An obscure SCOTUS ruling last week sets the stage for Obama to seize your 401(k)

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.

An obscure SCOTUS ruling last week sets the stage for Obama to seize your 401(k)

Tapping the estimated $19.4 trillion dollars in private pension plans is every progressive socialist’s wet dream. I warned you Obama had his eye on your 401(k), and now a little noticed Supreme Court ruling just gave him the green light to seize your money.

The US Supreme Court ruled last week in the unanimous, 8-page decision in Tibble v. Edison holding that employers have a duty to protect workers in their 401(k) plans from mutual funds that are too expensive or perform poorly. That is simply astonishing since there is no constitutional requirement for even government to provide social benefits.

Remember when the Constitution provided a limit to government power?

Yeah, me neither.

Now the Constitution says the government has to protect you from your own bad investment decisions. Er, SCOTUS says the government has to protect you from your own bad investment decisions. The Constitution is silent on the matter. But, emanations of penumbras, or some such rubbish dontcha know.

Monday’s unanimous ruling sends a warning to employers that they now must improve their plans and it is now an obligation to project employees. This comes just in time for then the next step is government to seize private funds and prosecute employers who choose badly a fund manager. This fits perfectly just in time for the Obama administration’s next assault as they prepare a landmark change of its own by issuing rules requiring that financial advisers put the interest of customers ahead of their own. This creates a very gray area wide enough to justify public seizure of pension funds under management.

Read that again, in case you didn’t catch the part where the government is going to decide if your 401(k) is “good enough.”

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.

Yet this decision is even deeper. It sets the stage to JUSTIFY government seizure of private pension funds to protect pensioners. When the economy turns down and things get messy, they are placing measures in place to eliminate money in and physical physical dimension, closing all tax loopholes, shutting down the world economy with FATCA, and preparing for the final straw of Economic Totalitarianism with the Supreme Court reversing its entire construction of the Constitution to impose a duty upon employers to ensure the 401K plans perform in a world where interest rates are going negative. You really cannot make up this level of insanity.

Oh, this level of insanity is just what a guy like Bernie Sanders ordered. It’s the nanny state, writ large.

Bureaucrats answerable to Sanders’ cohort Elizabeth Warren will now get to decide if your 401(k) plan cuts the mustard. They’ll arbitrarily set a cap on management fees, and punish any fund that exceeds their idea of a “reasonable” profit.

The punishment? Seizing the fund’s assets, and forcing your money into an investment in Treasury bonds.

Then you’re just another creditor to Obama, standing in line behind all the geezers on Social Security. Good luck getting paid, after all you’re also collecting Social Security, and sooner or later you’ve made enough money.

Between the court ruling and the Obama administration’s push for stronger fiduciary rules send a strong message that government can much easier seize the pension fund management industry of course to “protect the consumer.”

Who’s gonna protect us from the government?

You knuckleheads shoulda thought that through before you elected a committed Marxist to the presidency.

Share

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.

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: 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

Annals Of The 47%: Obama Administration Made $125 Billion In ‘Improper’ Payments Last Year

Share

government-handoutsObama’s minions aren’t very good stewards of the public’s money.

In fact, they’re so bad, they set a new record for improper payments handouts.

Federal agencies made $125 billion in improper payments last year, including tax credits to people who didn’t qualify, Medicare payments for treatments that might not be necessary and unemployment benefits for people who were actually working, said a government report released Monday.

The level of improper payments was a new high after several years of declines. In addition to fraud, the errors included over payments and under payments, as well payments made without proper documentation.

While the errors were spread among 22 federal agencies, three programs stood out: Medicare, Medicaid and the Earned Income Tax Credit.

Together, the three programs accounted for more than $93 billion in improper payments, according to the report by the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress.

“This taxpayer money was not spent securing our borders, it was not spent on national defense, and it was not spent contributing to a safety net for those in need,” said Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. “This is a problem that is going to get worse year after year if we do not get a handle on it now.”

The “problem” is in the eye of the beholder Senator.

And in the eye of President Jarrett, everything is going according to plan.

Because every single one of those $125 billion dollars went toward buying votes for Democrats. What could be more important than that?

