Bush admits he will default...WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE?!?!?!

[sadiesworld]

This evening it has been reported that * states that the SS surplus is "spent". No reference to the treasury notes securing that debt. At the same time we see the administration pushing for permanent, unaffordable tax cuts which primarily benefit the elite.

For the first time * is candid about the theft...no more "well, everyone gives a different date for the point at which SS will be insolvent"...he lays it out--YOU ARE F**KED!!

All I see are threads about the election of 2008 or Gannon.

What gives?

[GetTheRightVote]

1. Where is the link for the report on this quote ??

I would love to read it or see it.

:kick:

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. I'd like to see taht one too

but this is not surprisign if true... I have been expecting junior to do this... after all Grover Norquist promised this three years ago, almost

[xray s]

4. Josh Marshall has been all over this today

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_02_06.php#004757

President Bush lays the groundwork for defaulting on almost two trillion dollars worth of US Treasury bonds, from today at the Commerce Department ...

Some in our country think that Social Security is a trust fund -- in other words, there's a pile of money being accumulated. That's just simply not true. The money -- payroll taxes going into the Social Security are spent. They're spent on benefits and they're spent on government programs. There is no trust. We're on the ultimate pay-as-you-go system -- what goes in comes out. And so, starting in 2018, what's going in -- what's coming out is greater than what's going in. It says we've got a problem. And we'd better start dealing with it now. The longer we wait, the harder it is to fix the problem.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. You know the truth is somehwere out there

after all the GAO has been consistent on their 2048 date....

So I have to be a tad cynical, ok

that said, what the bush administration wishes to do is to carry out the wet dream of teh right to destroy the New Deal... and they are well on their way

That said... they default... this will be the greatest crisis since the Great Depresion... and the Republicans do not even realize it... or rather the real Republicans do... the Neo Cons do not... faith based policy...

[calimary]

30. Well, hey, why should we be so surprised? I mean, look at his track record

in the private sector. On HIS watch, not one - not two - but THREE oil companies (TEXAS oil companies, at that) went belly-up. And he's never had to face consequences for such reckless, irresponsible behavior. Was he EVER brought up on fraud charges? Was he EVER audited or hounded by the IRS? No, he was always lifted up and out (raptured, maybe?) by one of his or his dad's rich cronies, into the next job, or the next place-to-get-up-and-go-to-in-the-morning. He was always provided a golden parachute to a soft landing, and people always still took his phone calls. So no sweat, 'eh? What's another bankruptcy? What's the big deal, anyway? I'll be fine (HE says). He has no sense whatsoever of what ANY of this means to the average guy, whose company bankruptcy will certainly mean a world of hurt and headache. But not our boy bush. He'll never have to feel the pain. He'll just skip off to the next greener pasture. Only now, it's not mere companies he's trashing. It's countries. (Maybe it's just that he really doesn't recognize the difference between the two? He is a little - er - thick.)

[LiviaOlivia]

3. I agree

Try this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=114x14302

[LiviaOlivia]

5. From Feb 4

From Matthew Yglesias
Feb. 4, 2005

Default

I see that no less a figure than Paul Krugman has now taken two cracks at the clawback issue, eliding the issue of the
Trust Fund default which Kevin Drum semi-questions. I think liberals are offering Bush too much benefit of the doubt on this subject, making cute suggestions that the White House press corps ought to try and demand a straight answer, etc. Here's the case.

The White House is now emphasizing that private accounts do not, alone, constitute a solution to whatever Social Security's problems are. The White House has repeatedly defined Social Security's move into cash flow imbalance starting in 2019 as the problem. One can dispute whether or not this is, in fact, problematic. It is clear, however, that it only is problematic if you think there's something problematic about paying the money back. We should, therefore, take the president at his word and assume that when he proposes unspecified benefit cuts large enough to bring Social Security into balance he means cash flow balance, which means trust fund default. I note that the major idea floated by the White House -- price indexing of all benefit calculations -- is a bigger-than-necessary cut if you use trust fund accounting. I also note that the clawback provision in the private accounts isn't properly motivated unless you assume the program to be in cash flow balance.

Last but by no means least, Jacob Sullum wrote a column which advocates defaulting on the Trust Fund debt (" (S)ince this fund consists of IOUs from the Treasury, the relevant date is 2018, when benefits promised to retirees will start exceeding payroll taxes and the system will begin running a chronic annual deficit . . . higher (income) taxes . . . Social Security's fiscal crisis begins in about a dozen years, so the focus on 2042 is misleading."). This column received a response from House Republican Conference Director Greg Crist who called it "a great article" and then complained about Sullum's use of the term "privatization." If the House GOP had some kind of objection to Sullum's view that the cash flow deficit is the problem Bush is planning on addressing, they had an ideal opportunity to do so. So, yes, a reporter should ask Bush about this. But until the White House offers some kind of credible, explicit denial, liberal bloggers and pundits ought to assume that the White House understands the implications of their words and is, in fact, planning on not repaying the money.

http://yglesias.typepad.com/matthew/2005/02/default.html

Definition: clawback (British) finding a way to take money back from people that they were given in another way; "the Treasury will find some clawback for the extra benefits members received"

[aquart]

6. Call me Cassandra.

Dammit. I KNEW it. I said it.

