few years ago the government of the United States of America nationalized nearly 1/6th of our economy when they took over the health care system with forced mandates. In the process they essentially took control of $1.6 trillion in yearly industry revenues.

But that’s nothing compared to private savings. The total amount of retirement assets in America, including 401k, IRA and savings accounts is around $21 trillion. With our national debt coincidentally approaching the same, the government sees big money and potentially a way out of our country’s fiscal disaster.

This will start voluntarily with the MyRA and other state-sponsored programs. But when not enough Americans are making it their patriotic duty to turn over their funds to their government, they’ll mandate compliance with the stroke of a pen just as they did with the Patient Affordable Care Act.

This is spot on.  And, by the way, the excerpt is a small part of a much larger post.  I’d advise you to go over there to read the rest.

As you look at the MyRA scam.  Think of these…

1.  The Income Tax was only going to be on the rich, and at a small percentage.  Look at your next pay-stub, and see how true that is.

2.  Social Security funds were going to be kept separate from all other government funds?  Just remember that what you pay in to SS goes right out to fund the government, and interest on the debt.  As for the “lock box?”  It’s full of worthless government IOU’s.

Anything the government offers now will be changed in order to rip you off.  They’ll say some thing to get you to buy in, like, “if you like your plan…”  Then, once they have the power, and your savings, they’ll do whatever they want with it, and you’ll be left will a meaningless IOU.  Then, when you retire, you’ll find that you get nothing, because some democrat constituent group needed your hard earned savings more than you do.

And, then, you’ll regret your votes for democrats.

Share

Greatest Hits: Barak Obama: “… I will direct the Treasury to create a new way to rip you off.”

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Barak Obama: “… I will direct the Treasury to create a new way to rip you off.” Steve found that Obama was eying our retirement accounts with a jealous gaze…

A little over a year ago I had posted  More taxes … IRA’s and 401k retirement accounts are soon to be ripped off as well.  In that post I mentioned … the government is strongly considering pilfering the retirement accounts of all Americans. At the end of 2010, there was an estimated 17.5 trillion dollars in United States retirement assets, including 3.1 trillion in 401k’s and 4.7 trillion in IRA’s.  If anyone thinks for a second the government doesn’t have its eye on that, they are living in a fantasy world. 

Okay, four years ago to the month this piece came out   Retirement Alert: The Government Has Plans for Your 401(k) and IRA.

Via: GoBankingRates.com

In the near future, the government may be planning to take over your  401(k) and Individual Retirement Accounts (IRA) and managing it on its own. Why, you ask? Well, mainly because there is an unprecedented  trillion-dollar deficit that needs to be taken care of.

So this is the deal: somewhere out there is a major deficit that is  struggling to lower despite the government’s efforts. However, there are tons of 401(k) and IRA accounts floating around with  tons of money (well, at least what’s left after the financial crisis).

So now, according to BusinessWeek, the Treasury and Labor departments are asking  for public comment on “the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individuals  Retirement Accounts into annuities  or other steady payment streams.”

How Would the Conversion Work?

Basically, in order for the conversion to work, the government would take  over you retirement savings. In return, it would promise to pay  you some type of monthly benefit in your retirement years.

One suggestion from Teresa Ghilarducci of the New School for Social Research in  New York, who was a part of hearings last fall held by the House Education and  Labor Committee, was to give all workers “a $600 annual inflation-adjusted  subsidy from the U.S. government.”

In exchange, the workers would be required to invest 5 percent of their pay  into a guaranteed retirement account that would be administered by the Social  Security Administration.

However, this guaranteed retirement account would actually be an investment  in U.S.  Treasury bonds that would go toward paying down the huge  trillion-dollar budget deficits.

MORE RIGHT HERE

Well, that was written four years ago. The liberal mind set .. “Hey, if the government was going to take your retirement it would have already happened!” prevails in very intellectually challenged people. But now that it’s upon us and actually being set in motion, the liberals will simply say that the government will provide a better retirement system with your money than what you have right now, so it’s okay.