Homeland Security?

Puh-lease.

If the Obamabots were interested in Homeland Security they’d close the borders and keep Iran and Hezbollah on the terrorist watch list.

Instead they’re focused on one thing. Putting as many Americans as possible on the dole. Consumers of government vote for the party of government. And Democrats are masters at promising Free Stuff.

Just wait, the next two years of “improper payments” will make $125 billion look like a drop in the bucket. They’re gonna pull out all the stops to keep the White House firmly under their jackboots, which means levels of wealth transfer that would make Robin Hood blush.

Tax “refunds” to illegal aliens who never paid a dime of taxes in their lives.

ObamaCare subsidies to anybody with a pulse. And to the recently departed, especially if Social Security “forgot” to count them as dead.

College loan “forgiveness.”

More mortgage writedown shenanigans from the FHA too.

No grant is too small. No boondoggle too shameful. Federal largess will flow where votes are needed most, while their propagandists in the press fan the flames of racial and class discord. It’s the Progressives’ Battle Of The Bulge, their last-ditch effort to cement socialism as the successor to the great American republic.

And when we really do run out of other people’s money? Hey, that’s Hillary’s problem.

.

.

Share

One Chart Disproves Obama’s Claims That He Is A “Deficit Cutter” – Who Made The Chart? Obama’s Federal Reserve…

Share

FRED Chart 001

Hat/Tip to Doug Ross @ Journal.

Just a few short days ago, President Obama uttered these words in his 2015 State of the Union speech:

At every step, we were told our goals were misguided or too ambitious; that we would crush jobs and explode deficits. Instead, we’ve seen the fastest economic growth in over a decade, our deficits cut by two-thirds, a stock market that has doubled, and health care inflation at its lowest rate in fifty years.

Now I won’t spend time debunking the four lies he told in that short excerpt, instead let’s look at just his claim that he’s a “deficit cutter” in this great article from over at Doug Ross’ place:

ONE CHART IS ALL IT TAKES: The Ludicrous Claims of Obama as a “Deficit-Cutter”

Oh, and did I mention the chart itself comes from the Obama Federal Reserve?

Put simply, any claims linking President Obama to fiscal responsibility are somewhat akin to using Michael Moore as a spokesperson for Jenny Craig.

By the time this walking economic catastrophe has left office, the total federal debt will have doubled. All of the debts rung up in all of American history will have doubled in eight short years.

Every governmental oversight office — from the CBO to the GAO — is warning that the debt is “unsustainable”. Interest payments on the debt will double in just the next five years, from $266.7 billion currently to $578.3 billion in 2020. And the Obama administration’s forecast shows interest payments rising to $785 billion per year by 2025.

And let’s not forget Obama’s failure to even talk about the looming entitlement crisis.

The system is headed for collapse. And Obama has only added fuel to the fire.

.

.

.

Share

Story Update: Woman’s Tax Refund Stolen By Government for Something She Did Not Owe

Share

In what appears to be the next IRS scandal, the government is stealing tax refunds from people-even if they do not know if the targeted person actually did anything wrong.  Greta covered that recently.


 


We know that government, and especially the left, believes that all wealth and income belongs to them-not you. The honestly believe that government, as “god,” determines what, if any, of your income that you GET to keep. Given that belief, it should be no surprise that this is happening.  And, if they have to tax you into poverty, they’ll do it.  If they have to steal your tax refund to do it, that’s OK too.  And if you end up being poor, so be it.  If’s fairness and social justice!

Share

The Boomer Retirement Tsunami Will Be Devastating To Younger Americans

Share

Last week I wrote a post in which I offered my condolences to Americans under sixty years of age. I was referring to the mess my generation (The Elders) and the Baby Boomer generation (Soon To Be Elders) have left to the younger generations. Actually the cut off is closer to 53 than 60; but 60 was a nice round number. Now I have some more detailed information to share with you younger folks so you will know just how thoroughly screwed you are. I found this wonderfully informative guest post at Zero Hedge that lists twenty facts about the demographic shock wave that is heading your way as the Baby Boomers begin retiring at the rate of around 10,000 per day.

