Archive for December 30th, 2011

December 30, 2011

Gingrich sees Sarah Palin as Vice President, Cabinet Secretary

Gingrich/Palin ticket?

Newt Gingrich said that former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be among the candidates that he would consider when considering a potential running mate, adding that the former GOP vice presidential nominee would be an ideal candidate for secretary of Energy.

Gingrich, speaking Wednesday during a conference call with conservative voters hosted by Ralph Reed’s Faith and Freedom Coalition, was asked by one of the attendees whether he would consider Palin as a running mate.

“She is certainly one of the people you would look at. I am a great admirer of hers and she was a remarkable reform governor of Alaska, she’s somebody who I think brings a great deal to the possibility of helping in government and that would be one of the possibilities,” Gingrich said, according to Right Wing Watch.

He went on to suggest that Palin might be ideal for a position in his Cabinet.

“There are also some very important Cabinet positions that she could fill very, very well,” Gingrich said. “I can’t imagine anybody who would do a better job of driving us to an energy solution than Gov. Palin, for example. Tell her that she would certainly be on the list of one of the people we would consider.”

Palin had toyed for months with running for the presidency before ultimately announcing late this summer to stay out of the GOP race.

via Gingrich sees Sarah Palin as vice president, Cabinet secretary – The Hill’s Blog Briefing Room.

December 30, 2011

Social Security Lies

Privatize Social Security "Make the Poor Wealthy"

Privatize Social Security "Make the Poor Wealthy"

Here’s what the 1936 government pamphlet on Social Security said, “After the first 3 years – that is to say, beginning in 1940 – you will pay, and your employer will pay, 1.5 cents for each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year. . . beginning in 1943, you will pay 2 cents, and so will your employer, for every dollar you earn for the next 3 years. . . . And finally, beginning in 1949, twelve years from now, you and your employer will each pay 3 cents on each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year.” Here’s Congress’s lying promise: “That is the most you will ever pay.”

Having read the government pamphlet, I consulted Webster’s Dictionary. The definition for the word ever contains descriptions like: “at all times,” “always,” and “at any time.” Had Congress lived up to its promise, our maximum Social Security tax this year would be $90 instead of over $6,000. The Social Security Act of 1935 would have never been enacted had Americans back then known that we’d be subject to a $6,000 tax.

Another lie in the Social Security pamphlet is, “Beginning November 24, 1936, the United States government will set up a Social Security account for you. . . . The checks will come to you as a right.” Americans were led to believe Social Security was like a retirement account and money placed in it was our property. President Clinton and Vice-President Gore and their sycophants want you to continue to believe that. The fact of the matter is you have no property right whatsoever to your Social Security “contributions.”

You say, “Williams, that’s crazy; what do you mean?” In a U.S. Supreme Court case, Helvering v. Davis (1937), the Court held that Social Security was not an insurance program saying, “The proceeds of both employee and employer taxes are to be paid into the treasury like any other internal revenue generally, and are not earmarked in anyway.” In another Supreme Court case, Fleming v. Nestor (1960), the Court said, “To engraft upon Social Security system a concept of “accrued property rights” would deprive it of the flexibility and boldness in adjustment to ever-changing conditions which it demands.” Again, the Court rejected any comparison of Social Security with insurance or an annuity. Now the Social Security Administration belatedly is trying to clean up its history of deception. Its web site (www.ssa.gov/history/nestor.html)says, “Entitlement to Social Security benefits is not [a] contractual right.” Adding, “There has been a temptation throughout the program’s history for some people to suppose that their FICA payroll taxes entitle them to a benefit in a legal, contractual sense. Congress clearly had no such limitation in mind when crafting the law.” That’s Social Security Administration’s dishonest blame evasion. After all it was they who said, “The checks will come to you as a right.”

What to do? First, let’s commend George Bush for having the guts to touch the “third rail” of American politics by warning the American people that Social Security is a national disaster waiting to happen in just 20 or 30 years. His proposal to allow workers to take two or three percent of their FICA taxes and invest them in an approved private investment vehicle is a good first step. A bolder step would be to honor our current Social Security obligations and allow any person who chooses to do so to opt out of the program altogether and privately manage their retirement needs. That, of course, would retire funding Social Security obligations out of general revenues for a period, requiring large spending cuts elsewhere. But each year we’d be moving towards a permanent solution.

Walter E. Williams

c23-00

May 22, 2000

via Social Security Lies.

%d bloggers like this: