Skip to comments.
The Problem with Social Security Reform is this: The Government Already Stole the Money
Townhall ^ | 04/30/2013 | Bill Tatro
Posted on Tuesday, April 30, 2013 12:20:52 PM by SeekAndFind
I’ve been waiting in the wings very patiently for the all the uproar to die down before I weighed in on the incredibly stupid 2010 comment made by former Wyoming Senator Alan Simpson in which he called me and my fellow senior citizens, “The greediest generation.”
With a tax code that exceeds 72,000 pages in length and consumes more than six billion person hours per year to determine taxpayers’ taxable income, with an IRS that has become a feared law unto itself, and with a government that continues to extract more wealth from every taxpaying American every year, is it any wonder that April 15th is a day of dread in America?
Social Security taxes and income taxes have dogged us all since their institution during the last century, writes Judge Andrew Napolitano, and few politicians have been willing to address these ploys for what they are: theft.
Seniors and vets, it’s happening before our very eyes ~ President Obama, not Paul Ryan, is pushing our highly dependable Social Security benefits program over the cliff while playing politics with the Republicans and over the wishes of 87% of those over 50 years of age who oppose any cuts to social security benefits
by Allen L Roland
“Social Security…is not a dole or a device for giving everybody something for nothing. True Social Security must consist of rights which are earned rights ~ guaranteed by the law of the land.” Harry S. Truman, August 13, 1945
Voters should know that Social Security is not an entitlement but rather a system of wage replacement insurance, which we, as workers, pay for in payroll taxes throughout our working lives.
The system provides benefits when workers stop receiving wages due to retirement, disability or premature death. And voters should also know that Social Security is solid and dependable; it hasn’t missed a payment in 77 years, is currently running a surplus of $2.7 trillion, and is solvent for the next quarter century.
In an economy that continues to be sluggish, with unemployment unacceptably high, Social Security is the solution, not the problem ~ and it must now be strengthened, if not increased, and most certainly not undermined by millionaire politicians who answer to the financial elite and ignore the public.
(GyG: ALWAYS, See The Reader Responses…please…) ~ Social Security, Medicare facing cuts in Obama budget [Democrats Hate Old People]
Tampa Bay Times ^ | 4/4/13
Posted on Friday, April 05, 2013 8:14:38 AM by SoFloFreeper
President Barack Obama next week will take the political risk of formally proposing cuts to Social Security and Medicare in his annual budget in an effort to demonstrate his willingness to compromise with Republicans and revive prospects for a long-term deficit-reduction deal, administration officials say.
In a significant shift in fiscal strategy, Obama on Wednesday will send a budget plan to Capitol Hill that departs from the usual presidential wish list that Republicans typically declare dead on arrival.
Instead it will embody the final compromise offer that he made to Speaker John Boehner late last year, before Boehner abandoned negotiations in opposition to the president’s demand for higher taxes from wealthy individuals and some corporations.
Someone Needs To Be Held Accountable … and They Need To Pay… “Most Americans are—let me search for the word—freeloaders. And most of those deny it” by Jim Karger
…..Most Americans are—let me search for the word—freeloaders. And most of those deny it. Indeed, a 2008 poll found that 57% of Americans denied ever using a government program. But when shown a list of 21 actual programs, including student loans and home-mortgage interest deduction, 94% of the deniers turned out to have bellied up to the pork-bar after all.
Who are they? They are us.
They are current Social Security recipients who, under no theory, have paid in near enough to justify the benefits they are receiving in the mail each month.
It is a General Public filled with so much fear and hate that they can’t get enough of the engorged war machine that spends more on “defense,” more properly called “war,” than the next 16 largest nations combined.
It is funding for the arts which means funding artists who can’t sell their paintings or pottery or music in the free market.
Obama’s Declaration of Political War… (” a liberal wet dream: It pressed all of the Left’s erogenous zones:…”)
Indeed, Obama’s second inaugural address was a liberal wet dream: It pressed all of the Left’s erogenous zones:
• Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security? Obama vowed not to change or reform them — even though they are driving us toward financial insolvency, and even though they provide workers with a relatively lousy return on their investment.
• “Climate change”? It is real, and it must be addressed — now!
The Obama Economy: Americans are drawing down their 401(k)s for nonretirement needs in record numbers, just as Social Security goes bust. This portends poverty for millions as the White House fiddles. Cat food, anyone? One out of four U.S. workers with 401(k) retirement savings accounts has been forced to cash them out or borrow from them at high costs just to stay solvent.
The Washington Post, citing a report from financial advisory firm HelloWallet, said the withdrawals have drained $70 billion, or an astonishing near-quarter of the total $293 billion, in America’s retirement accounts “undermining already shaky retirement security for millions of Americans.”
You are hearing ad nauseam in the discussion of the fiscal cliff about entitlement reform and tax reform (tax increases). What you’re not going to hear hardly anyone talking about is Executive branch reform. Why? I don’t know, but it is very disturbing. The Simpson-Bowles commission didn’t make one recommendation for cutting the Executive branch. Not one. Cuts from Social Security, Medicare and the Military yes, but not the Executive branch.
And why should they be talking about Executive branch reform (cuts)? Because the Executive branch is much bigger than you think.
By Michael Snyder
November 19th, 2012
A website run by the federal government (“WelcomeToUSA.gov“) encourages new immigrants to the United States to apply for welfare benefits. This website is run by the Department of Homeland Security and it says that it “is the U.S. Government’s official web portal for new immigrants.” So your tax dollars were used to build and maintain a website that teaches immigrants how to come into this country and sponge a living off of federal welfare programs paid for by your tax dollars.
(“Social Chaos Is Coming Because of massive dependence on government…”) ~ Government Dependency Will End in Chaos by Ron Paul
Listen to Ron Paul
The media insists on characterizing statements about dependency on government handouts as controversial, but in truth such statements are absolutely correct.
It’s not that nearly half of Americans are dependent on government; it’s actually more than half. If one includes not just people on food stamps and welfare, but also seniors on Medicare, Social Security and people employed by the government directly, the number is more like 165 million out of 308 million, which is 53%.
Unless the Democrats and Republicansin Congress can reach an agreement on an extension, many temporary tax-cut provisions will expire at the end of this year.