So, if you are in that younger demographic, I strongly suggest that you read the Zero Hedge article so you will know what is coming and maybe you can prepare yourselves psychologically for what the rest of your lives will be like. For now, I will share with you a few of those facts and then I’ll add my two cents worth.

1. Right now, there are somewhere around 40 million senior citizens in the United States.  By 2050 that number is projected to skyrocket to 89 million.

Please keep that 89 million number in mind. I’l come back to it in a moment.

2. According to the Employee Benefit Research Institute, 46 percent of all American workers have less than $10,000 saved for retirement, and 29 percent of all American workers have less than $1,000 saved for retirement.

6. A study conducted by Boston College’s Center for Retirement Research found that American workers are $6.6 trillion short of what they need to retire comfortably.

13. Right now, the American people spend approximately 2.8 trillion dollars on health care, and it is being projected that due to our aging population health care spending will rise to an astounding 4.5 trillion dollars in 2019.

18. At this point, Medicare is facing unfunded liabilities of more than 38 trillion dollars over the next 75 years.  That comes to approximately $328,404 for every single household in the United States.

21. Overall, the Social Security system is facing a 134 trillion dollar shortfall over the next 75 years.

22. The U.S. government is facing a total of 222 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities during the years ahead.  Social Security and Medicare make up the bulk of that.

So, younger Americans, how are you going to support your parents and grandparents in their retirement years? Where are you going to get the money to keep our Social Security benefits and Medicare and Medicade benefits coming? You can’t, you say? Think again, my young friends. What was that number I asked you to keep in mind? 89 million! Let that number sink into to your poorly educated mind some more. That is one hell of a big voting block, isn’t it?Do you really think they won’t vote to raise your taxes to keep their benefits coming? I suggest look up the voting records of the AARP. These 80+ million old folks will team up the 50+ million food stamp recipients and they are going to squeeze the last drop out of you. Count on it! We conservatives/libertarians won’t vote for those higher taxes; but we are a minority among our age demographic. You are screwed and you may as well get use to it. You will be the first generations of American who will not have a better standard of living than your parents. And, by the way, you are not without part of the blame. Since you became of age to vote, most of you have voted for progressives, haven’t you? So, don’t fret. Higher taxes and a lower standard of living is a fundamental part of the “progressive” plan. Agenda 21, sustainable living, and global warming/climate change policies are all about higher taxes and lower standards of living.

Our Founders gave the American people a constitutional republic. Unfortunately the people elected to support and defend that constitution have decided that the constitution is longer meaningful and is actually an impediment to progressive policies. So, welcome to democracy, Americans. You do understand what democracy is, right? Democracy is the system of government where 50%+1 part of the population can put the screws to the 50%-1 part of the population. I’m sorry about that. I really am.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post: Asylum Watch

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

Americans Under Sixty; You Have My Condolences

Share

Yes, you have my condolences and my apologies. You see, the youngest of my generation (pre-boomer) and the eldest baby boomers … well, we lived the American dream and while we were doing that, we unintentionally put the screws to you. We did this by buying into the meme that bigger is better: bigger city governments, bigger state governments, bigger federal government, bigger government programs, bigger pension plans for government works, banks so big we can’t allow them to fail, and worst of all we bought into using bigger and bigger debt to pay for all the goodies we wanted our bigger governments to provide for us. We allowed ourselves to be conned by our politicians  into believing it was okay because you younger Americans wouldn’t mind paying off the debts we ran up. Now it’s clear that you won’t be able to pay our debts. We have left you an economy where you have little chance to get ahead. In fact many of you are losing ground. I feel particularly bad for those of you have reached the age where you are beginning to think about retirement. I sorry that most of you will have to forget about that. You can afford to retire. If there is any Social Security left for you, it won’t be enough by a long shot. Most of you have no savings and you’re in debt up to your eyeballs. For those who are fortunate enough to have put away a small nest egg, your money is earning no interest and inflation, which is much worse than what the government wants you to believe, is eating away at that nest egg. I’m sorry to be the one to tell you; but your days of “shop til you drop” are long gone. No, your new meme must be : Work Til I Drop. Those younger than you who are hoping you will soon retire so they can have a shot at your better paying job will just have to suck it up until you croak ( another 20 to 30 years).

