The Greenweasal syndrome GOP social security scam

Ra Energy Fdn.
Raleigh Myers
Worksheet bio
http://www.igc.apc.org/raenergy/bio.html
Blog
http://raenergy.blogspot.com/

"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a
boot stamping on a human face -- for ever." -
George Orwell, 1984 http://www.holdthemaccountable2004.com/home.htm

Sing this song at the polls NOV 2  TAKIN' MY COUTRY BACK sing it http://www.takinmycountryback.com/main.htm

The Greenweasal syndrome GOP social security scam

And the reason Social Security is in fairly good shape is that during the
1980's the Greenspan commission persuaded Congress to increase the payroll
tax, which supports the program.

The payroll tax is regressive: it falls much more heavily on middle- and
lower-income families than it does on the rich. In fact, according to
Congressional Budget Office estimates, families near the middle of the income
distribution pay almost twice as much in payroll taxes as in income taxes. Yet
people were willing to accept a regressive tax increase to sustain Social
Security.

Now the joke's on them. Mr. Greenspan pushed through an increase in taxes on
working Americans, generating a Social Security surplus. Then he used that
surplus to argue for tax cuts that deliver very little relief to most people,
but are worth a lot to those making more than $300,000 a year. And now that
those tax cuts have contributed to a soaring deficit, he wants to cut Social
Security benefits.

[Comment: Paul Krugman, one of the few to criticize Greenspan besides William
Greider, makes some points taxpayers should commit to memory about deficits
and Social Security. --efn]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/02/opinion/02KRUG.html

The New York Times

March 2, 2004

Maestro of Chutzpah

By PAUL KRUGMAN

krugman@nytimes.com

The traditional definition of chutzpah says it's when you murder your parents,
then plead for clemency because you're an orphan. Alan Greenspan has
chutzpah.

Last week Mr. Greenspan warned of the dangers posed by budget deficits. But
even though the main cause of deficits is plunging revenue - the federal
government's tax take is now at its lowest level as a share of the economy
since 1950 - he opposes any effort to restore recent revenue losses. Instead,
he supports the Bush administration's plan to make its tax cuts permanent, and
calls for cuts in Social Security benefits.

Yet three years ago Mr. Greenspan urged Congress to cut taxes, warning that
otherwise the federal government would run excessive surpluses. He assured
Congress that those tax cuts would not endanger future Social Security
benefits. And last year he declined to stand in the way of another round of
deficit-creating tax cuts.

But wait - it gets worse.

You see, although the rest of the government is running huge deficits - and
never did run much of a surplus - the Social Security system is currently
taking in much more money than it spends. Thanks to those surpluses, the
program is fully financed at least through 2042. The cost of securing the
program's future for many decades after that would be modest - a small
fraction of the revenue that will be lost if the Bush tax cuts are made
permanent.

And the reason Social Security is in fairly good shape is that during the
1980's the Greenspan commission persuaded Congress to increase the payroll
tax, which supports the program.

The payroll tax is regressive: it falls much more heavily on middle- and
lower-income families than it does on the rich. In fact, according to
Congressional Budget Office estimates, families near the middle of the income
distribution pay almost twice as much in payroll taxes as in income taxes. Yet
people were willing to accept a regressive tax increase to sustain Social
Security.

Now the joke's on them. Mr. Greenspan pushed through an increase in taxes on
working Americans, generating a Social Security surplus. Then he used that
surplus to argue for tax cuts that deliver very little relief to most people,
but are worth a lot to those making more than $300,000 a year. And now that
those tax cuts have contributed to a soaring deficit, he wants to cut Social
Security benefits.

The point, of course, is that if anyone had tried to sell this package
honestly - "Let's raise taxes and cut benefits for working families so we can
give big tax cuts to the rich!" - voters would have been outraged. So the
class warriors of the right engaged in bait-and-switch.

There are three lessons in this tale.

First, "starving the beast" is no longer a hypothetical scenario - it's
happening as we speak. For decades, conservatives have sought tax cuts, not
because they're affordable, but because they aren't. Tax cuts lead to budget
deficits, and deficits offer an excuse to squeeze government spending.

Second, squeezing spending doesn't mean cutting back on wasteful programs
nobody wants. Social Security and Medicare are the targets because that's
where the money is. We might add that ideologues on the right have never given
up on their hope of doing away with Social Security altogether. If Mr. Bush
wins in November, we can be sure that they will move forward on privatization
- the creation of personal retirement accounts. These will be sold as a way to
"save" Social Security (from a nonexistent crisis), but will, in fact,
undermine its finances. And that, of course, is the point.

Finally, the right-wing corruption of our government system - the partisan
takeover of institutions that are supposed to be nonpolitical - continues, and
even extends to the Federal Reserve.

The Bush White House has made it clear that it will destroy the careers of
scientists, budget experts, intelligence operatives and even military officers
who don't toe the line. But Mr. Greenspan should have been immune to such
pressures, and he should have understood that the peculiarity of his position
- as an unelected official who wields immense power - carries with it an
obligation to stand above the fray. By using his office to promote a partisan
agenda, he has betrayed his institution, and the nation.


"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a
boot stamping on a human face -- for ever." -
George Orwell, 1984 http://www.holdthemaccountable2004.com/home.htm

Sing this song at the polls NOV 2  TAKIN' MY COUTRY BACK sing it http://www.takinmycountryback.com/main.htm

SING THE VOTE
http://atomfilms.shockwave.com/contentPlay/shockwave.jsp?id=this_land&preplay=1&ratingBar=off

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE in song is the first step to a fascism free planet
"THIS LAND IS YOUR LAND, THIS LAND IS MY LAND, THIS LAND IS MADE FOR YOU AND ME"

IMAGINE: WE are children of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars; WE ALL have a right to be here

START SINGING THE PLANET'S ANTHEM AT ALL EVENTS TO SHOW HOW "WE" HAVE ALREADY VOTED.
This would get some air time if we did it at GOP campaign events even in congress this Summer and fall and beyond after all it is the anthem of the Age of Aquarius no. We suggested that "THIS LAND" be the Global Village Planetary anthem at Woodies celebration in San Francisco at the Geary Theater in 1967. It was seconded by three ambassadors and has become the second third fourth etc. anthems to many countries.

FOLKSAY(people say) ............ has become Our defacto Global Village Planetary anthem and in essence we voted for citizen empowerment as we sung it. Now let's get it officially on record by singing it everywhere as direct democracy.
        THE DAWNING OF THE AGE OF AQUARIUS is the reality at hand! The children of the universe, the right to be here generation _ the meek taking their prophetic inheritance out of probate is not a conspiracy.

Ra Energy Fdn.
Raleigh Myers
http://raenergy.igc.org/raenergy.html

Worksheet bio
http://www.igc.apc.org/raenergy/bio.html

Newsgroups beginning in the eighties click on date and web
http://groups.google.com/groups?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&q=%22Ra+Energy+Fdn%2E%22

Call to Action blog
http://www.google.com/search?q=Global+Vote+raenergy&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=02Eigc%2Eorg%2Faction%2Ehtml