The so-called Bush tax cut — The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (JGTRRA) — gave us our current six income tax brackets of 10, 15, 25, 28, 33, and 35 percent, a $1,000 child tax credit, a long-term capital gains rate of 15 percent, a qualified dividend tax rate of 15 percent (0 percent for those in the two lowest tax brackets), a section 179 expense deduction of up to $250,000 for small businesses, an estate tax that was gradually reduced to zero for 2010, and numerous tax credits and deductions.
Video: The Obamacare Mess Explained in One Sentence… (“This puppy’s going viral, so we might as well hop aboard the train and toot the horn a few times.”)
This puppy’s going viral, so we might as well hop aboard the train and toot the horn a few times. Here’s medical doctor and Illinois State Senatecandidate Barbara Bellar summarizing the president’s unpopular healthcare law in a single, tortured sentence:
(Video at link)
BEGIN TRANSCRIPTRUSH: Let me ask you this:
It’s not like some little Podunk European country collapsing, that goes to another relatively Podunk European country for a bailout.
When we collapse, there are worldwide reverberations.How long is it going to take?I’m asking a serious question.Eighteen months? You throw Obamacare onto what we know we’re gonna get more of from Obama:
The Treasury Department is withholding part of the Social Security monthly payments of about 115,000 seniors because they have fallen behind on student loan payments. There was a time when Social Security benefit payments were untouchable, but that is a thing of the past.Obama’s War on Seniors is growing at such a rate that the number of effected seniors has almost doubled in just the last year.
Alarming purchases by benign federal agencies: Why are the Social Security Admin and Weather Bureau buying bullet? « « Coach is RightCoach is Right (“The answer could be that …”)
By George Spelvin, staff writer We’ve seen the stories about large purchases of ammunition being made by federal agencies that have nothing to do with our military or law enforcement.
Perhaps the more important question is why these are otherwise nonthreatening agencies buying hollow point bullets that have been internationally outlawed since 1899?
The answer could be that Barack Obama is coming for your guns by using a 1961 Secretary of State Declaration to incrementally and too bad for America’s Second Amendment rights. A new youtube video entitled “Troops Ordered to Kill All Americans Who do Not turn in Guns,” is making cyber waves Big time!
“Freedom From War, A U.S. Program for General and Complete Disarmament, No. 7277, dated September, 1961, lists the following actions to be taken:
–immediate disarmament action-international control -read United Nations- to oversee all states read countries including United States-Peacekeeping mechanisms to be set up in a UN Peace Force.
Now this means a: drastic reduction in our U.S. military along with that of Russia to a troop level figure of 2.1 million men only for each state country.-conversion of our military bases into areas for “Peaceful Purpose” and strict prohibition of the manufacture of all ARMAMENTS!
For much of the past few generations, the debate over balancing the federal budget has been a central feature of every presidential campaign.
But over time, the goalposts have moved. As the amount of red ink has grown steadily larger, the suggested time frames to restore balance have gotten increasingly longer, while the suggested cuts in government spending have gotten increasingly shallower.
Update: Second Video Added – 71 Year Old Taken To The Ground For Questioning Paul Ryan | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution
As Congressman Paul Ryan cracked a joke about him, Tom Nielsen found himself face down on the floor
being handcuffed by police. The 71-year-old retired plumber from Kenosha was thrown to the ground, placed in handcuffs, and arrested for trespassing and resisting arrest after objecting to Ryan’s plans to gut Social Securityand
Friday, August 10, 2012
Do We Face Social Unrest or Worse?
Charles Burris on the past as current events.
Buried by Google
Bill Sardi on online insignificance.
On the Batman shooting. Article by Laurence Vance.
CLICK BELOW @ LINK BELOW !!!!!
A new chart set to be released later today by the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee details a startling statistic: “Over 100 Million People in U.S. Now Receiving Some Form Of Federal Welfare.”
Barry Goldwater Against Big Government (1964) – Classic Campaign Ad
Youtube ^ | 11 July 2012 | AllClassicVideo
Posted on Thursday, July 12, 2012 9:12:54 AM by moonshot925
NARRATOR: “Don’t look now young man, but somebody has his hand in your pocket. It’s the hand of big government. It’s taking away about four months pay from what your daddy earns evey year — one dollar out of every three in his paycheck. And its taking the security out of your grandmother’s Social Security.”
GOLDWATER: “You know, that’s the great trouble with big, inflationary government. It takes more and more of your earnings. It slowly but surely destroys individual initiative and responsibility. The government must draw its strength from the people, and as it drains away this strength, it must inevitably undermine the foundations of self-government. I ask you to join me in helping restore the individual freedoms and initiatives this nation once knew, to make government more the servant and not the master of us all. In this free nation we do not choose to be ruled, we elect to be governed.”
BO and the Supremes lunge to finalize the totalitarian central planning of the vast health care pseudo-system in the U.S. was so full of verbiage, rationalizations, shilly shalling, one step back and two steps forward into totalitarian central planning that it was ludicrous in a very grim way.
The details are absurdly complex and obfuscating, but basically BO imposed a “universal insurance dodge” similar to Social Security to pay for the vast trillions more in costs needed to pay for 60,000,000 new patients who cannot pay for themselves, the Supremes by 5 to 4 said that’s illegal, but you can do the same scam by changing the name to a “tax” and get away with it. The Media at first thought the Supremes had rejected the obviously unconstitutional forced purchase, then got muddled up by the wording and shilly shalling in the actual decision, then reversed themselves, then….
In his recent appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Representative Ron Paul was asked by Sam Stein of the Huffington Post whether he was going to set a good example for younger Americans and opt out of Social Security.
(“You might as well legalize sodomy as recognize the Bolsheviks.”) Winston Churchill’s Choice Words for Obama’s “Gay Pride Month”
This month the U.S. federal government has officially endorsed America’s fourth “Gay Pride Month” in the last dozen years. President Bill Clinton originally declared June “Gay Pride Month” in June of 2000, and President Barack Obama has continued that tradition ever since June 2009. These declarations foreshadowed his announcement shortly before Mother’s Day last month which made him the first President in the history of the United States to executively communicate moral and political support for changing the historical, common law, statutory and biblical definition of marriage to sanction the ability of two men or two women to marry.
But the West’s great political heroes of only a few generations past had starkly different expressions toward homosexuality (sodomy).