Monty Pelerin has an excellent article up titled, Retirement Impossible for Many. It’s a good read. Pelerin is not as magnanimous I. In fact he had some harsh words for the “Me” and the “Now” generations and he puts much of the blame on government, which I’ll let you read for yourselves. This quote from his article sums up fairly well his views:

This is the environment that government has created for the country. The young don’t understand the implications. The government is no better than the pimp used by a loan shark. Get em’ hooked while they are young and you will have them for life.

We are at least a generation into this foolishness. There are consequences beyond the occasional defaults and bankruptcies declared along the way. Much of society has been corrupted by the belief that debt is normal and necessary to live the good life. Few understand that a good life cannot be borrowed; it must be earned.

Now the consequences for those who followed the siren’s song are becoming evident. As these people approach retirement, they have wasted the most productive years for saving. They have put themselves into a box from which there is no escape. Many are oblivious to the mathematics and to the retirement poverty they have consigned themselves. Many are unaware that Social Security, as presently constituted, will be broke when they count on it.

Pelerin also provides this table of retirement account balances for people ages 50 to 64 sent to him by one of his readers:

average retirement account americans

If you are under sixty, try to look on the bright side. It is said that people who stay active live longer.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post: Asylum Watch

Share

Baby Boomers: The Selfish Generation

Share

Let me preface this piece with a few necessities.  First, I grew up being told that my generation (X) was the worst.  We were lazy, the television generation who expected everything to be given to us.  No doubt every generation before mine had to deal with the same “when I was your age”, self-absorbed and forward blaming rhetoric.  Never mind that we are the product of our parents (how did we become the television generation?).

Second, this isn’t an unthoughtful whining or a blind pointing at my parents for all of the world’s woes.  I always found it somewhat sickening that my parent’s generation (not necessarily my parents) were willing to place their life struggles on the “greatest generation” that preceded them.  It took a lot of reflection to make sure I wasn’t simply following suit.

Lastly, obviously not all baby boomers fall into the stereotypes below, but those who shaped their generation tend to and those who dominate their politics have few exceptions.  Being a baby boomer doesn’t make you wicked.

That said…

“The Baby Boomers are the most self-centered, self-seeking, self-interested, self-absorbed, self-indulgent, self-aggrandizing generation in American history,” Paul Begala

There’s a strange dichotomy when it comes to the “Worst Generation” (the Baby Boomers); they stressed individual freedom from the social cohorts (“If it feels good do it”) but couldn’t stretch that ideal to fit into their economic philosophies.  Champions for drug use, sexual liberation, and a no-consequence society understood on some level that their imprudent practices didn’t bode well for economic stability.  No need for responsibility – the commune would supply.

The problem is that nobody in the commune had anything to supply and, eventually, those who became successful became miniature Ayn Rands.  Greed for this generation was either evil or righteous and no equilibrium was found.  Selfishness flourished on both sides.  Baby boomers are the generation with the most tied up money in our nation’s history and also the generation who demands the most in entitlement.  No wonder we constantly hear clamoring about the income gap.  The gap isn’t so much the problem, it’s the mentality of this generation and their refusal to accept arithmetic’s conclusions.   

For instance, Third Way, a Democratic think tank found that in 1962 about 32 cents per dollar was invested and only 14% on entitlements but by 2030 we are projected to have less in investments and entitlement spending above 60%.  Such math should move the populous to implement major reform so that generations after aren’t bankrupted at the expense the previous generation’s entitlements, but that’s not the case.

Baby boomers not only overwhelmingly vote to protect their sacred cows (Social Security and Medicare) they have a history of voting for expansions.  Every baby boomer president we’ve had has expanded entitlements; most recently Bush’s prescription drug plan, and of course, Obamacare.  Every reform attempt made has been completely destroyed by the largest voting bloc in the nation – the baby boomers.