During his 65 minute State of the Union drivel Barack made some notable statements of which people should have been paying attention. I know, that’s extremely difficult if you’re like me and can’t stand to hear the sound of his voice for more than … oh … 60 seconds. Most of what he said was the same old stuff just a different day. But then he started talking about how he found a way to bilk the American public out of more of their money by setting up a government run retirement program. This program essentially will not be voluntary. I’m sure it will force employers to pull a percentage of your pay check to buy into “your future”.

Now, I’m not sure why the government thinks they need to force the public into some kind of retirement account beyond the fact that they want more of your money. Eventually, soon enough, they’ll grab the existing $17 TRILLION in private retirement accounts and “invest” it wisely into government run “nest eggs”.

I’m not all that savvy on this sort of thing and Dan Steinhart, Managing Editor of the The Casey Report can explain it better than I can.

Via: Casey Research

Obama Fires the First Shot on Your Retirement Account

Dear Reader,

Did you watch the State of the Union address?

I didn’t, because, well… I didn’t want to.

But I did read the transcript the morning after. And boy is there a doozy in there. A lot of news outlets are talking about it. But very few dissected Obama’s tricky language enough to understand its significance.

I’m talking about his unveiling of the “MyRA,” which is ostensibly a new retirement account for working-class Americans. Sounds innocent enough.

But read a little closer, and… well, rather than put words in his mouth, let’s let the skilled orator tell us about the MyRA himself, word for word from his State of the Union address.

Take it away, Barack. (His words, verbatim, are in bold.)

“Let’s do more to help Americans save for retirement. Today, most workers don’t have a pension. A Social Security check often isn’t enough on its own.”

Can’t argue with that. The personal savings rate has been declining since the 1970s. Reversing that trend would help get America back on track to prosperity. Tell me more.

“And while the stock market has doubled over the last five years, that doesn’t help folks who don’t have 401(k)s.”

Good point. It’s hard for lower-income earners to save enough money to invest in the stock market. Helping them access stocks is a great idea, provided they enlist a competent advisor.

Granted, it’s not a perfect solution. But allocating a portion of one’s savings to stocks is smart—certainly better than allowing inflation to bleed one’s savings account to death.

“That’s why, tomorrow, I will direct the Treasury to create a new way for working Americans to start their own retirement savings: MyRA.”

Actually, Mr. President, working Americans already have access to IRAs. You’re giving the impression that lower-income Americans don’t have access to tax-advantaged retirement accounts, but that’s not true at all. Even if my employer doesn’t sponsor a plan, I can start one on my own. Anyone under the age of 70½ can open a self-directed IRA, and plenty of brokers allow people to enroll with as little as a $500 initial contribution.

So where are you going with this?

“It’s a new savings bond that encourages folks to build a nest egg.”

Whoa, hang on there. You were just talking about the stock market. How do savings bonds help the average Joe tap into stocks?

“MyRA guarantees a decent return with no risk of losing what you put in.”

Stop it. First of all, bonds neither guarantee a decent return nor protect people from losing their principal. In fact, with interest rates still near historic lows, buying bonds today and holding them for the long term virtually guarantees they’ll lose money.

Second, a bond is not a one-sided transaction. Whoever issues the bond is borrowing money from the buyer. The US government would be issuing these bonds, so that would mean… wait a minute, you wouldn’t be trying to covertly confiscate workers’ earnings to fund the government, would you?

AND THE REST RIGHT ABOUT HERE

Original Post:  Cry and Howl

Share

Obama Is Eying Your Savings!

Share

Obama Is Eying Your Savings!: Our Contributor Jim, living in a communist dictatorship, knows all to well how this pans out…

Remember when President Obama said “there comes a point when a person has earned enough”? Well, it should be a surprise that he also feels that people have saved more than they need for retirement. Mr. Obama has given new meaning to the word “arrogance”.

With this scandal a day administration, it is no wonder some of their plans to get their hands on more of your money slip under the radar.

On Aril 12, 2013, the Wall Street Journal wrote:

How many times have you read financial-advice stories lecturing you to max-out on your IRA, save as much as you can in your 401(k), and even pay taxes now to change your regular IRA into a Roth IRA that will be tax-free until you die?

Well, be careful how much you save.

Assistant OpinionJournal.com editor Allysia Finley on President Obama’s attack on tax deferred retirement accounts.