Thinking Straight in a Crooked World Only $5.00 In 1919, after Lenin had led the Soviets to slaughter the entire Russian royal family and then set up the Cheka (his own version of the Gestapo) to hunt down all opponents of Marxism, Winston Churchill like many westerners became aghast to hear the news. He told the cabinet that Lenin and Trotsky should be captured and hanged, “as the object upon whom justice will be executed, however long it takes, and to make them feel that their punishment will become an important object of British policy.”
He told the Dundee electors that the Bolsheviks were reducing Russia “to an animal form of barbarism,” maintaining themselves by “bloody and wholesale butcheries and murders carried out to large extent by Chinese executions and armored cars. . . . Civilization is being completely extinguished[.]”
But perhaps Churchill’s most telling words were communicated to Lloyd George. Churchill wrote: “You might as well legalize sodomy as recognize the Bolsheviks.”
(Excerpt) Read more at americanvision.org …
- WINSTON CHURCHILL, Harvard Minority. I had somehow forgotten that Winston Churchill’s grandmoth… (pjmedia.com)
- Gay Pride Month Spotlight: Frank Anthony Polito (pantiesupskirtdown.com)
- A new exhibition reveals Winston Churchill’s Irish connections (irishcentral.com)
- Winston Churchill: The Ultimate CEO (greatfinds.icrossing.com)
- Gay Pride Month Spotlight: Kergan Edwards-Stout (pantiesupskirtdown.com)
- Churchill Style: The Art of Being Winston Churchill (coolhunting.com)
- New book on the style of being Winston Churchill (teleread.com)
- Five things Winston Churchill can teach writers (billbennett.co.nz)
- Churchill & the power of words (franjohns.me)
- Tony Perkins Slams Gay Pride Month: Why No ‘Adultery’ Or ‘Drunkenness’ Pride? (huffingtonpost.com)
Prison Planet.com » “I’m Supporting The Party That I Belong To”: Rand Paul Speaks About Romney Endorsement
While he anticipated the backlash, Rand believes that supporting the party will enable him to get more done, and that many critics have been too quick to forget the good things he has managed to do so far from within the Senate.
“Supporting the nominee has been part of my ability to try to have influence… If Republicans see that you are not going to support the nominee, the doors close.”
The Senator believes that endorsing Romney will help earn his trust and make him more likely to listen to his policies. He agreed that it is better to have Romney as a friend than as an enemy.
“People say that ‘you’re selling your soul’. No, I’m supporting the party that I belong to, in order to try to work within the party to get things I believe in. “
Prison Planet.com » Ron Paul Still Isn’t Sure If He’s Going To His Own Republican Convention Festival
Siemon also points out that the Fairgrounds agreement came almost immediately after Sen. Rand Paul‘s surprise endorsement of Republican nominee Mitt Romney.
“It seems too coincidental,” he told Business Insider, adding slyly: “We’re conspiracy theorists, after all.”
A spokesman for the Republican National Convention has not yet responded to Business Insider’s request for comment.
It is not for federal judges to redefine marriage for us. When they do, it is tantamount to cultural suicide, and we should not be surprised at the cultural and social degradation sure to follow.
William Bennett writes in his book The De-Valuing of Society, “Our common culture … embodies truths that most Americans can recognize and examine for themselves. These truths are passed down from generation to generation, transmitted in the family, in the classroom, and in our churches and synagogues.” But the truths of our culture and the traditional American family are now being attacked and demagogued like never before in our history in the name of “tolerance” and “rights.”
(“Romney Is a Fraud He lusts for much bigger government.”) Ann Romney Asks the Right Question by Patrick J. Buchanan…
When Hillary Rosen said that Ann Romney had “never worked a day in her life,” it was among the better days of the Romney campaign.
For Rosen – present whereabouts unknown – both revealed the feminist mindset about women who choose to become wives and mothers and brought Ann Romney center stage.
Before a Connecticut audience recently, Mrs. Romney spoke of her reluctance to see her husband pursue the presidency a second time and said she resisted, until she got an answer to one critical question.
“Can you fix it?” she asked Mitt. “I need to know. Is it too late?”
Mitt Romney replied, “No, it’s getting late, but it’s not too late.”
Yet Ann’s question lingers. Is it still possible to turn this country around? Or has a fate like that of Europe become inevitable?
If one focuses on the deficit-debt crisis, and what a president can do, the temptation is to succumb to despair.
Consider. The U.S. government spends a peacetime record 24 to 25 percent of gross domestic product. Most of that is expended on five accounts: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other Great Society programs, interest on the national debt, war and defense.
Five myths about conservative voters (by Frank Luntz, based on his polls)Washington Post ^ | April 27, 2012 | Frank LuntzPosted on Saturday, April 28, 2012 9:42:20 AM by Innovative1.
Conservatives care most about the size of government.2. Conservatives want to deport all illegal immigrants.3. They worship Wall Street4. Conservatives want to slash Social Security and Medicare.5. Conservatives don’t care about inequality.
So, if everyone is concerned about the income gap, what’s the big difference between left and right? It’s the difference between opportunity and outcome. Conservatives want to increase opportunity, giving everyone the freedom and tools to prosper, so that the poor may someday become rich.
When Texas Gov. Rick Perry, then in the early stages of his short-lived quest for the Republican presidential nomination, referred to Social Security as “a Ponzi scheme,” he was excoriated by the press, left and right, and by his fellow Republicans, as well. Earlier this week, government actuaries revealed that Perry was correct.
That revelation, which was greeted with a ho-hum by the media, basically announced that by 2033, 21 years from now, the so-called Social Security trust fund will be empty.
The only reason this was even announced is because we are approaching a presidential election campaign, and in response to Perry’s much-derided claim, the government’s actuaries, who originally told the Obama administration and the public that the fund would be solvent until 2036, re-examined their numbers and concluded that it will be in the red three years earlier than they thought.
(“Our country is tilting on the edge of a Marxist cliff, ready to fall to its death unless some ‘fearless’ ideas and leadership pull it back toward the other direction…and quickly”) Laurie Roth – We need a ‘Fearless and Principled’ President
With Obama, we have seen the United States of America wrenched and yanked into Marxism and fascism. We have seen our moral base, achievements and world leadership viciously assaulted. We are quickly being cut down to size…Obama’s size which is pathetically small and insignificant.