Another baby boomer dichotomy exists that takes selfishness to a completely different level with illogical conclusions pulled from every philosophy to support their venal greed.  While hippies and bohemians criticized corporate or individual greed, they fancied their drug-induced sexual orgies.  Responsibility be damned; they aren’t hurting anyone – they’re all about peace and love.  Meanwhile 30 million voices were never heard or asked of their opinion.

The actions that lead to the decision of Roe v Wade may be the most selfish taken by that generation.  While they sneered at corporatists for hoarding “unneeded” money, they were willing to deny life to a person for the benefit of sidestepping responsibility and at times worse, in order to cut ties with a financial burden.  They made a barbaric evil a mainstream badge of courage.

Today abortion is less popular in America than it has been since the absurd ruling of Roe v Wade.  Polls over the last 20 years have shown a steady decline in support among the younger age groups; the baby boomers have remained steady in their creed.  In fact, the baby boomers are the only group that support it – those 70 years old and older don’t, nor do the 30 and younger.  These generations X and Y are even being called the “pro-life generation” in some circles; something that would have undoubtedly been more prevalent had 30 million been allowed an opinion.

Hopefully the next generation can move beyond their partial extermination and correct the folly of their parents.  That folly has created the greatest debt in our nation’s history by astronomical and incomprehensible measure, destroyed an infrastructure given to them, shipped a large portion of our best jobs overseas, wrecked manufacturing, ruined our good name internationally, and currently fills the chambers of the most pathetic congressional body this nation has experienced, ignores Constitutional law and the list goes on.

So…we have a lot to do.  Let’s start by removing this generation from all political offices.  What say you?

Original Post:  The Sentry Journal

Share

Serf City

Share

Serf City

“As a Congress we need to step up and point out and take charge and point out when the President is going beyond his constitutional powers, which is frequent, and we have got to do something about it …” – Rep. Justin Amash

While the legislature dithers, the hematophagic minions of the Left are swooping down upon our defenseless hatchlings.  Get ‘em while they’re young; there’s no such beast as a natural-born socialist:

First Obamacare, Now Obamacore – Part 1: Common Core Sows Seeds of Socialism in Young (Somewhat Reasonable)

[…] the very roots of Common Core are in the early ideas generated by Obama and his fellow radical community organizer, Bill Ayers. It was Obama who headed the Chicago Annenberg Challenge from 1995 to 1999, a school “reform” organization founded by Bill Ayers, which funneled more than $100 million into community organizations and radical education activists.

Indoctrinations Lessons such as these should chill the blood of any progenitor not named “Obama”:

Teaching materials aligned with the controversial national educational standards ask fifth-graders to edit such sentences as “(The president) makes sure the laws of the country are fair,” “The wants of an individual are less important than the well-being of the nation” and “the commands of government officials must be obeyed by all.” The sentences, which appear in worksheets published by New Jersey-based Pearson Education, are presented not only for their substance, but also to teach children how to streamline bulky writing.

Public education was boring enough in the good old days when it taught mostly readin’ and ‘ritin’ and ‘rithmetic; forcible instruction by teacher’s union members in the tedious precepts of progressivism should have kids dropping out of schools by the busload as soon as they’re old enough to drive.

PTG

Original Post:  Be Sure You’re Right, Then Go Ahead!

Share

Leftwaaard..Maaaarch! Left….Left…Left…

Share

While we on the Right have been enjoying some well deserved Schadenfreude at the expense of President Obama and the Democrats over the diasterous rollout of Obamacare, with some of our pundits going so far as to claim that the public’s awakening due to Obamacare will be the end of liberalism in America, the Left has been planning their counter attack. Rather than concede that Obama’s program to provide health insurance to everyone, including those with preexisting conditions, was too big of a move to the Left, the left Left-wing of the Democratic Party is looking at Barack Obama and his potential replacement, Hilary Clinton, and finding them wanting. The left Left-wing is thinking that Barry and Hilary are not far enough to the Left. They are not planning on conceding anything to the Right. To the contrary, they are planning a big push further to the Left.

“More liberal, populist movement emerging in Democratic Party ahead 0f 2016 elections” is the title of this Washington Post article. The author points out that left Left-wing rising stars, like Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, are not happy the Mr. Obama has indicated a willingness to consider some reforms to the rapidly failing Social Security system in exchange for more taxes and more spending. Sen. Warren is instead supporting a bill to expand Social Security benefits.

