Not that there's anything wrong with that...

Barack Obama is not a Muslim, he is a practicing Christian. Romney is a Mormon, Huckabee is a Baptist, Giuliani is a Catholic, and Hillary is Satanic. Just kidding ;-)

Frankly, if a candidate's religion matters to you then you have failed to understand a fundamental American value, namely, that the President elect is to represent all Americans equally without respect to their faith and is not to govern as though we live in a theocracy. This standard applies equally to each of the candidates, not just to the ones we disagree with.

Although Obama (my personal favorite) is not a Muslim, if he were, he would be just as outstanding and would remain heads above all the others.

Radio, Republicans, and Recession

Glenn Beck has been promoting doom and gloom on the economy for, oh let's see... at least a year now. Today was no different. Today he had a guest on named Steve Cordasco who is a money expert. They talked about our economic woes and how a key indicator to watch is 30yr T-bills. For all of you financially non-literate types ;-) that's a 30 year Treasury bill, a very safe investment with low interest rates. The rates on bonds go down as the demand for them gets higher. The rates on 30yr T-bills are lower than they've ever been before. This, Beck's guest Cordasco claims is a sign of things to come. People are moving their money into very safe investments for the long haul.

Now, it must be remembered that it's an election year and with that will be all that typically goes along with an election year. Glenn Beck's first choice for President is Mitt Romney, a man with whom Beck shares religious faith. Beck has repeatedly touted Romney as someone with a strong business sense who can save our country's financial crisis. What better way to move Beck's political agenda along than with a little financial mess that must be cleaned up by... oh, I don't know... Romney!

I have no doubt that there is a recession on the way, but let's think about how we got to this point. Two leading factors come to mind 1) debt 2) economic anarchism. Both of these were taken on at the behest of Conservatives.

1) Our national debt climbs to pay for our 3.5 billion per day war budget and the corporate bail-outs that Bush has arranged for such paupers as Citibank (since they shouldn't have to be held responsible for their bad loans) is strapping us as a nation. On top of this, we as individuals have responsibility for taking their crappy loans and getting caught up in the borrow-and-spend mentality our President advised following 9-11.

2) Free-market capitalism, or more appropriately "economic anarchism" does not work. Well, it works in a feudal sense, but not in a democratic one. Ironically, the all-wise consumers in whom economic anarchists place all trust to guide the market are fools the moment they step into a voting booth. Furthermore, the "free-market" is actually not free. The people who own it are increasingly the Citibank's and Wal-Marts of the world. This phenomenon will continue as the "free-market" works it's magic.

It just seemed a little too much today to be coincidence with the first two hours of the program being about economic crisis and the third hour being about Romney for President. It turns out Steve Cordasco is a conservative talk show host on 1210am in Philadelphia aka "The Big Talker." This is the same station from which Beck's career took off. They offered no other explanation for the take off in T-bills other than a recession. Uh, how about that baby boomers are retiring left and right and any financial advisor would be remiss if they didn't suggest putting money in T-Bills as a source of income for a retiree??!!!???

There may be a recession ahead, but how we got there is as important as how we can get out. In fact, if we are careful to learn from our mistakes... we might not make them again in 2008.

Social Insecurity

After receiving an email forward from a friend, I've decided to point out a couple of things regarding Social Security. Now, I understand that not one is particularly concerned about social security as a topic right now (which is to say the media isn't talking about it, no politicians are particularly motivated about it right now, and we have more pressing concerns such as the Superbowl) but I do take forwards seriously.

Well, allow me to clarify. I take seriously forwards which are 1) political in nature and 2) which are written to help or hurt a person or cause. My reasoning is that most people (being predisposed toward apathy with respect to politics) will take forwards at face value or will completely discard them altogether.

In the case of this forward I think neither of those approaches is appropriate. It raises some legitimate concerns, though not comprehensively. It offers no solutions either, other than a transparent one which is inadequate. I'll try to make some points and offer a solution in the end.