Our country is tilting on the edge of a Marxist cliff, ready to fall to its death unless some ‘fearless’ ideas and leadership pull it back toward the other direction…and quickly.
Dr. Laurie Roth is the ‘outside of the box’ candidate, with visionary plans both domestically and with foreign affairs. She is devoted to God, family and country and has the guts to do what needs to be done.
URGENT PROBLEMS WHICH CRY OUT FOR ACTION
The US Government is nearly 16 trillion in debt and the Obama ‘presidency’ is spending significantly more than we take in. Our minimum interest payment is several hundred billion a year and rising.
Our people have been experiencing 15-20% unemployment, (real numbers not contrived statistics) staring in horror as their homes are foreclosed. We have seen inflation soar as the economy struggles under the weight of this fraudulent regime.
Social Security and Medicare / Medicaid, are entitlements, whether we like them or not. For decades, millions of our citizens have counted on medical and retirement payments. Having been forced and coerced to pay into Social Security, they now count on its monthly payments to support them. I am for exploring creative solutions for retirement with our younger folks but, we must be faithful to those who have already paid into and are now retired and counting on Social Security as the only source or major part of their income.
Hikes in Gas Price Eclipse Payroll Tax Cut
Print The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones’ Facebook Infowars store
RALPH R. REILAND
February 28, 2012
The Washington politicians were in full self-congratulatory form recently when the Republicans and Democrats in Congress finally displayed a moment of bipartisanship and passed the payroll tax cut extension that keeps in place the two percentage point cut in the tax that funds Social Security.
It’s probably the dumbest tax to cut, given that Social Security ran $100 billion in the hole over just the past two years and the official projection from the Social Security and Medicare boards of trustees shows an ever-rising level of red ink: “After 2014, cash deficits are expected to grow rapidly as the number of beneficiaries continues to grow at a substantially faster rate than the number of covered workers.”
The White House said the two point cut in the payroll tax will put an extra $80 a month in the take-home pay of people making $50,000 a year, leaving out the part about the level of federal red ink subsequently rising by an extra $93 billion over the next decade.
To the people who responded to President Obama’s request and emailed their stories to the White House about how not getting the $80 a month (or $40 per month — $1.33 a day — if you’re making $25,000) would impact their lives, Obama senior adviser David Plouffe, following the enactment of the extension, sent an email to each, saying “We still have a lot of work to do” and attaching a photograph of Obama.
When Ruth Bader Ginsburg said in Egypt recently that she “would not look to the U.S. Constitution if [she] were drafting a constitution in the year 2012,” it was no surprise. In that the Constitution militates against a nanny state and preserves a status quo, it is by its very nature a conservative document. This is why liberals hate it so. And, as the power of the left grows via their control over the culture, their teeth and contempt for the Constitution are displayed ever more (see Obama, Baracket al.). But what of conservatives?
Here are some suggestions.
Ron Paul should be making the point that Social Security and Medicare are threatened by multi-trillion dollar wars that are funded by debt, by bailouts of a deregulated banking system, and by money creation to keep the banks afloat. Libertarians support deregulation, but their position has always been that deregulated industries must not be bailed out with public subsidies, much less subsidies that are so extensive that they threaten government solvency and the value of the currency.
Perry “retires” early, begins collecting state pension
Posted on Saturday, December 17, 2011 12:58:43 AM by 2ndDivisionVet
Yes, he’s still governor. He’s “retired” only for benefits purposes, which means he can start collecting his pension while he’s still collecting a salary. It’s perfectly legal. Just … unhelpful.
Perry makes a $150,000 annual gross salary as Texas govenor. Now, thanks to his early retirement, Perry, 61, gets a monthly retirement annuity of $7,698 before taxes, or $6,588 net. That raises his gross annual salary to more than $240,000…
[T]he disclosure is sure to spark criticism of Perry, who has called for sweeping changes to Social Security for average workers and has railed against special “perks” that members of Congress get.
“Perry was legally able to begin collecting the employee class annuity under the ‘rule of 80.’ The combination of his U.S. military service, state service and age exceeded 80 years and qualifies him for the annuity under Texas Government Code 813.503 as amended in 1991,” Sullivan said. “Perry continues to pay into the Employees Retirement System with a 6.5 percent withholding from his state salary.”…
The Keystone Ultimatum (Will Obama veto a tax holiday to stop a job-creating pipeline?)
Wall Street Journal ^ | 12/16/2011
Posted on Friday, December 16, 2011 12:36:22 PM by SeekAndFind
We’ve largely ignored the not-so-great payroll tax debate on the assumption that it would pass in any case and won’t matter much to the economy. But now things are getting interesting: If Republicans hang tough, they might even get a useful policy victory in return for giving President Obama his political fillip.
Keep in mind that the payroll tax “cut” is nothing more than a tax holiday. All the political palaver is about extending it for one more year, through 2012, so Mr. Obama can claim he did something for middle-class voters before Election Day. Because it is temporary, the tax holiday will do little to change employer incentives to hire.
The best one can say for the payroll reprieve is that individuals will better spend the money than the government would. The problem is that government will keep spending anyway, borrowing the money instead. The one-year payroll extension will take something like $121 billion from Social Security revenues, which means about 10% to 15% of the entire federal budget deficit expected for this fiscal year
ARE FACTS AND TRUTH NO LONGER IMPORTANT?
Complaints regarding identity theft can be filed via the FTC website
(Dec. 9, 2011) — The other day I wasted my time dialoging with an Obama supporter. I know what you’re thinking: “Why squander the time you have left on earth with an exercise in futility?” Not quite true; you see, I was attempting to diagnose the reason for, what for no better term that I can see than “fact avoidance,” or “fact blockage,” maybe “factitis” (fakt-ti’ tis) n. The mind’s amazing ability to substitute reality with fiction.
Take, for instance, Obots refusing to discuss the Federal Law regarding fake, false, and the use of multiple Social Security numbers. The law is very specific in that it states that the use of any other than the Social Security number issued, you win the chance to get cuffed and booked. “Well, that’s because you’re racist,” the Obot told me. I called a lawyer friend and asked her what she thought of the Obot’s response.
“It’s implied,” she said. “Because Obama is half-white, then Arab with a smattering of black, any reference to illegality is Verboten! You see, Obots think that they can circumvent any law, rule, regulation, moré and tradition they want because of the fantastical whim of disassociation. I mean, if they break the law and get caught, even on tape, they whine. In Germany we call such people “wieners;” here in America they’re called Obots.”
