Screwing our retirees is HOW WE ROLL

Screwing our retirees is HOW WE ROLL

Monday, September 5, 2011

Readers bonus

A copy of my paid subscription of Gerald Celente's TRENDS JOURNAL

1 comment:

Al M said...

Seventy-eight million baby boomers were reaching retirement
age, many without enough to retire on, all facing
mounting health care costs … all while the availability and
quality of medical services declined.
With these facts in front of them, and with everyone
except the top 10 percent of the population down the tubes
or feeling the squeeze, the Republicans launched an all-out
campaign to alienate the other 90 percent.
To balance the budget, cuts had to be made and national
debt levels reduced.
The Republican final solution was to reduce and/or
eliminate “entitlements” – a word that had taken on a pejorative
meaning. How dare people who’ve worked all their
lives, acted responsibly and paid their taxes, feel entitled to
anything from their government? Health care, elder care …
Republicans were running on a “we don’t care” platform.
And, if they got their way, any care the people did receive
would be less than what they got before and would come
from the private sector; the health industry that gives generous
campaign contributions (i.e., bribes and payoffs) to
politicians for passing legislation that will further enrich
them.

Another main Republican plank was to reform Social
Security. Under a complex partial privatization plan crafted
by Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan (Roadmap For
America’s Future), Social Security and Medicare benefits
would be cut, cost-of-living increases trimmed, and the retirement
age for those under 55 would be “modernized” to
eventually reach 70. At the same time, the Social Security
agency itself would be significantly downsized to a level of predictable inefficiency.
The end result of their
“Roadmap” would be to steer
as much tax money as possible
away from the public sector and
into the private sector. It was passionately held GOP Gospel
that corporations operated more efficiently than government
bureaucracy. While perhaps attractive in principle,
in practice there was ample evidence demonstrating that
privatization had its limits. (“Private Prisons Found to Offer
Little in Savings,” NYT, 18 May 2011)