The Right Opinion
Entitlement Rip-Off
Bernie Madoff took money from people who thought he'd invested it, gave some to others who thought it was a partial return on their earlier investments and kept much for himself. That's called a Ponzi scheme, and his $50 billion fraud was called the biggest ever. But it wasn't the biggest. Social Security and Medicare are much bigger ones.
These are trillion-dollar scams. Medicare has a $36 trillion unfunded liability. Social Security's is $8 trillion. There's no money to keep those promises.
But Congress isn't investigating this scam. Congress runs it. That FICA money you thought government had saved for your retirement is gone. There's nothing left but IOUs backed by nothing. Your money was spent not only on current retirees but on wars, welfare, corporate bailouts, earmarks and all the other stuff Congress wants. For years, this was possible because the FICA tax brought in surpluses that allowed government to pay retirees more than they contributed and still help buy those other things.
Those days are gone. The huge group of baby boomers has started to retire, and that means trouble. In 2008, for the first time, Medicare paid out more than it took in.
So instead of filling the government's coffers and hiding the real size of the budget deficit, the entitlement programs have now begun to drain the treasury. Part of the "problem" is that we live longer. When Social Security started, most people didn't live to 65. Now we average 78.
This means that baby boomers like me who expect to collect Social Security and Medicare are basically stealing from children.
Think of the burden: When I was a kid, there were five workers for every retired person. Now, there are only three. And soon there will only be two young workers to fund each baby boomer's Social Security and Medicare checks.
Veronique de Rugy, an economist at the Mercatus Center, points out that Social and Medicare right now consume almost half the federal budget. In coming years, if nothing changes, they will swallow nearly the whole thing. But since Congress will want to spend money on all the other things it now buys -- not to mention a new medical entitlement -- the government will either have to raise taxes to stratospheric heights, borrow like crazy or inflate the dollar. Whichever it chooses, we'll have serious problems.
Higher taxes are not a good solution because taxation suppresses economic activity by transferring capital to politicians. Yet our only hope is a sustained economic boom.
As Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., points out: "You literally cannot tax your way out of this problem. It's not mathematically possible. ... You wipe out the middle class."
Well, how about borrowing? That might mean raising interest rates, which, again, would depress economic activity. Even then, lenders such as China may soon be too nervous to lend Uncle Sam more money. Moody's recently announced it might downgrade America's credit rating.
The most likely outcome is that the Fed will print more money, inflating the currency, so that the creditors are paid with less-valuable dollars. Our purchasing power will disappear.
The architects of the welfare state sure have left us a big mess. Yet hardly anyone talks about entitlements, except to add new ones.
De Rugy asks: Why can't people take care of their own retirement by investing the money government now takes? Had we done this all along, the looming problem would have been averted. Instead, "We're about to witness the biggest, most massive transfer of wealth from the relatively young and poor people of society to the relatively old and wealthy people in society."
Our forefathers would be appalled. After the American Revolution, when the new government was debating how to pay its bills, George Washington said this about a national debt: "We should avoid ungenerously throwing upon posterity ... the burden we ourselves ought to bear." Well, we sure are dumping my generation's debt onto posterity. I wish we had more politicians like George Washington.
COPYRIGHT 2010 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS, INC.
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

8 Comments
G.E.Miller
Wednesday, March 24, 2010 at 8:11 AM
Is the state a thief? Are those elected and appointed as "trustees" of our constitution thieves? Do you answer yes? Are these thieves using force? If yes, then only a greater use of force will stop the thieves.Where is the point that the people have the moral authority to revolt and further, where is the point that the people have the moral obligation to revolt?Sincerely,Gary
Marcus
Wednesday, March 24, 2010 at 12:55 PM
America doesn't have to revolt violently. We just need to revolt economically.Don't buy anything you don't need. Period.Go to one spouse working outside the household. Stop paying for daycare, the extra gas, the clothes needed for work, the lunches out, etc.Sell your expensive cars and house and by cheaper and smaller.Get out of personal debt forever. By only with the money you have. If you have to by something with credit like a car, make it minimal.If the middle class were to take on this mindset, I can promise you, government will sit up and take notice.Doing it this way is like a tea party revolt because the less you earn and the less you buy, the less taxes go into the pot.So come on middle America! Lock up those wallets and let's revolt!!!!! Our dollars are our power!!!