With all of this in mind, here's the forward:

Your Social Security

Just in case some of you young whippersnappers (& some older ones) didn't know this…It's easy to check out, if you don't believe it. Be sure and show it to your kids. They need a little history lesson on what's what .and it doesn't matter whether you are Democrat of Republican. Facts are Facts!!!
Our Social Security
Franklin Roosevelt , a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary,

2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the Program,

3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,

4.) That the money the participants put into the Independent "Trust Fund" rather than into the General operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and,

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month -- and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to "put away" -- you may be interested in the following:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
independent "Trust Fund" and put it into the
general fund so that Congress could spend it?
A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically
controlled House and Senate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?
A: The Democratic Party.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
Security annuities?
A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the
"tie-breaking" deciding vote as President of the
Senate, while he was Vice President of the US .
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving
annuity payments to immigrants?
AND MY FAVORITE:
A: That's right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!
And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!


If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of
awareness will be planted and maybe changes will
evolve. Maybe not, some Democrats are awfully
sure of what isn't so.
But it's worth a try. How many people can
YOU send this to?
Actions speak louder than bumper stickers.

AND CONGRESS GIVES THEMSELVES 100% RETIREMENT FOR ONLY SERVING ONE TERM!!!


Some questions, points, musings, and thoughts on this topic:

* Yes, FDR implemented social security. Something not often pointed out is that the payout started at roughly 62 and the average life expectancy was roughly 65. (I say "roughly" because I'm not sure of the exact ages, but I'm within a year or two of each. It was never designed to be a retirement plan, it was designed to be safety net for people who may not be able to afford heat, housing, or food.

* Yes, the Democrats have raided the funds and simultaneously given themselves a nice retirement plan in the process. Yes Republicans were equally (not incidentally) responsible for that. Look at the votes!

* Yes, FDR said only 1% of 1,500 would go to FICA. So what???? Every time I go to Wendy's the prices go up, should we put handcuffs on them preventing an increase?

* Why didn't the Republican controlled congress, senate, or white house do a damn thing about it when they were in power?

* Why do Republicans get the same retirement pay out as Democrats?

* During Clinton's presidency, he did try to reform social security and was stonewalled. By whom?

* In a state with many retirees which is also conservative (Florida) Republicans have used not only social security but low (to no) taxes on older citizens who vote to get elected.

Here's my suggestion, keep a safety net for people that will not be able to survive without some sort of assistance in the form of Social Security while allowing people who are young and planning their retirement to set aside for it by putting money in stocks and specially designated retirement plans.

Oh wait, we do that!
If you're young, get a 401(k), 403(b), SEP, Roth IRA, Traditional IRA, Whole Life Policy, or Annuity. (Scratch that, annuities are a rip-off).

If you're old and you're on Social Security, life sucks because the "security" is nothing close to "retirement" and you should tell those "young whipper-snappers" to start saving for the latter or they'll be stuck in the former.

True, this is not a Democrat or Republican thing, so why are we only being shown one party's errors???? The solution is for us to hold both parties accountable for the failing Social Security. Neither should get a pass as they've both participated in the corruption and they've both failed to rectify the problem. We can, as voters, hold them accountable but unfortunately that will require more than forwards and blogs, it will require true civic engagement. Sorry... there's no magical formula, we just have to get involved.

I think I finally understand what Neitzche meant when he said “We have art to hide ourselves from the truth.” I was thinking about how, for example, people watch movies wherein characters do things we would all love to do and we appreciate seeing them do it. We acknowledge that it should be done in reality but no one really does it. Perhaps Art itself is contributing to this. I mean, if people have an outlet for their frustrations then they have no incentive to actually carry out their frustration… they may simply view art and then feel better. No real change, just feelings. Therefore, Art is the enemy of revolution.

GOBAMA!

They said he couldn't do it. Democrats and Republicans alike thought the "Hillary Express" would win it. Obama will be our next president, and not a moment too soon.