On Wednesday Wells Fargo released the results of its survey of 1,500 individuals between ages 25 and 75, titling it “80 is the New 65 for Many Middle Class Americans” while another study in June by three financial service non-profits showed three-quarters of those surveyed planning to work beyond age 65.
America Before The Entitlement State
forbes ^ | 11/18/2011 | Yaron Brook and Don Watkins Yaron Brook and Don Watkins
Posted on Saturday, November 19, 2011 2:10:39 PM by MontaniSemperLiberi
…In the 19th century, even though capitalism had only existed for a short time, and had just started putting a dent in pre-capitalism’s legacy of poverty, the vast, vast majority of Americans were already able to support their own lives through their own productive work. Only a tiny fraction of a sliver of a minority depended on assistance and aid–and there was no shortage of aid available to help that minority.
“Those in need,” historian Walter Trattner writes, “. . . looked first to family, kin, and neighbors for aid, including the landlord, who sometimes deferred the rent; the local butcher or grocer, who frequently carried them for a while by allowing bills to go unpaid; and the local saloonkeeper, who often came to their aid by providing loans and outright gifts, including free meals and, on occasion, temporary jobs. Next, the needy sought assistance from various agencies in the community–those of their own devising, such as churches or religious groups, social and fraternal associations, mutual aid societies, local ethnic groups, and trade unions.”
Van Jones Exploits Children to Push Communist Agenda
Townhall.com ^ | November 11, 2011 | Katie Pavlich
Posted on Friday, November 11, 2011 5:20:42 PM by Kaslin
Here we are again, the Left exploiting children to push their own convoluted agenda. This time, it’s Van Jones using children to push his 10-point “Contract for the American Dream” plan. Ironically, in the video the children plead to increase Social Security taxes so our seniors can have a secure retirement. Too bad Van Jones isn’t telling these kids that when they get a job and start paying into the Social Security system, they’ll never see a dime of their own money back when they retire.
Points made in the video:
(More Generational Strife?) Retirement Wars
American Spectator ^ | 11.10.11 | David N. Bass
Posted on Thursday, November 10, 2011 7:21:38 AM by Publius804
Will Baby Boomers be the last generation to enjoy the modern concept of a leisure-filled retirement? It’s a worthy question to ponder in light of a new Pew Research Center report showing a growing wealth gap between young and old in the United States.
Using government data over the last 25 years, Pew found that households headed by those over 65 have made “dramatic gains” in economic well-being, while those headed by younger adults have fallen steadily behind.
RUSH: A question: If Barack Obama can use taxpayer money to invest in risky private sector investments like all of these fraudulent, phony, there-is-no-business-there green energy loans…? If Obama could do that, if he can use taxpayer money to invest in risky private sector investments that go belly up, shouldn’t we be able to put our retirement money in a safer place than Washington? I personally don’t mind risking my money on investments I trust. What I don’t like is other people risking my own on investments only a fool would trust. Privatizing a portion of Social Security is an argument that’s always out there, and any time somebody brings it up seriously within the realm of politics they get shot down as, “It’s the third rail, can’t do that,” and of course look at how it’s demagogued.
A Letter from an Enraged Lady
EMAIL | NA | Patty Meyers, WYO
Posted on Sunday, October 30, 2011 1:43:06 PM by dvan
I Think She Is Upset!
Alan Simpson, Senator from Wyoming , Co-Chair of Obama’s deficit commission, called senior citizens the Greediest Generation as he compared “Social Security” to a Milk Cow with 310 million teats. Here’s a response in a letter from PATTY MYERS in Wyoming … I think she is a little ticked off! She also tells it like it is!
“Hey Alan, let’s get a few things straight..
1. As a career politician, you have been on the public dole for FIFTY YEARS.
2. I have been paying Social Security taxes for 48 YEARS (since I was 15 years old. I am now 63).
3 My Social Security payments, and those of millions of other Americans, were safely tucked away in an interest bearing account for decades until you political pukes decided to raid the account and give OUR money to a bunch of zero ambition losers in return for votes, thus bankrupting the system and turning Social Security into a Ponzi scheme that would have made Bernie Madoff proud..
There are many headlines out there now stemming from his Meet the Press interview yesterday claiming that Ron Paul wants to end student loans. Well no, in fact, though he abolishes the Department of Education along with four other federal departments, the student loan part is taken out and handled elsewhere.
Everyone recognizes we have major problems with Social Security and Medicare, and yet when anyone attempts to address these problems, they are immediately accused of “ending,” “slashing” or “getting rid of” such programs. Ron Paul is not suggesting this for anyone currently reliant on these programs or for those who will be in the near future. In fact, Paul’s opt-out for Social Security in his budget plan is age 25—not exactly imminent doom for the program or those on it.
The same is true of student loans. To recognize that we are bankrupt and we must have drastic change in this country is not to say that certain programs Americans have come to rely on will be gotten rid of overnight. Paul is certainly saying no such thing.
But the costs must be addressed—and not simply what the government spends, but the massive debt incurred by those in this country who just want a college education. To be sure, the countless Americans who are now slaves to education-related debt can tell you there are substantial problems with our current system.
Ron Paul simply wants to fix them.
…..We are in a World War. It’s a war between the educated and the ignorant, between the future and the past, and between freedom and slavery.
Even though we have many problems, the concern that this country even has a future is first and foremost. Western Civilization is under attack by Islam, a political philosophy which will be the death of us all unless we get it together as a people who at least are cognizant of the danger, and I’m talking directly to the people in Christchurch, New Zealand, as much as I’m talking to those in Corpus Christi, Texas.
It’s a sad fact that our enemy has made such successful inroads into all of the non-Islamic countries through the astounding oil revenues that we have paid them since oil was discovered by an American in the Middle East. The West paid for and developed extraction techniques, built the pipeline and the delivery vessels required to move the crude, yet it is they who hold us hostage economically for our failure to be totally energy-independent from the oil of the Middle East.. That will end.
In America, our education system has deteriorated to the point where an ineligible candidate made it all the way to the White House, and those in Congress who should have spoken up, but didn’t, about the fake birth certificates and the illegal Social Security number of Obama, were elected or reelected. Also, the standards of all of our institutions, from universities to firemen, have suffered because of Affirmative Action. That will end…..