A lot of job-switchers are ignoring what may be one of the best options to get the most out of their retirement: Moving their savings into their new employer’s 401(k). MarketWatch’s Jim Jelter explains the benefits.

That’s the message in President Obama’s budget for fiscal 2014, which for the first time proposes to cap the amount Americans can save in these tax-sheltered investment vehicles. The White House explanation is that some people have accumulated “substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving.” So Mr. Obama proposes to “limit an individual’s total balance across tax-preferred accounts to an amount sufficient to finance an annuity of not more than $205,000 per year in retirement, or about $3 million for someone retiring in 2013.”

On April 14, 2013, the Independent Sentinel wrote:

THEY ARE COMING FOR YOU NEXT, make no mistake about that!. They already proposed it back in 2008. The government is on the hunt for more money to support its spending problem. President Obama wants more “revenue” – “taxes” – so he can make more “investments” as he spreads the wealth around.

You need to be afraid, very afraid!

Americans have $17.5 trillion in savings with 25% of it in IRA’s. It is a future source of revenue for the government if they can get their hands on it.

President Barack Obama’s Fiscal Year 2013 budget plan estimated that retirement tax deductions taken by employers and individuals over the next five years add up to $429 billion in “lost” tax revenue. The government believes your savings is their lost revenue.

See how that works? Because you take a legal tax deduction, the government is getting screwed. Never mind that the original idea was to give citizens an incentive to save. Further along in the Independent Sentinel article we find this:

Share

Greatest Hits: They Said if I Voted for Romney, They’d Come After my 401(k), and They Were Right!

Share

They Said if I Voted for Romney, They’d Come After my 401(k), and They Were Right!:   Don’t be surprised when they come for your savings…

That’s right kids, they government is eyeing your 401(k), IRA, or 403(b) with great envy.  And, as for the title, since Stacey is talking blog shtick, I thought I’d borrow from his well, which is deep with all sorts of goodness.  

But, back to the seriousness.  There has been rumblings about the government taking over all private retirement accounts for some time.  Apparently, the democrats just can’t let a big pool of money sit there in private hands-it must be controlled, and redistributed, bythe kind hands of government.  Bob Belvedere at  TCOTS has more…

The Editors at Investor’s Business Daily published an excellent editorial yesterday [tip of the fedora to Memeorandum] on the coming attempt by the national government to seize control of retirement accounts, like the 401(k).

A highlight:

President Obama’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, for instance, proposed lowering the cap on the amount workers could place in their 401(k)s without incurring taxes.

And nearly three years ago, Newt Gingrich and Peter Ferrara wrote on these pages about the Treasury and Labor departments “asking for public comment on ‘the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams.’”

“In plain English,” said Gingrich and Ferrara, “the idea is for the government to take your retirement savings in return for a promise to pay you some monthly benefit in your retirement years.”

More than 60 million American workers have a 401(k) or similar — 403(b) or 457(b) — plan. But taxing these accounts or lowering the amount that can be contributed to them tax-free would do little to close the deficit and cut the debt.

Do take the time to click here and read it all [and weep].

Hmmm, let’s take a look at the following a bit more closely…

“the idea is for the government to take your retirement savings in return for a promise to pay you some monthly benefit in your retirement years.”

That sounds rather familiar, doesn’t it?  I mean, how does money get taken from me in exchange for payments when I’m retired?  Oh, that’s it, Social Security.  Well, I never expect to see a dime from that government ponzi scheme, which is why I have a 401(k).  However, if they government does to my 401(k) what they are doing to Social Security, should ever expect a single dime of that either?

I’m thinking retirement is going to be very cold and hungry.  Then again, IPAB would probably kill me off buy that time anyway.

Isn’t it great to live in the “fundamentally transformed USSA?”

We’ll be showing more and more posts about this today, as it is a current issue. 

Share

Will The Government Steal Your Savings? It’s More Likely Than You Think?