And, you may want to read this article about the movement to raise the minimum  wage to 15 per hour.

From my years living in South America, I can tell you that populism is an easy sell. Blame everything on the rich and promise the poor everything under the sun. I use to think that Americans were different; in that they would never fall for that populist garbage. I’m not so sure that’s true anymore.

Think about the 2016 presidential election. It’s not that far away. For whom are the retired and about to retire Baby Boomers going to vote? The Republican that is promising to fix (reform) Social Security or the Democrat who is promising to expand Social Security benefits? Who are the growing numbers of minimum wage workers going to vote for? The Republican that says increasing minimum wage results in higher unemployment or the Democrat who is promising to double the minimum wage? And, what about the college students and recent graduates? Are they going to vote for the Republican who promises them nothing or the Democrat that promises to forgive part of their student loans?

Populism really is an easy sell. And, please don’t worry about how they could possibly pay for all of their largess. Remember that we have a very accommodating Federal Reserve that can and does create money out of thin air. It’s called Quantitative Easing or what I like to call QEasy, where the “Q” stands for quantity of money. Every time the Treasury runs low, the Fed makes an accounting entry and all is well again. (Think Japan)

In 2016, we will learn what America is made of once and for all.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post:   Asylum Watch

Share

Things that You Need an ID to do, But Voter ID is Racist!

Share

It seems that people get through life just fine with needing an ID to access products of government services.  However, to vote?  Why sir, that’s racist!

The Washington Examiner compiles 24 things that you must have an ID to purchase, I don’t hear much from liberals about how any of these things are racist. When it comes to protecting the integrity of what keeps America from turning into a dictatorship, showing an ID is definitely racist.

Mind Boggling.

Below are just some of the examples of things you need to prove your identity for:

1. Alcohol

 

2. Cigarettes

 

3. Opening a bank account

 

4. Apply for food stamps

 

5. Apply for welfare

 

6. Apply for Medicaid/Social Security

 

7. Apply for unemployment or a job

 

8. Rent/buy a house, apply for a mortgage

 

9. Drive/buy/rent a car

 

10. Get on an airplane

 

11. Get married

 

12. Purchase a gun

 

13. Adopt a pet

 There are a lot more over at The Young Conservatives, so get on over there!

Share

Taking America Back One Bit At A Time – Part 4: The Taking of America Continued

Share

Parts 1, 2, and 3 of this series Taking America Back One Bit  At A Time can be found herehere, andhere.

The Taking of America continued

In Part 3, The Taking of America, we talked about how from day one there were those who wanted to manipulate our new government in wats that would benefit them financially; the practice of  cronyism began in earnest and powerful bankers also took advantage of the potential of America through their investments and very importantly they applied their influence to get our government to establish a national bank that they could control. We talked about how it took the bankers many years to finally get America to establish a central bank in 1913; the Federal Reserve. While these banking interest were reaping the rewards of their investments in America, they became very interested in what was going on in Russia with the Bolsheviks. They thought they saw a similar potential in this communist experiment in Russia as they did in the American experiment. They would help finance the Bolshevik revolution and they would invest in the new Russia.

To this humble observer, it appears that although the powerful banking interests made a lot of money from their investments in communist Russia, it did not turn out like they had hoped. They would not see the same benefits from state ownerdhip of the means of production that they did from America’s free market approach. However, they did see Marxism or, at least, socialism as a very useful tool for advancing their lust for wealth and power.

