Political propaganda is a powerful thing. When it is married to economic illiteracy, people can be fooled into voting against their own best interests. This week, a bit of economic reality was introduced into the Social Security debate. To wit: “People retiring today are part of the first generation of workers who have paid more in Social Security taxes during their careers than they will receive in benefits after they retire. It’s a historic shift that will only get worse for future retirees, according to an analysis by The Associated Press.”

What debate? One of the most successful bits of propagandizing by leftists has been their ability to convince a majority of Americans that they are better off sending their Social Security payments to that giant federal sinkhole Washington, D.C., instead of putting them into a private account with their own name on it.

In terms of propaganda coupled with economic illiteracy, it doesn’t get any better than that.

With all due respect (or lack thereof), one has to be dumber than the proverbial brick to think the same politicians who run trillion dollar annual deficits that have given us a $16 trillion national debt – and counting – bear the slightest resemblance to fiscally responsible stewards. The only thing dumber is believing that one’s Social Security funds are protected in a government “lockbox.”

Let me tell you what’s really in that so-called lockbox: a boat load of government IOUs totaling approximately $2.6 trillion. All the money Americans send to Washington to fund Social Security is spent right away. This allows politicians to do two things: promise more “free” goodies to the dim-bulb set, and partially mask the real level of irresponsible spending going on.

What else don’t some of the economic illiterates know? They don’t know that Congress can change the terms of the deal anytime they want to. Not that they haven’t gotten hints. From time to time there are stories about how upset Social Security recipients are when the cost of living increase that is supposed to keep their checks in line with inflation, doesn’t quite keep pace. In fact, a lot of recipients got real upset when there was no cost of living adjustment in both 2010 and 2011, because the index used to calculated it showed little or no inflation.

If government cooks the books, it’s called politics. If a bank holding your private Social Security funds tries to manipulate the interest rate on your account, it’s called fraud.

Of course anytime anyone speaks about privatizing Social Security, the libs get a severe case of the vapors, and spin dark stories about how Americans are utterly incapable of maintaining their own retirement accounts. Compared to whom? Re-read the above regarding the “superior” fiscal stewardship of the political class. And while you’re at it, remember that millions of American somehow manage to handle their very own IRAs and 401K accounts without such help.

What about stock market crashes? Who says one has to keep one’s money in the stock market? A reasonable plan could be worked out where Americans would be required to keep their retirement savings in safe investments – or sign a waiver if they wish to roll the dice. Either way, Americans would be in control of their own money – which is why big-government, the state-is-everything leftists can’t stand the idea. In short, putting your retirement money in a private account represents freedom. Sending it to Washington, D.C. represents bondage to the state.

The AP has laid out where such bondage is leading. Yet as of now, Americans have been convinced they prefer bondage to freedom.

Here’s hoping they snap out of it.