Share

This has been a recurrent theme for several years.  It’s been simmering on the back burner, so to speak, but it continues to get some attention from time to time.  The issue is savings.  Whether it be your 401k, or your IRA, or even a savings account; the democrats has been eying them like a crackhead views their pipe.  Big government has wasted trillions on making more poor people, creating dependency, paying off contributors, punishing enemies, arming those that kill Christians, and trying to prop up their union buddies.  Now, after building up an unsustainable debt, they need another fix, and your savings is becoming mighty attractive to them.  Remember the old cartoons where two characters are starving?  remember how one character would look at another, and see a sandwich?  It’s kinda like that.  Doug Ross has the latest developments…

This didn’t just happen over night. The move to make this reality has been going on for quite some time. The first time it was mentioned publicly in any official capacity was at a 2010 Congressional hearing:

Democrats in the Senate on Thursday held a recess hearing covering a taxpayer bailout of union pensions and a plan to seize private 401(k) plans to more “fairly” distribute taxpayer-funded pensions to everyone.

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee heard from hand-picked witnesses advocating the infamous “Guaranteed Retirement Account” (GRA) authored by Theresa Guilarducci.

In a nutshell, under the GRA system government would seize private 401(k) accounts, setting up an additional 5% mandatory payroll tax to dole out a “fair” pension to everyone using that confiscated money coupled with the mandated contributions. This would, of course, be a sister government ponzi scheme working in tandem with Social Security, the primary purpose being to give big government politicians additional taxpayer funds to raid to pay for their out-of-control spending.

You’d think that such an idea would be immediately dismissed by the American public, but it has only gained steam since, as evidenced by a 2012 hearing held at the U.S. Labor Department:

The hearing, held in the Labor Department’s main auditorium, was monitored by NSC staff and featured a line up of left-wing activists including one representative of the AFL-CIO who advocated for more government regulation over private retirement accounts and even the establishment of government-sponsored annuities that would take the place of 401k plans.

“This hearing was set up to explore why Americans are not saving as much for their retirement as they could,” explains National Seniors Council National Director Robert Crone, “However, it is clear that this is the first step towards a government takeover. It feels just like the beginning of the debate over health care and we all know how that ended up.

Such “reforms” would effectively end private retirement accounts in America, Crone warns.

A few years ago the government of the United States of America nationalized nearly 1/6th of our economy when they took over the health care system with forced mandates. In the process they essentially took control of $1.6 trillion in yearly industry revenues.

But that’s nothing compared to private savings. The total amount of retirement assets in America, including 401k, IRA and savings accounts is around $21 trillion. With our national debt coincidentally approaching the same, the government sees big money and potentially a way out of our country’s fiscal disaster.

This will start voluntarily with the MyRA and other state-sponsored programs. But when not enough Americans are making it their patriotic duty to turn over their funds to their government, they’ll mandate compliance with the stroke of a pen just as they did with the Patient Affordable Care Act.

This is spot on.  And, by the way, the excerpt is a small part of a much larger post.  I’d advise you to go over there to read the rest.

As you look at the MyRA scam.  Think of these…

1.  The Income Tax was only going to be on the rich, and at a small percentage.  Look at your next pay-stub, and see how true that is.

2.  Social Security funds were going to be kept separate from all other government funds?  Just remember that what you pay in to SS goes right out to fund the government, and interest on the debt.  As for the “lock box?”  It’s full of worthless government IOU’s.

Anything the government offers now will be changed in order to rip you off.  They’ll say some thing to get you to buy in, like, “if you like your plan…”  Then, once they have the power, and your savings, they’ll do whatever they want with it, and you’ll be left will a meaningless IOU.  Then, when you retire, you’ll find that you get nothing, because some democrat constituent group needed your hard earned savings more than you do.

And, then, you’ll regret your votes for democrats.

Share

They Said if I Voted for Romney, They’d Come After my 401(k), and They Were Right!

Share

That’s right kids, they government is eyeing your 401(k), IRA, or 403(b) with great envy.  And, as for the title, since Stacey is talking blog shtick, I thought I’d borrow from his well, which is deep with all sorts of goodness.  

But, back to the seriousness.  There has been rumblings about the government taking over all private retirement accounts for some time.  Apparently, the democrats just can’t let a big pool of money sit there in private hands-it must be controlled, and redistributed, bythe kind hands of government.  Bob Belvedere at  TCOTS has more…

The Editors at Investor’s Business Daily published an excellent editorial yesterday [tip of the fedora to Memeorandum] on the coming attempt by the national government to seize control of retirement accounts, like the 401(k).

