Category Archives: Political philosophy

MADOFF WITH SOCIAL SECURITY

This is not original work and I do not know the author to whom to give credit. Whoever it was, they did a good job comparing how Madoff made off with investors money and how the government has made off with our contributions for Social Security.

***************

Why did Bernie Madoff go to prison? To make it simple, he talked people into investing with him. Then he didn’t invest their money. He simply took the money from the new investors to pay off the old investors. Finally there were not enough new investors coming in to keep the payments going. Now Madoff is one of the most hated men in America.

Madoff did to his investors what the government has been doing to us with Social Security. There is no meaningful difference between the two schemes except that one was operated by a private individual who is now in jail, and the other is operated by politicians.

Here is a side-by-side comparison.

BERNIE MADOFF SOCIAL SECURITY
Takes money from investors with the promise that the money will be invested and made available to them later Takes money from wage earners with the promise that the money will be invested in a “Trust Fund” and made available later.
Instead of investing the money Madoff spends it on nice homes in the Hamptons and yachts. Instead of depositing money in a Trust Fund the politicians use it for general spending and vote buying.
When the time comes to pay the investors back Madoff simply uses some of the new funds from newer investors to pay back the older investors. When benefits for older investors become due the politicians pay them with money taken from younger and newer wage earners to pay the geezers.
When Madoff’s scheme is discovered all hell breaks loose. New investors won’t give him any more cash. When Social Security runs out of money they simply force the taxpayers to send them some more.
Bernie Madoff is in jail. Politicians remain in Washington.

******************

In a corporate pension plan the corporation makes a pension promise to employees then backs it up with annual cash contributions into a trust fund. The fund then invests in a broad spectrum of securities. If the trust fund managers were to give the money back to the corporation and call it a loan it would be an abuse. The trust would be a sham. But that is exactly how Social Security works.

Funds are withheld from our wages. Our employer matches the amount taken from us and sends the total to the Social Security division. The Social Security  division sends it to a trust fund. The trust fund uses it first to pay current retirees then gives the balance to the federal government to do with as it pleases. The federal government thanks the Social Security division and gives them an IOU called a bond. No investments are made. There is no money in the trust fund, only IOU’s.

Our Social Security scheme is indeed a Ponzi scheme.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

DID GOLDMAN DO IT?

It doesn’t matter.

Of course it matters civilly; if wrongs were committed the consequences should be applied. But guilt or innocence doesn’t matter politically because the allegation alone serves the purpose.

In Rules for Radicals Alinsky’s 13th Tactical Rule is “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Goldman has been picked. (If they are guilty, a cynic might say they volunteered.) “Freeze it” means stay on it. Obama is coming to New York Thursday to stay on it. To “personalize it” means getting the community to feel personally harmed by it. You lost your job because of a recession by which Goldman profited. To “polarize it” is to use the target to fan the flames, to agitate. Get the people angry. Get them behind legislation to reform the financial markets. The government needs more power over the financial industry, to keep the cats from getting fat while you are looking for work.

Mayor Bloomberg learned of the intended visit only upon seeing it in the news. He was not amused. But the goals of polarization and agitation were advanced in the process. A good community organizer makes it plain that he is not subservient to the man, not part of the establishment. There is no need to coordinate with the mayor.

Random Thots hopes to publish an analysis of Goldman’s guilt or innocence when more details become available. In the meantime we recommend today’s article in the New York Times. It appears to be a fair and well written analysis.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

THE NEED FOR PROBLEMS

Politics 101. Politicians justify their existence and gain voter support by solving problems, the bigger the problem the better. Having a problem to be solved is an imperative. It establishes the need for government involvement and enables a political party to proclaim they are the one best suited to solve it. Problems must be carefully chosen, skillfully enlarged and loudly proclaimed. In extreme cases it may even be necessary to create the problem. Once identified, a problem must not be wasted.