Dear Carrie: Does my wife collect 100 percent of my Social Security benefits at my death? Thank you. — Bert
Dear Bert: I wish I could provide you with a quick answer to such a straightforward question. But as with so many issues related to government programs, there are a number of factors that come into play. So yes, it is (possible for your wife to collect 100 percent of your Social Security benefits after you die. But read on for some of the fine print.
Before we get into those details, I want to clarify that there is a difference between standard spousal Social Security benefits, which max out at 50 percent of the worker’s benefit and survivor benefits, which can go as high as 100 percent.
In terms of survivor benefits, if you should die your wife’s benefit will depend on three things: 1) when you begin to take your Social Security benefits 2) her age when she begins to collect survivors benefits and 3) whether or not you had started to collect benefits prior to your death.
Since I don’t know the particulars of your situation, I’ll just briefly lay out a few scenarios.
IF YOU TAKE YOUR BENEFITS AT FULL RETIREMENT AGE
The simplest is if you begin taking benefits at full retirement age (66 for those born between 1943 and 1954). That would mean you’d collect your full benefit and your wife, should you pass away before her, could then collect 100 percent of your benefits as long as she also was at full retirement age. This doesn’t mean you absolutely have to start taking benefits at age 66. You could also choose to delay up to age 70. The advantage here is that the longer you delay taking Social Security, the larger your benefit–and the larger your wife’s survivor’s benefit–would be.
IF YOU TAKE YOUR BENEFITS EARLY
If you begin taking your Social Security benefits at 62, the earliest age you become eligible, your monthly benefit would be reduced permanently by about 25 percent. In this case, your wife’s benefit is also affected. The IRS rules state that a widow or widower at full retirement age qualifies for 100 percent of what a spouse (set ital) has been receiving (end ital). So if you opt to take Social Security early, upon your death, your wife would collect 100 percent of your (set ital) reduced (end ital) benefits. Unfortunately, the IRS doesn’t boost the benefit to the full rate when someone dies.
IF YOUR WIFE TAKES SURVIVOR BENEFITS EARLY
As I mentioned, a spouse at full retirement age can collect 100 percent of the deceased spouse’s benefit. But a surviving spouse can begin to collect benefits at age 60 if necessary (or age 50, if disabled). In this case, however, the benefit is reduced by a small percentage for each month before the surviving spouse reaches full retirement age. This could potentially reduce the monthly benefit to between 71 percent and 99 percent of the full benefit.
For example, assuming that your wife’s full retirement age is 66, if she started collecting survivor benefits at 60, she would get only 71.5 percent of your benefit. If she started at 62, she’d get 81 percent, and so on. The rationale is that by claiming benefits early, you receive them for a longer period of time so it potentially adds up to the same total. You can find a detailed chart of the various ages and percentages on the Social Security website at ssa.gov/suvivorplan.
IF YOU DIE BEFORE STARTING TO TAKE BENEFITS
Should you die before filing for benefits, no matter how old you are, once your wife reaches full retirement age she would qualify for 100 percent of the benefit you would have received (or her own benefit, whichever is greater). If she starts to collect early, however, it will be reduced as I just described.
STRATEGIES FOR TODAY
While your question concerns survivor benefits, you might also want to make sure you and your wife are maximizing the benefits you’re entitled to today. For instance, if you’ve already filed for benefits, your wife could collect benefits either based on her own work history or the spousal benefit, whichever is higher.
If you haven’t explored your various options, I suggest talking to your financial advisor to come up with the best strategy. You can also contact the Social Security administration. It offers information and counseling to help you weigh the different factors. You can speak to a Social Security counselor at your local SSA office or call 1-800-772-1213. Best of luck.
Families were more dependent on government programs than ever last year.
Nearly half, 48.5%, of the population lived in a household that received some type of government benefit in the first quarter of 2010, according to Census data. Those numbers have risen since the middle of the recession when 44.4% lived households receiving benefits in the third quarter of 2008.
The share of people relying on government benefits has reached a historic high, in large part from the deep recession and meager recovery, but also because of the expansion of government programs over the years. (See a timeline on the history of government benefits programs here.)
Means-tested programs, designed to help the needy, accounted for the largest share of recipients last year. Some 34.2% of Americans lived in a household that received benefits such as food stamps, subsidized housing, cash welfare or Medicaid (the federal-state health care program for the poor).
High unemployment and increased reliance on government programs has also shrunk the nation’s share of taxpayers. Some 46.4% of households will pay no federal income tax this year, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. That’s up from 39.9% in 2007, the year the recession began.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.wsj.com …
One of the problems in trying to select a leader for any large organization or institution is the tendency to start out looking for Superman, passing up many good people who fail to meet that standard, and eventually ending up settling for a warm body.
Some Republicans seem to be longing for another Ronald Reagan. Good luck on that one, unless you are prepared to wait for several generations. Moreover, even Ronald Reagan himself did not always act like Ronald Reagan.
The current outbreak of “gotcha” attacks on Texas Governor Rick Perry show one of the other pitfalls for those who are trying to pick a national leader. The three big sound-bite issues used against him during the TV “debates” have involved Social Security, immigration and a vaccine against cervical cancer.
Where these three issues have been discussed at length, whether in a few media accounts or in Governor Perry’s own more extended discussions in an interview on Sean Hannity‘s program, his position was far more reasonable than it appeared to be in either his opponents’ sound bites or even in his own abbreviated accounts during the limited time available in the TV “debate” format.
On Social Security, Governor Perry was not only right to call it a “Ponzi scheme,” but was also right to point out that this did not mean welshing on the government’s obligation to continue paying retirees what they had been promised.
Even those of us who still disagree with particular decisions made by Governor Perry can see some of those decisions as simply the errors of a decent man who realized that he was faced not with a theory but with a situation.
For example, the ability to save young people from cervical cancer with a stroke of a pen was a temptation that any decent and humane individual would find hard to resist, even if Governor Perry himself now admits to second thoughts about how it was done.
Many of us can agree with Congresswoman Michele Bachmann‘s contention that it should have been done differently. But it reflects no credit on her to have tried to scare people with claims about the dangers of vaccination. Such scares have already cost the lives of children who have died on both sides of the Atlantic from diseases that vaccination would have prevented.