A highlight:

President Obama’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, for instance, proposed lowering the cap on the amount workers could place in their 401(k)s without incurring taxes.

And nearly three years ago, Newt Gingrich and Peter Ferrara wrote on these pages about the Treasury and Labor departments “asking for public comment on ‘the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams.’”

“In plain English,” said Gingrich and Ferrara, “the idea is for the government to take your retirement savings in return for a promise to pay you some monthly benefit in your retirement years.”

More than 60 million American workers have a 401(k) or similar — 403(b) or 457(b) — plan. But taxing these accounts or lowering the amount that can be contributed to them tax-free would do little to close the deficit and cut the debt.

Do take the time to click here and read it all [and weep].

Hmmm, let’s take a look at the following a bit more closely…

“the idea is for the government to take your retirement savings in return for a promise to pay you some monthly benefit in your retirement years.”

That sounds rather familiar, doesn’t it?  I mean, how does money get taken from me in exchange for payments when I’m retired?  Oh, that’s it, Social Security.  Well, I never expect to see a dime from that government ponzi scheme, which is why I have a 401(k).  However, if they government does to my 401(k) what they are doing to Social Security, should ever expect a single dime of that either?

I’m thinking retirement is going to be very cold and hungry.  Then again, IPAB would probably kill me off buy that time anyway.

Isn’t it great to live in the “fundamentally transformed USSA?”

Share

Oh how the Narrative Changes: Social Security in Great Shape a few Weeks ago, Now on it's Deathbed

Share

Back in the day, when there were only three broadcast networks, and when newspapers were throw in the trash at the end of the day, it would have been easy to get away with a 180 degree narrative change.  Just pretend that the old narrative never happened, and move on wit the new one.  People might have noticed, but without the evidence easy to see, it would eventually work.

Can a party get away with that in the age of alternative media?  Not so much. With the internet being forever (unless you’re the Daily Kos purging posts to seem slightly less hypocritical when criticizing Sarah Palin), stories are easily accessible for the  foreseeable future.

The latest case in point came yesterday, when the POTUS announced that Social Security checks might not go out in August unless the GOP sabotages the economy to Obama’s liking.


(insert sound of screeching tires here)

Wait a freaking minute here! I seem to recall that over the last few months, we were consistently told that Social Security and Medicare were so well funded as to be bullet proof.  As Rep. Ryan’s buget plan was rolled out, we were told that Social Security was in great shape, and that Ryan and his GOP cohorts were just trying to kill off all the grannies (like there would be any left after ObamaCare anyway).

Here is what MSNBC had to say about it back in March of this year. 

But skeptics wonder: why pick on Social Security? Since Social Security will be solvent until 2037, why must it be part of any fiscal overhaul now?

Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif., a member of the Bowles-Simpson commission who voted against its recommendations, has accused Republicans of wanting “to raid Social Security to pay for their past failures to balance the books.”

He said Social Security has “$2.6 trillion in reserves dedicated to paying the retirement, disability and survivor benefits that American taxpayers have earned” and that $2.6 trillion “doesn’t add to our deficit.”

Pacific Progressive has this to say last month.

“Misinformation about Social Security has led many to believe that Social Security is in immediate danger of insolvency” said Dean Baker, a co-director of CEPR and author of the report, “but the program will be fully solvent for almost three more decades. Furthermore, even if no changes are ever made, a child born in 2010 can expect to see a benefit that is more than 50 percent larger in real terms than what current retirees receive today.”

Progressive News Daily had this in January.

Is it “sick”? Social Security has $2.5 trillion in T-Bills sitting in a trust fund, is financed through 2037 and if nothing were to change it would still be able to pay out higher benefits than it does today, indefinitely.

Is it getting sicker? Well, the 2000 Social Security Trustees’s report (PDF)projected that the trust fund would run out in … 2037. But the 1997 report (PDF) expected the trust fund to be depleted by 2029 — 8 years earlier than currently projected. So in that sense, it’s “healthier” today than it was 13 years ago.

Then, CNS News has this yesterday.  It seems to show that the government has enough money to pay for things, including Social Security, for some time.