By coincidence or not, in the early 1900?s groups of true believers in the Marxist worker’s paradise looked upon the United States of America, the bastion of free market capitalism, and came to what would be very important conclusions that would be very important in the eventual demise of America. Groups like the Fabian Society and later the Frankfurt Schoolers and others would conclude two things. One, they would not defeat capitalism in America by force and two, they would not convince the American working class that they were being exploited by rich capitalists. The reason for the latter was that in spite of sweat shops, child labor, and women and blacks being treated like second and third class citizens the working class in American was seeing their standard of living improve rapidly due to the economic miracle that free market capitalism was enjoying in America. Therefore, they concluded that they would have to take the long view and take gown America bit by bit from within. To achieve their goals, they knew they would have to change the way Americans think and that meant they would have to dismantle the American culture. They set four principal goals for changing America’s culture: they would need to control the education of Americans, they would need to control the information that Americans received via media, they would need to control the culture through the entertainment industry, and they would need to break the influence of Christianity on America’s culture.  Parallel to all of this, they would need influence in the political arena. The message of compassion for the working class and the poor that they were selling would find eager buyers among America’s elite political class. They would have some very successes on the political front. Woodrow Wilson would be our first left leaning elitist president. Under the Wilson administration, the founding principles of America would be dramatically altered. Not only did the banking interest get their central bank, but the principle of state’s right took a nearly fatal blow when enough states ratify the 17th Amendment to electect Senators by popular vote instead of the states having the right to appoint their Senators. Also, under Wilson the federal government got the right to tax our income. The stage was set for our central government to grow in size and power. Our second left leaning elitest president was Franklin Delano Roosevelt who was the first to adopt the principle of never letting a crisis go to waste; Social Security was born out of the Great Depression. Eventually the socialist ideologues would take control of the Democratic Party. It may have been when Jimmy Carter was elected; a very ineffective president or certainly by the time Bill Clinton was elected who was very effective for them. Now we have the very left leaning Barack Obama who was just elected to a second term and we can’t deny how effective he has been to advancing the socialist agenda.

So, the question that is begging to be asked is how did some small groups of academic socialist thinkers have so much success? Was it because they were so dedicated to their near religious belief in their mission? Or, did they have a lot of financial help along the way? I certainly think they did. Have you ever asked yourself why huge foundations created from wealth amassed from the free market capitalist system; like the Rockerfeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Tides Foundation, and others support policies that are contrary to the way their founders amassed their fortunes? Why do  mega-rich people like David Rockerfeller, Maurice Strong, Warren Buffet, George Soros, and Bill Gates promote policies that would seem to be against everything their lives have been about? I think the answer is simple. These mega-rich and powerful people believe they became super rich and powerful because they are smarter and wiser than the rest of us lesser souls who inhabit this planet. And, because they believe they are smarter and wiser than everyone else, it is they who should decide how the world should work and what our minimal roles will be. This is where talk about one world order, one world government, and one world currency comes from.

So, here we are in December 2012. Barack Obama has just won a second term. We conservatives look forward with dread about what is to become of this country we love in the next few years and beyond. We believe that this last election was a fundamental game changer. We believe America has passed a tipping point and no matter what happens in the next few election cycles, America will continue to decline both economically and in its influence in the world (militarily) until the monetary house of cards that supports it collapses and leave us and most of the world in chaos. So, I regret to inform you, dear readers, that before we can get to the point of this frustrating;ly long around about way of the title of this seris of posts, we need to do one more thing. In Part 5, we will need to speculate about what we think is going to happen in the next four or five years and what we think mught happen in the next ten, fifteen, or twenty years. Then I promise you we will get into what we can be doing to help pave the way for an American Renaissance two or more generations down the road.

Well, now you know what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post:  Conservatives on Fire

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

Economics 101: The Effects of Dependency

Share

We’ve often pointed out that it seems that the left wants people dependent on Government for their daily needs.  After all, if you get everything you have from the government, you’ll probably vote for the politicians that will keep it coming.  The following video from The Center for Freedom and Prosperity explains the personal dangers of government dependency…

Depend on yourself?  How novel!

H/T:  I’m 41

Share

Should President Obama be Blamed for Current Mess?

Share

Although it is tempting at times to be sucked into the ‘everything is Obama’s fault’ vortex, that really is illogical, and so I try to base my opposition to him on the logical grounds that the policies which he supports leads to a society that is less happy, less loving, less free, less prosperous, less secure, less responsible, less wealthy, less efficient, and less productive. It is President Obama’s policies that I object to and try to oppose.