The biggest mischaracterization of Governor Perry’s position has been on immigration. The fact that he has more confidence in putting “boots on the ground” along the border, instead of relying on a fence that can be climbed over or tunneled under where there is no one around, is a logistical judgment, not a question of being against border control.
Texas Rangers have already been put along the border to guard the border where the federal government has failed to guard it. Former Senator Rick Santorum‘s sound-bite attempts to paint Governor Perry as soft on border control have apparently been politically successful, judging by polls. But his repeated interrupting of Perry’s presentation of his case during the recent debate is the kind of cheap political trick that contributes nothing to public understanding and much to public misunderstanding.
Those of us who disagree with Governor Perry’s decision to allow the children of illegal immigrants to attend the state colleges and universities, under the same terms as Texas citizens, need at least to understand what his options were. These were children who were here only because of their parents’ decisions and who had graduated from a Texas high school.
Governor Perry saw the issue as whether these children should now be allowed to continue their education, and become self-supporting taxpayers, or whether Texas would be better off with a higher risk of those young people becoming dependents or worse. I still see Governor Perry’s decision as an error, but the kind of error that a decent and humane individual would be tempted to make.
I have far more questions about those who would blow this error up into something that it is not. Error-free leaders don’t exist — and we don’t want to end up settling for a warm body.
Ultimately, this is not about Governor Perry. It is about a process that can destroy any potential leader, even when the country needs a new leader with a character that the “gotcha” attackers demonstrate they do not have.
The presidential debates are looking more like symptoms of our problems than they do like part of the solution. Maximum style, minimum substance. Focus on sizzle, forget about the steak.
These events are supposed to be about quality information, raising the bar, and producing a thoughtful, informed electorate. But they are being produced to provide entertainment, and we are barely getting that.
Technology doesn’t take the place of substance. YouTube and real-time polling are not substitutes for thoughtful, provocative questioning.
Can it really be, after all the heat he has taken on Social Security, that Rick Perry was not pushed on how specifically how he would reform it?
Can it be, as expert after expert has laid out the long list of failures of Romneycare in Massachusetts and its unquestionable similarities to Obamacare, that Mitt Romney was not called out on his sidestepping and denials?
Can it be that, on a day where the stock market in our country dropped 3.5 percent and in China by 5 percent, that candidates were not asked what they think is wrong with the global economy?
Can it be that, when many experts agree that government meddling in housing and mortgages was central to the recent financial collapse, there has not been a single question on why Fannie and Freddie are still standing, propped up by government, and untouched?
Why, when everyone knows that Rick Santorum is a social conservative, would the question on “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the military be directed at him? His answer was a surprise to no one. Why wasn’t Romney the one questioned on this?
Why, instead of wasting time on stupid questions like “Who on this stage would you choose as your vice president?” would the question not be asked “Who is your favorite justice on the Supreme Court”?
Both Romney and Michele Bachmann have said they will repeal Obamacare on day one. Shouldn’t someone ask what happens on day two? What would they do to fix our health care system, which clearly has problems?
With all the focus on Social Security, policy experts generally agree that the problems of Medicare are much bigger and more complex. Yet, there has not been a single question about how to reform Medicare.
But perhaps even more fundamentally, the cable sponsors of these events have failed grotesquely to bring out the fault lines that divide these Republican candidates and the Republican Party.
Where are these candidates on Roe v. Wade and the role of law in protecting unborn lives?
Where are these candidates on preservation on the integrity of traditional marriage?
With all the talk about states’ rights, why are there no questions about the appropriateness of a federal court overturning a popular vote in the state of California — Proposition 8 — to preserve the traditional definition of marriage in their state?
Or the denial of the District of Columbia government to even allow a vote of its residents on this issue before declaring same-sex marriage legal?
Does the collapse of the traditional family in America — something undeniably happening as we rapidly approach having half of our children born to unwed mothers — even matter? Should candidates not be forced to weigh in on this?
The downward spiral into an exclusively technocratic discussion about the economy — like we’re all laboratory mice in a box with politicians pushing the buttons — obfuscates key differences between these Republican candidates and the two parties.
It is a symptom of the big problems of our country that we appear incapable of having presidential debates with serious questions.
Considering the fact that no real votes will be cast until next year and considering the fact that the polls are constantly changing, shouldn’t all of the candidates participating in the Republican debates be given roughly the same amount of time to talk? After all, what kind of a “debate” is it when certain candidates are given double (or sometimes even triple) the amount of talking time? Why is it that Rick Perry and Mitt Romney have been getting about twice as much talking time as the other candidates during the Republican debates? It is amazing that more people are not calling into question the credibility of these “debates”. Whether you support one of the Republican candidates or not, we should all be able to agree that one of the goals for these debates should be to treat the candidates as fairly and evenly as possible. Unfortunately, as the numbers you are about to see indicate, that is definitely not happening.
According to blogger Wes Hemings, the following is how much talking time each candidate received during the last Republican debate….MORE…..
By Lucy Madison
Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz says it makes no difference which Republican presidential candidate scores the nomination for 2012 – because they all share extreme-right views that will not prevail over President Obama.
Wasserman Schultz, speaking in an appearance on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” said Sunday that any Republican candidate in the field would pose a “very stark contrast” when matched up against Mr. Obama in the 2012 election, particularly on issues like Social Security, immigration reform and Medicare.
“It doesn’t much matter which one of the Republicans gets nominated because they’re all the same,” the Florida Democrat said. “They are all embracing and bear-hugging the Tea Party. Moving to the right – they can’t move to the right far enough.
“They all favor privatizing Social Security, which would pull the safety net out from under our seniors, and favor ending Medicare as we know it… They all are wrong on immigration reform when it comes to Hispanics in the states,” she continued.
Addressing Republican National Committee chair Reince Priebus, who also appeared on the show. the Florida Congresswoman said, “My state will go in the win column for President Obama again because the extremists in the Tea Party control your party.”
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com …
YO, AMERICAN BLOGGERS! THE TIME FOR THE SLUMBERING GIANT TO AWAKEN IS LONG OVERDUE.
1984+PLUS IS UPON US!
AMERICAN BLOGGERS: AWAKEN THE BIG DUMMY -- DO IT NOW! !!!!!
NO AINOs!!!!! "REAL" AMERICANS ONLY!
'FAIR USE' EXCERPTS
(BACK.LINKED TO SOURCE)
THE "OTHER" GUNNY G BLOG!