There must always be a current problem. When one problem has outrun its usefulness another must be started. In choosing a problem for government to solve do not be deterred if it happens to be a problem that government created. Blame is easily transferred to the private sector with a little populist rhetoric. And of course, one should make maximum use of the word “crisis”. If an actual crisis is not available, the specter of one may be used.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

KRAUTHAMMER NAILED IT

Charles Krauthammer once said something to the effect that to understand American politics you must realize that Democrats think Republicans are evil and Republicans think Democrats are stupid. A profound observation to be sure.

Conservatives complain that Liberals are less tolerant. Why wouldn’t they be if they are combating evil while Republicans are only confronted with stupidity? The relative intolerance by liberals is less a matter of hypocrisy than simply the natural result of their core belief. Liberals are true to their label in matters of crime, sex and indolence. These are forgivable human weaknesses. However, the conservative ideology is destructive to society as a whole.

Evil is something that must be set right. Stupidity can be ignored. Hence liberals have always been active demonstrators against the evil they perceive, whereas conservatives were ill motivated to disrupt their lives in order to demonstrate against ignorance. It is a change of perceptions that has brought about the Tea Party. Conservatives envision evil in the direction in which the country is currently being led, and evil must be set right.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

OUR AAA FOREIGN POLICY

A for Apologize
In his early travels from Berlin to Egypt and beyond, Obama never missed an opportunity to apologize for America. It became predictable. When repetition rises to predictability it qualifies as policy. It has been the policy of our current President to apologize around the world for America.

A for Appease
It started with a pledge to take part unconditionally in dialog with our enemies. It continued with the abandonment of missile defense installations in Eastern Europe, a pure gift to Russia with nothing asked in return. Overtures were made to Ahmadinejad but not accepted. Nonetheless, Obama gave tacit support to Ahmadinejad in their elections by stressing the sovereignty of the Islamic Nation of Iran under its current leadership and expressing no indication of support for the more moderate and relatively Pro-Western opposition party.

When the good people of Honduras, through their legal process, deposed a Marxist president and Chavez acolyte, Obama curried favor with Chavez by siding with the Marxist. The list would not be complete without mentioning the move toward recognizing the terrorist organization Hamas as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.

The diverse reactions from abroad make for political theatre. Putin smiles in appreciation, Ahmadinejad says go [expletive deleted], Chavez respects Obama as a hero.

A for Alienate
England and Israel are the most obvious and most important instances of alienating our closest friends. A consortium of British MP’s (Ministers of Parliament) has called for an official declaration to “end the special relationship between Britain and the U.S.” If that is not serious alienation nothing qualifies, nothing. Obama offered to meet with Ahmadinejad unconditionally but refused to dine with the Prime Minister of Israel on a recent visit or appear in a customary “handshake” photo.

When campaigning, Obama promised to break a trade agreement with Canada and to make Mexico shape up so Mexicans would no longer want to cross the border. These were taken as false campaign promises from the get-go so all we lost here was a little respect.

Common thread
There is a common thread woven into these policies. It is the view that America is not, and never has been a noble nation. Originating with British settlements on Indian land, a period of slavery, dominance over Hawaiian natives, territorial war with Mexico and culminating with an economic system that fails to result in equal financial status for all; the United States is viewed more as an oppressor than a force for good in the world. But there is hope, hope we can change, change America from what it has been to what it should be.

I would love to have been a fly on the wall in the Obama bedroom on the night our First Lady told the world she had never in her life been proud of America, (until her husband won the nomination). We can only speculate, but by his actions it would appear Barrack is of like mind.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES

Benefits and even jobs will be lost in the wake of ObamaCare. Yahoo business page reports:

Remember the part in the ObamaCare pitch when they said if you like your current health care, it won’t change? Turns out it might.

Companies are already announcing that their health care premium costs are going through the roof. Some are responding by firing people. Some are cutting benefits. And some are presumably eating it.

One thing Washington never gets is the economic rule of rational expectations. That rule says people will react to changes in the law.  The reaction of employers may not be intended but it is predictable.