However, according to the Daily Treasury Statements published by the U.S. Treasury Department, the ongoing flow of federal tax revenue since the Treasury declared that it had hit the debt limit on May 16 has been more than sufficient to cover the combined costs of federal spending on interest payments, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the Veterans Affairs department and federal workers wages and insurance benefits (including wages and insurance benefits for military personnel).

Specifically, according to the Daily Treasury Statements, as of the close of business on May 16, the federal government had taken in $1.333454 trillion in tax revenues since the beginning of fiscal 2011. By the close of business on July 7, tax revenues for fiscal 2011 had grown to $1.629630 trillion. Therefore, between May 16 and July 7 the federal government took in a total of $296.176 billion in new tax revenue.

In that same time period, total interest payments on the national debt equaled $14.632 billion.

Thus, the new tax revenue of $296.176 billion the federal government took in between May 16 and July 7 was enough to pay the federal government’s $14.632 billion in interest obligations during that period 20 times over.

A simple look at Google will show you that multitudes of left leaning sources were telling us that Social Security was as healthy as an ox, and would continue to be  so for decades.  Of course, the trust funds are filled with IOUs in the form of treasury  bonds, so we really don’t know how much those will be worth once Obama is done ruining the economy, as well as our credit.  But that, as they say, is another story.

At any rate, we have to ask the question; was every lefty source in the universe lying for the last 6-8 months, or is Obama lying now?

Related Post:  The Other McCain

Share

Baby Boomers Bombed

Share

Many of you have probably figured out by now that Jon Hayward (formerly  Doctor Zero  and now writing full-time for Human Events) is one of my favorite conservative writers. He has written another thought-provoking article titled “The Boomer Bust” or “Boomers reap what they didn’t bother to sew”.  It’s well worth reading the entire article, which isn’t very long.

Although I am arguably John’s biggest fan, I’m compelled to differ with his depiction of the Baby Boomers in some aspects. But, before I get into that, let me share the initial part of his essay. Then I will add my comments.

The Associated Press reports on the grim financial future of the Baby Boom generation: “Through a combination of procrastination and bad timing, many baby boomers are facing a personal finance disaster just as they’re hoping to retire.”

“Bad timing?”  You want to know what “bad timing” was?  Riding at anchor in Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.  The Boomers screwed themselves.  The factors combining to ruin their retirement are the result of policies they support, promoted by politicians they insisted upon.

The AP lists a few of the top reasons for the Boomer predicament: the disappearance of traditional pension plans, falling stock prices and home values, inadequate Social Security income, and a predilection for spending instead of saving.

John takes each one of  the reasons that AP listed for the predicament of the Boomers and, without pulling any punches, tells us how the boomers made the bed in which they must now lay down . Here is final right-cross to the jaw of the Boomers.

Welcome to the future you made, Baby Boomers.  If you think retirement is tough now, just wait until Generations X, Y, and Z arrive in the future you made for them.

I don’t disagree with anything John said. In generic terms, yes, the Baby Boomers are guilty as charged. The problem I have with Jon’s essay is that he treated the Baby Boomers as a monolithic group, which, of course, they are not. Politically the Boomers are made-up of conservatives, moderates, and liberals. Once you recognize that they are not a monolithic group, some additional issues beg to be explained.

My guess is that conservatives have probably always out numbered the liberals but the moderates were the largest segment of the Boomers. If I’m right, one has to ask, how did we get into this mess? I think part of the answer is that the liberals became the vocal minority and the conservatives and moderates became the silent majority. This began in the 60s, The liberals within a few years took control of the Democratic Party. The have been a fairly cohesive group and they have been steadfast in promoting their ideals. The liberals gradually took over MSM and they also took control of the education system. Their allies have always been the unions. Being the vocal minority, they more often than not were able to convince a majority of the moderates to go along with them.

Meanwhile, the conservatives continued to be part of the silent majority. They may have believed that the Republican Party represented their interest but the truth has been that the Republicans have always been a centrist party ; made up of mostly moderates, a few liberals, and fewer still true conservatives. Because conservatives, until very recently, were not vocal, they in fact contributed to the liberal designed mess in which we now find ourselves. In other words, the conservative Baby Boomers never were active participants in bringing America to the precipice; but,yes, we have been passive participants.

Original Post: Conservatives on Fire

Share