The policies pushed by the radical progressive Obama are supported by the Democratic Party through their votes in Congress (my own Senator Debbie Stabenow votes lock-step with the most radical of progressive issues that are pushed by Obama) and by their re-nomination of him, and these policies are destroying the foundations of our nation. Some of the evidence of this is obvious- $5 trillion in debt, crumbling roads and schools, rise in drug use and broken marriages, falling test scores vs the world, etc- and some of this is more hidden- lost time to fix the looming collapse of Social Security and Medicare, the aging of infrastructure, decreases in investment, lack of experience being gained by young workers who are severely underemployed, etc- but the foundations of our nation are indeed crumbling.

President Obama and the Democrats would like to blame this on George W Bush and the Republicans, and in some respects they should be blamed- for going along with the desires of the Democrats and liberals on issues. But they have also suffered from their wrongs, being voted out of office in 2006 and 2008.

But in many ways President Obama and the Democrats should be blamed as well for the falling fortunes of our nation, and should suffer from their wrongs in this election.

Paul Mirengoff over at Powerlineblog has a good and measured argument of why President Obama should be blamed for our situation and should be held electorally responsible. From his post FOR OBAMA, WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND:

Today’s poor jobs report, and President Obama’s ungracious reference yesterday to the parlous state of the economy at the end of the Bush administration, will renew the debate about how much responsibility Obama bears for the current weak economy and how much of it is Bush’s fault. Personally, I’ve never believed that a president’s policies have much impact on the economy, in the short term. And I doubt that the presidency of either Bush or Obama provides a good explanation for our sorry jobs picture.

Let’s start with Obama. I have no trouble accepting the conservative argument that his regulatory policies, coupled with Obamacare and a general hostility towards business, have hurt the economy. And I doubt that the stimulus was money well spent, even for the narrow purpose of short-term job growth.

But I’ve seen no good projection of, say, what the employment numbers would look like in the absence of the stimulus and in a different regulatory environment, and I question whether such a study could reliably be performed. Republicans like to rely on old Obama administration estimate of what unemployment would be with and without the stimulus program. It’s fair to do so from a political standpoint. But these estimates, and the arguments based on them, should not be confused with serious economic analysis.

In the absence of a reliable analysis, I revert to my view that a president’s policies have little impact on short-term economic health. To me, then, the main cause of our current weak economic climate is to be found in deeper trends, including those underway when Bush left office.

But this doesn’t mean that Bush bears much responsibility for our economic woes. The 2008 recession was closely related to the collapse of the housing market. The best analyses I’ve seen of the recession, and of the housing market collapse, come from Stanford economist John Taylor. He has cited two main culprits: excessively low interest rates and the provision by banks, under political pressure, of home loans to people who couldn’t afford to pay them back.

Bush did not set interest rates; that was Fed’s work. And Bush bears little responsibility for the crusade, carried out for years, to make sure low income folks could buy homes. That crusade was led by liberal Democrats, as one would expect given that low income folks are a core part of the liberal base.

The Bush administration, in fact, warned about the mischief that was emanating from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. To be sure, Bush and congressional Republicans should have done more. But the Republicans never had the votes to roll back the liberal Democrats’ affordable housing agenda. Attempting to do so would have led to charges of racial insensitivity, and worse, with no policy payoff at the end of the day.

And foremost among those hurling this charge surely would have been Sen. Barack Obama.

In fact, Obama’s commitment to coercing banks into making loans to poor credit risk individuals goes way back. This was a core element of the community organizing movement in the early 1990s. ACORN used to stage sit-ins and other coercive action directed at Chicago banks that had the audacity to confine their loans to those who were very likely to repay them. As Stanley Kurtz has noted, Obama was recruited by Chicago’s ACORN to run training sessions in “direct action.”

So I have little sympathy for Obama when he frets that he’s being blamed for a mess that Republicans left him. The president did inherit a mess. But he was also present at its creation, and his Party brought it to fruition. Let’s call this poetic justice. Or the chickens coming home to roost.

Powerlineblog can always be counted on to provide good and measured reporting on the issues of the day, and if you haven’t bookmarked it yet then please do so and read it daily.

Original Post: A Conservative Teacher

Share