It is not correct that “some are eating it”. It is the consumer that will pay it because all expenses are eventually reflected in the price. The alternative ends in bankruptcy.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

RULES FOR RADICALS

Rules for Radicals is the book written by Saul Alinsky, the man who Chris Matthews referred to as “one of our heroes”. Random Thots has just published a review of Rules for Radicals which you can access at the Book Reviews sidebar on our Homepage. What follows here is commentary on factors surrounding the book. Go to the review if you wish to read about the book itself.

Alinsky has been called the founder of modern community organizing. He set up activist organizations and trained their members to follow his methods. The man and his work are pertinent today because Alinsky played a significant part in the early lives of our current President and our current Secretary of State.

No one, including Saul Alinsky himself, would dispute that he was a radical. He reveled in it. His teachings were aimed at how best to bring down a government, in this case the United States government,  to pave the way for a Marxist replacement. We have good reason to explore the fascination Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had with Saul Alinsky

In some circles much is made of the fact the three were Chicago centric. So was Milton Friedman, it’s irrelevant. Hillary Clinton chose Saul Alinsky as the subject of her thesis at Wellesley College. That could be interesting. When the Clinton clan aspired to move from the Ozarks to DC, Hillary Clinton asked Wellesley to secure her thesis from public access. Wellesley complied, though no such request had ever been honored before.

But you can read the actual thesis here, courtesy of Random Thots. Read through it if you wish. There is nothing in it that merits condemnation. Miss Rodham’s interest in Alinsky’s work was academic, a fascination with a significant figure within the sphere of what she foresaw as her future. Alinsky was aware of her study and offered her a job. Hillary turned him down.

By the time young Obama was recognized as worthy of a leadership role Saul had died. But those carrying on his work invited Barack to join them, and he accepted. It was before his time at Harvard. Obama underwent training with the Industrial Areas Foundation, an organization Alinsky founded in 1940, and which carries on his legacy today. Thus began the community organizing that Obama so often quoted as a qualifying factor in his quest for the Presidency.

ACORN has been referred to as a spawn of Alinsky. I have found no direct connection between ACORN and Alinsky, however as Charlotte Allen reported in The Weekly Standard “ACORN’s founders certainly had Alinsky’s principles in mind when they founded the organization in 1970”.

When you put all we know about Obama together, his embracing of Marxist Liberation Theology, launching his political career from the home of William Ayers, siding with the Socialists in matters involving Argentina and Honduras, quasi nationalization of members of the automotive and financial industries, and a hell-bent-for-leather drive to expand government, one could reasonably assume Obama is a true believer.

That also seems to be the conclusion of T David Alinsky, son of Saul. In September of 2008 The Canada Free Press reported:

In Artful Dodger style, Barack Obama, plays down his mentorship with Communist author Saul Alinsky. But Alinsky’s son, L. David Alinsky, credits Obama for “learning his lesson well” from the Communist guru.

Indeed, Alinsky Jr. who credits his late father for the success of last week’s Democratic National Convention may have done something that Obama’s detractors couldn’t: blown the cover on the presidential hopeful’s communist leanings.

Says Alinsky’s son L. David Alinsky of his father’s influence at the Dem Convention: “ALL the elements were present: the individual stories told by real people of their situation and hardships, the packed-to-the rafters crowd, the crowd’s chanting of key phrases and names, the action on the spot of texting and phoning to show instant support and commitment to jump into the political battle, the rallying selections of music, the setting of the agenda by the power people.”

“The Democratic National Convention had all the elements of the perfectly organized event, Saul Alinsky style, the Communist guru’s son wrote in a letter published yesterday in the Boston Globe.

Reading Rules for Radicals will provide the reader with greater understanding of Obama’s methods and insight into what his goals may or may not be, essential knowledge every voter should have.

PAY TO PLAY IN ALBANY

Is Pay-to-Play coming to a state near you?