Didn't matter.

[sadiesworld]

8. Many of us knew it...

but the fact is, the MSM has allowed * to play a vague numbers/date of insolvency game. The jig is up...time for the dems to call him on it.

He is intent upon denying the full faith and credit (of the US government) to the people he claims to represent--treasonous bastard!

[LiviaOlivia]

7. They are stupid people.

Fear not Osama but fear Bush.

Livia: chapter 1 verse 1

[sadiesworld]

9. Thanks for your links, LO...

I'm extremely frustrated at the moment. I don't understand why DUers are entralled about an election over three years away when the issue is HERE, NOW. I'm also ready to take my remaining foot out of the dem camp if the party can't bring itself to call Bushco on this one. If the whole game is all about personality and cheerleading those personalities, f**k politics--I'll just catch up on the oscars (the eye candy is better).

Sorry, you don't deserve my rant/vent! :)

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. Hence why some of us have decided to retake the party

at the local level, you can bet I will be calling MY reps tomorrow

[Donna Zen]

12. Let's ask *

why he doesn't just pay the American people whose money he spent, and not pay, claw-back, or default on the loans from the Chinese? Heh..

[sadiesworld]

13. Well, considering that China has our manufacuring base...

let's call it even.

[IronLionZion]

14. The US government has never defaulted on treasury notes...NEVER GODDAMNIT!

What makes you think they'll start now?

If Bush does that, our economy will tank like never before. People will frantically try to sell back their bonds and other countries will too. Investments will grind to halt and the dollar will inflate to damn near nothing.

Unless Bush and his buddies have their investments in Euros, they'd become hella poor too. They won't default on these bonds.

[sadiesworld]

15. * said the surplus is "spent".

He has no intention of paying it back.

BTW, my husband would agree with you, i.e., the markets will roil with the news that * intends to default on the notes. I say they will barely notice (they may even like it--after all it is more $ for them).

We're the peons and, therefore, designed to be screwed. The oligarchs and industrialists KNOW the rules are different for them. Hell, the IMF has been suggesting default for a couple of years now.

[earth mom]

16. I'm outraged too. So he's saying SS is already bankrupt, is that correct?

We are up shit creek if so. :grr:

[zann725]

19. No. Not at all. Dem. Senators had hearing on CSPAN about a week ago

and had SS Admin. officials, and FDR's grandson (who worked for SS Admin for many years), and Economists and Think Tank people on...and ALL agreed that SS was in NO crisis until about 2050. And that SS personnel were being forced to "lie" about, and "sell" privatization.

Bush simply wants to "end" the dialogue. He's done his 4 city tour. He's done. He always gets his own way. EOM.

This is the quickest way to segue to privitization. And if WE, the well-informed, believe this sudden-change-of-facts, imagine how quickly middle America will believe his lies.

We must NOT roll-over and accept this lie!

[earth mom]

20. Thanks for the reply. Now I get it. * is playing hard ball.

I, for one, will not roll over and accept this lie either!

[JAK1941]

24. Where are they getting this information?

I watched C-span yesterday evening and listened to several YOUNG Dems. discussed the issue, and they ALL reiterated that SS IS SOLVENT AND WILL CONTINUE TO PAY 100% OF BENEFITS TO THE YEAR 2052, AFTER WHICH IT WILL PAY 80%. We have 47 years or so to "fix" the problem.

And, my friends, it can be done; but not by swallowing the bullsheist being force fed to us by the Bushies and jumping to conclusions. CONTACT YOUR SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES and WORK WITH THEM to find a feasible solution. AGAIN I REITERATE, DON'T PANIC AND BELIEVE THE BULLSHEIST THE BUSHIES WANT US TO BELIEVE.

I am 63 years old and rely on SS disability benefits, plus a small amount from a Met Life policy which I purchased through my employer while I was able to work; AND I'M NOT ALLOWING BUSH THE SHEISTER TO FORCE ME TO GO INTO CARDIAC ARREST ABOUT SOCIAL SECURITY. HE'S JUST NOT GOING TO GET THIS OLD LADY'S PANTIES IN A WAD, NO MATTER HOW HE TRIES!!!!!

GEORGE W. BUSH DOESN'T KNOW HIS ARSE FROM A HOLE IN THE GROUND!!!!!
GEORGE W. BUSH DOESN'T KNOW HIS ARSE FROM A HOLE IN THE GROUND!!!!!
GEORGE W. BUSH DOESN'T KNOW HIS ARSE FROM A HOLE IN THE GROUND!!!!!
GEORGE W. BUSH DOESN'T KNOW HIS ARSE FROM A HOLE IN THE GROUND!!!!!
GEORGE W. BUSH DOESN'T KNOW HIS ARSE FROM A HOLE IN THE GROUND!!!!!

Now, kids, repeat that simple message to yourselves five times daily. Keep up the fight against this monster. BUT NEVER, I REPEAT NEVER EVER, ALLOW HIM TO BRAINWASH YOU WITH HIS LIES!!!!!