Stang: The GOP, Red From The Start....
Thomas Dilorenzo...Our Republic Cannot Be Restored Until GOP Destroyed!
COMMIE CHICAGO~ Al Benson
MAD AS HELL AND...
FOOD FOR THOUGHT - Chuck Baldwin Archive
- BREAKING: Senate Judiciary Committee Passes ‘Gang of 8′ Amnesty Bill to Full Senate (13-5 vote)… “This is a shameful day for the U.S Senate.”
- Congress and ‘the people’ can do nothing to Obama UNLESS THEY DECIDE TO « The Roth Show… “The squeeze is on and the deathly blue is flowing in the water all around us. We are a nation, which has been boldly attacked in plain sight as Hitler did with Germany. More and more of us can feel it and know we are dying as Obama and his goons light another cigarette and roll out more tentacles of death and lies.”
- Monsanto Declares a Sneaky Social Media War Against Protesters
- The Great Unifier Didn’t Need to be Told About the IRS Targeting Conservatives… “…they’re positioning Obama as he didn’t know and that the higher-ups in the White House knew all the way up to his chief of staff, but nobody told him. They wanted him to not know. They wanted him to have plausible deniability. “
- Abolish the IRS (and the Income Tax With It)… “No dissenter can ever rest assured he is safe from the arbitrary power of the IRS.”
- The Obama Objective: To Control The News… “The Obama political team at the White House has always prided itself on its media savvy. After all, they got a candidate with an otherwise unsalable socialist past elected on a campaign that sold his personality, not his platform.”
- Tax-exempt charity of Obama’s half-brother is a fraud
- The tea party and the politics of paranoia Irony Alert
- “Big Sis” for president? EMILY’s List, Washington Post promote Janet Napolitano in 2016
- Pressure Points: Government Paranoia
- Dr James Manning… Bloomberg’s NYC for the Rich and Famous Only – YouTube
- Comments ‹ NOW BLOG THIS! ~ GUNNY.G: AMERICAN ! — WordPress
- Dan Rather: "The GOP Has 'Damaged' Hillary For 2016" -WRONG, She Damaged Herself You FOOL
- Is this still America?….. “See, you have never experienced a free America. You have never experienced that “shining city on a hill” as Ronald Reagan so loved to describe America. Reagan knew THAT America. He had experienced that America. Many of America’s so-called senior citizens living today also remember that America. I do.”
- IRS went after 83-year-old Tea Party granny (survived WWII internment camp)
- Senate Betrays Constitution for Israel: Commitment to attack Iran | Veterans Today
- The Spectator President Pat Buchanan “The Barack Obama revealed to us in recent days is something rare in our history: a spectator president, clueless about what is going on in his own household, who reacts to revelations like some stunned bystander.”
- VIRGINIA GOP NOMINEE E.W. JACKSON CALLING FOR BLACK EXODUS FROM THE DEMOCRAT PARTY AND TO END THE SLAVISH DEVOTION
Blogs I Follow
- "To See the World in a Grain of Sand"
- sharia unveiled
- Freedom Is Just Another Word...
- PATRIOTS AND PAULIES (Politics & News)
- USA PSYOP VICTIM OF POG CIA DOJ DOD PATRIOT & SPACE PRESERVATION ACTS
- The Blogspaper
- 2nd Amendment, Shooting & Firearms Blog
- Personal Liberty Digest™
- The Firewall
- End Time Bible Prophecy
- The Grey Enigma
- Dregs of the Future
- Evil of indifference
- News You May Have Missed
- Gds44's Blog
- GUNNY G: "...THE PEOPLE WHO CAST THE VOTES DECIDE NOTHING. THE PEOPLE WHO COUNT THE VOTES DECIDE EVERYTHING" -Stalin
- GUNNY G UP: THE NEW GUNNY G BLOG, ETC. !
- The Mad Jewess
- NOW BLOG THIS! ~ GUNNY.G: AMERICAN !
- Jericho777's Blog
- The Bullshit Fighter
- Terrible Truth
- Alternative News Report
- GUNNY G: IN POLITICS, NOTHING HAPPENS BY ACCIDENT, BUT IS PLANNED. -FDR !!!!!
- GUNNY.G: ARE YA GOOD-N-P!SSED YET, PILGRIM?
BECAUSE THERE IS
A WAR ON FOR YOUR MIND
CLICK BUTTON ABOVE
FOR THE THINKING MAN!
Please Click Button Above
THE Gunny G BOOKMARKS/One-Click Posts/Articles--CLICK HERE!!!!! (Diigo)
Gunny G: COUP d’ETAT! ~ BUT WHO’s COUNTING?
THE NEW Gunny "G" SITE!
Gunny "G" @ NETWORK54.com
Gunny G: HISTORY, MILITARY, ETC.
MAD AS HELL - NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE!
LEST WE FORGET
"A CONSTITUTION OF GOVERNMENT ONCE CHANGED FROM FREEDOM, CAN NEVER BE RESTORED. LIBERTY, ONCE LOST, IS LOST FOREVER."
"I WOULD REMIND YOU THAT EXTREMISM IN THE DEFENSE OF LIBERTY IS NO VICE! AND LET ME REMIND YOU ALSO THAT MODERATION IN THE PURSUIT OF JUSTICE IS NO VIRTUE!"
~ BARRY GOLDWATER
WHY HAS THIS FLAG BEEN A WORLDWIDE SYMBOL OF OPPOSITION TO STATE TYRANNY?(CLICK-HERE!)
Blogs I Follow
- "To See the World in a Grain of Sand"
- sharia unveiled
- Freedom Is Just Another Word...
- PATRIOTS AND PAULIES (Politics & News)
- USA PSYOP VICTIM OF POG CIA DOJ DOD PATRIOT & SPACE PRESERVATION ACTS
- The Blogspaper
- 2nd Amendment, Shooting & Firearms Blog
- Personal Liberty Digest™
- The Firewall
- End Time Bible Prophecy
- The Grey Enigma
- Dregs of the Future
- Evil of indifference
- News You May Have Missed
- Gds44's Blog
- GUNNY G: "...THE PEOPLE WHO CAST THE VOTES DECIDE NOTHING. THE PEOPLE WHO COUNT THE VOTES DECIDE EVERYTHING" -Stalin