Albany Democrats want to charge $50,000 for access to State Representatives. If I lived in New York and wanted to see my representative my question would be: Will I need to pay $50,000 one time or every year?

I wondered why the Republicans don’t charge. Then I realized they have no power in New York. Perhaps that is why there are fewer Republicans in New York. There is no money in it.

This is not a joke, Here is the link to the story. It was not very many years ago the MSM claimed neutrality. No more. It was not many years ago, perhaps 1 1/2 that politicians claimed to be corruption free. No more. From Louisiana to Albany it is now an open practice.

The Real Grass Roots
What could be more – of the people, by the people, from the people and to the people – than the blogosphere?

Truth has always been elusive and so it remains, but less so. In the blogosphere many tales are told from all sides of every story. There is Google, Snopes and more to verify or discredit the tales. It was access to verifiable truth than brought down Dan Rather.

Brazen Pay-to-play in Albany should be national news. Now it is.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

How to earn over $50,000 and pay no income tax

Get married and have two kids. Just one more thing, be typical. That is all you have to do.

More than one third of all income tax filers paid no federal income tax for the year 2008. When the returns for 2009 come in, the number will surely be higher. We are not talking about no additional tax with the return, we are talking about no tax, period. That means if tax was withheld from your pay check, either you got it all back in a refund or you did not make the list.

A typical family of four making less than $51,000 paid no tax at all for 2009 according to a report by The Tax Foundation. Furthermore, some of those non-payers got a “rebate” ( see my post on propagandic). In other words, some of your money, if you pay taxes, was given directly to someone who paid no taxes. This kind of rebate occurs only in the government sector. You cannot get a rebate on an automobile purchase unless you purchase an automobile.

It has been said that Democracy will continue to exist only until the majority of voters realize they can vote largesse for themselves from the government. Aristotle warned “If the majority distributes among itself the things of a minority, it is evident that it will destroy the city.” We are witnessing Democracy at the crossroads.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

DISCOVERY – CAPITALISM CAUSES INSANITY

The New York Times Online has a regular feature called “The Idea of the Day”. The idea for Feb 17th was that capitalism causes neuroticism. The idea was centered on a study printed in a publication by the name of “Eurozine”, based in Germany. Here are some excerpts.

“There is good reason to assert the existence, […] of a new type of capitalism, neuro-capitalism”

“…what links capitalism with neuroscience is not so much strict regulation as a complex system of systemic flaws. Repressive late nineteenth-century capitalism, with its exploitive moral dictates, proscriptions and social injustices, was a breeding ground for the neurosis diagnosed by scientists in the early twentieth century as a spiritual epidemic.

The article is long and your time is valuable, so I will spare you from the rest of it, except the conclusion. It is too entertaining to miss.

“The psychologically relevant question of how the self will relate to a mood-enhanced, more capable version of itself is rendered irrelevant by the fact that the requirements of the new capitalist reality make an individual improvement of this kind appear a highly desirable option. Indeed, as a consumer and commodity value appropriate to capitalism, it has already been in currency for some time. Alongside globalisation – the capitalist rationalisation of space and time – we are witnessing the epistemic and technical rationalisation of the neural foundations of the self, or what Walker Percy called the abstraction of the self from itself”

Now, dear reader, if you consider yourself a capitalist, and if you understand what the authors have just said in this their summary and conclusion, then I must consider their premise may be valid after all.

Or perhaps you think our nations leading newspaper is just putting us on. It’s true, the item is ridiculous to the point of being funny, but I am afraid they are serious. Lest you doubt me I offer this, another sample from the “Idea of the Day” feature. It was submitted by a reader and published immediately following Obama’s election.

The free market did I embrace,
Derivations and hedges took place,
Now I’m short on my cash
I’m feeling the crash,
The redness, it shows on my face.

— Thank God America is now Socialist.

We have a tough row to hoe to reclaim America. I am writing a blog. It is not much, but it is my best. What are you doing?

Bob B

Bookmark and Share