[calimary]

31. Welcome to DU! What YOU then need to do is harness your fury

and your resolve, and CALL YOUR REPS. If you can swing it, call SOMEBODY ELSE'S REPS!

Here are some word weapons: If they're republi-CON, tell them you know full well what GOP stands for:

Greedy Old Party
Get Old People
Grab Our Pensions

They're the Party of Pirates and the Home of the Hypocrites.

They, especially, need to hear that they do NOT have much company, or support, as they blindly march, shoulder-to-shoulder behind their "messiah." They need to be increasingly isolated and marginalized for this pig-headedness.

Besides, they're apt to be FAR more afraid of you than of many others of us at DU. You are a senior. They all know seniors vote religiously, and in HUGE numbers. They piss you off at their peril. And you can certainly remind them of that. Are you in any women's groups or seniors' associations - local, regional, or national? Throw THAT in, too.

Your age, your perspective, and your wisdom are MUCH appreciated here! As is your gumption!

Go get 'em, girl!

BTW - on edit - that 800 number that connected you to the Capitol Hill Switchboard is no more, so we're forced to resort to other means. www.congress.org will provide you a directory to contact information for EVERYBODY, House and Senate, local, regional and Washington. Phone, fax, email, snailmail.

And please excuse this exhortation. I don't mean to single you out. I nag EVERYBODY about this.

[Guaranteed]

17. Right- he's spending it into bankruptcy. nt

[ClayZ]

18. bu$h emptied the till, we pay the bill.

Only people left working will be making bombs and bullets, or is that outsourced too?


I have been OUTRAGED for so long I can't get back in.




:kick:

[JAK1941]

25. NO, HE ISN'T - YET!!!!!

SOCIAL SECURITY IS SOLVENT AND WILL CONTINUE TO PAY 100% OF BENEFITS UNTIL THE YEAR 2052, AT WHICH TIME IT CAN PAY 80%. WE HAVE 47 (FORTY-SEVEN) YEARS TO "FIX" THE PROBLEM!!!!!

(READ MY PREVIOUS POST.)

[CWebster]

21. What can we do?

We are doing our best to fight for an opposition party as some sort of force against this, as opposed to complicity with, as the kind of approach which got us here.

[JAK1941]

26. STOP BELIEVING THE BUSH BULLSHEIST LIES!!!!!

STOP LISTENING TO AND READING "NORMAL" MEDIA. CONTACT YOUR SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES AND WORK WITH THEM TO FIND A FEASIBLE SOLUTION. BUSH DOESN'T KNOW HIS ARSE FROM A HOLE IN THE GROUND!!!!!

[CWebster]

29. lol.

okay.

[gratuitous]

22. Not to mention he's in violation of the Constitution

Stupidhead knows (or should know) that the Social Security funds collected are either distributed to current beneficiaries or used to buy government bonds. The money paid for those bonds, naturally, is in turn spent by the government to fund other current obligations: The military, food stamps, the military, tobacco subsidies, the military, etc.

It's not a difficult concept, really. If you own U.S. Savings Bonds, you've done the same thing: Given the government money to meet its current obligations in return for the government's promise to pay you that money back, with interest, at some later date.

But did you know that the Constitution specifically forbids bad-mouthing the government's debts? It's true:

(Am.XIV, Section 4): "The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned."

You'd think some of the law-and-order Republicans would be a bit miffed that the President is in violation of the Constitution.

[CWebster]

23. Not when given the choice between that and a tax cut

a tax cut expressly benefitting them.

[JAK1941]

27. CONTACT YOUR SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES!!!!!

WORK WITH THEM, INSIST THAT THEY REPRESENT YOU, THEIR CONSTITUENTS. INSIST THAT THE TAX BREAKS FOR THE UPPER 1 PERCENT BE STOPPED. TELL THEM THAT THE BUSH BUDGET IS UNACCEPTABLE - TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE.

IT'S ONE THING TO GRITCH, GRITCH, GRITCH; IT'S ANOTHER THING TO DO SOMETHING POSITIVE ABOUT IT BY ACTUALLY WORKING WITH YOUR SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES TO EFFECT THE NECESSARY CHANGES.

BE PATIENT. I'M 63 YEARS OLD, BUT I'M NOT DONE FIGHTING YET!!!!!

[bunkerbuster1]

28. Of course it's a "bigger" story than Guckert/Gannon or 2008.

But you can't expect full boil outrage all the time about SS.

Yes, of course, Chimpy's idiotspeak about the trust fund is an outrage. But there's nothing appreciably DIFFERENT in the way he's been referring to it as being "spent", now, than when he and his butt-boys were calling it "nothing but IOUs".

That said, any fire you can put under this pot to bring it to boil is a Good Thing. I will be meeting with local Dems myself in a couple of days and you can bet your ass I will be bringing this up, even though it's not really a "local" issue.

SS should be the bedrock of our victory in 2006 -- and yes, we must focus on 2006, and the subsequent Chimpeachment that would follow a Dem victory.

[GOPBasher]

32. "Where is the outrage?"

There's never any outrage over anything Bush does. He can murder 17 American children in front of a news cameral, and the sheeple will still say, "Well, he's gots good moral characta."