MichaelSSEC
Thursday, March 25, 2010 at 6:24 PM
Robert Heinlein wrote that our country will be the greatest on Earth until the people figure out they can vote themselves bread & circuses, for a while at least. He was right. Once that irrational temptation sets in, we quickly find ourselves in the quandary facing France.France is broke. Everyone there knows it. They know why they're broke, too. Entitlements. Most Frenchmen receive some sort of entitlement from the government. They all know these things are bankrupting the country, and they all know entitlements must go. But every Frenchman wants the other guy to give up HIS entitlement -- I need mine, leave mine alone. Thus any politician who pledges to take down entitlements can't get elected because nobody wants to give up his own personal entitlement. So the country slips further and further into insolvency.Similar problems in Belgium, Greece, etc.What does the American Left want to do? Naturally, the party of Epic Fail wants us to emulate the policies driving Euro nations into bankruptcy.It's sheer lunacy to hide these problems, lie about them, pretend they aren't problems at all, and enact ways to shove the day of reckoning into the future. The longer we deny reality, the more painful that reckoning will be. The sooner we face facts, the sooner the painful readjustments will be done.There ain't no such thing as a free lunch. No matter how many laws Congress passes.
Judd G
Saturday, March 27, 2010 at 5:35 PM
I did the math. If you took the money that was paid into social security and medicare for one person from the time they were 22 years old up to when they retired, put it in a private savings account, compounded the interest at 6% quarterly, and they retired today, they would receive a check for over $750,000 from social security and over $200,000 from medicare. Ask people over 65 years old, if they would want to be on social security and medicare or receive close to $1,000,000 when they retired.Also, if an employee was allowed to let there medical savings accounts build-up over their working life, they would retire with a sizable medical nest egg built up.
Dennis McLaughlin
Sunday, March 28, 2010 at 10:11 AM
CUTS IN MEDICARE “MORE HISTORY”The Social Security Act was signed by FDR on 8/14/35. Taxes were collected for the first time in January 1937When the Social Security program loans money to the U.S. government, the government is obligated by law to pay this money back to the Social Security program with interest. This money becomes a part of the national debt.As of June, 2008, the U.S. government owes $2.36 trillion to the Social Security program. This comes to $7,800 for every man, woman, and child living in the United StatesIn 1968, when the trust fund was allowed to be put into the general fund,Under Johnson 1968This was done by legislation during the Johnson Administration and the build-up of the Vietnam War. The action taken was perfectly legal, even though many people consider it to be wrong .
Imo Greenwood
Monday, March 29, 2010 at 2:06 PM
To my knowledge, people living years ago , lived just as long as they are today. Why I say this, in my genealogy research, all my great great grandparents lived well into to their 80s and 90s, 100s, as did my father and I'm now 85.They had more common sense than most today. That is what is wrong today, no common sense, most have thrown common sense out the door, and stretched their hand out for all that free stuff. I've had other researchers state the same info.GOD HELP US ALL
Mountain Mona
Monday, March 29, 2010 at 2:53 PM
John Stossel is right on. I don't want my child and my future child to foot my bills...medical or otherwise. Yes, I am a member of the infamous Bay Boom generation. No I am not a wealthy person (my own choices)and I will likely work until I die (my choice again). Yes I would like to see Social Security and Medicare eliminated ASAP, as well as federal income tax. These were social experiments brought on by Progessives; as is the present legislated healthcare act debacle. They are compromising our country. Our most of legislators and our president are acting like someone getting ready to declare bankruptcy and spending like a madman on credit because they believe that they can not be held accountable...they give favors to get power and votes (TARP,stimulus,healthcare, education loan take over, upcoming amnesty for illegal aliens). We, as a country, can not afford them and they need to be fired! We also need to stand firm and not let them squirm out from under our feet by twisting words and distorting intentions. A snake can only bite you if you let go of its head!!
Jean L. Kaufman
Thursday, April 1, 2010 at 8:10 AM
I am concerned with our government's debt. Yes, things are broke but please include in this mess all the people on disability. They are also recipients from the Social Security, not just us old folks. We can't lie about our eligibility as they can. We must produce proof of our age. If many were reviewed, the number would decrease. I know three checks that aren't needed. I am sure the investigations would be a pay-off.