…The expected cuts to #RentalAssistance reflect #Trump’s broader desire to *shrink the footprint of government & its reach into Americans’ lives* [more like kill the #poor, party with the #rich, eradicate the middle], a project that includes sharp #cuts to federal #antipoverty programs viewed as *too generous or wasteful*.
(continued from previous post on thread)
This topic is very apropos in the current market. We may be about to enter another recession, perhaps a depression. 401K's are down. So the claim that we could do better investing on our own is uncertain, but is again certainly going to test a lot of ordinary citizens, postponing their ability to retire.
And I emphasize that the choice f when to retire is not just a whim. Even ignoring age discrimination, age wears on a person, and some people do physical jobs (read: ACTUAL hard work, as opposed to metaphorically hard work done by rich executives) that leave them depleted. So delayed retirement is not just an inconvenience, it is in some cases torture and in some cases impossible.
But even as we are potentially entering a depression, the billionaires are salivating. They are looking forward to "buying low". They're treating this roller coaster as a buying opportunity. They plan to get rich on this depression. Even as others suffer and probably many die. They are gleeful.
This is the time when Social Security should be doubling down and assuring people it will increase benefits to cover rising costs (although it wouldn't be terrible if we just impeached the President who's causing those rising costs artificially with tariffs that really no sane business people think are a good idea). Because Social Security is again a contract with the population about what our priority is. And if we need more money, we should be bumping the tax on those gleeful about what a great buying opportunity this is.
They, the rich, would probably whine that this singles them out. That people are jealous. No one should stand for such rhetoric. The ones making the noise did not get their power by dealing honorably with us citizens. This is not jealousy speaking, it is a desire for justice. Be glad I'm not suggesting (as some are) that we just eat the rich and be done with it. Proper taxation of accumulated wealth (not just income) works for me.
No one needs that much money anyway. It's CLEAR from their observed behavior that one can only buy so many gold toilet seats before one starts to wonder what the point of excess riches is, and really it seems the only thing that one can find to spend such wealth on is buying governments. And then, apparently, running them badly and cruelly. No, I'm not going to feel sorry about suggesting taxation.
2/2 (probably the end)
I often hear people say that Social Security should be eliminated, that we'd do better with our own 401K's.
There are a lot of problems with that argument.
First, it turns us into gamblers. The argument is that people could invest their money better. Maybe. But they can also invest their money worse. So it's a very uneven policy. And that is ultimately cruel. That's just gambling, and experience shows that gamblers are often a lot more confident than is warranted.
The sociopaths among us often say, "Too bad. Individuals should take responsibility for their lack of saving. It's not my fault that some people don't plan." Those same people, though, are telling us that we should eliminate the minimum wage, that if the market doesn't want to pay someone enough to even live, why should it have to. So exactly where is the savings supposed to come from? On the one side, people work hard for hardly any money. On the other side, they're told their failure to save is a moral failing. Where is the discussion of moral failing in having more money than God and still being unwilling to help raise people out of poverty? That seems the biggest moral failing.
Moreover, a lot of what makes the difference in who succeeds or fails is one's parents. Dynastic fortunes. Better schools. Better connections. Sometimes even just better health or better clothing. The narrative is spun that the rich worked hard for their money, but in my experience, poor people work much harder for the scraps they are thrown than rich people ever do, and the notion of "meritocracy" is nonsense because the people who get ahead are just those who get to start ahead of the others.
But while on the topic of morality, let's also look at the structure of Social Security itself. People like to compare it to a 401K, but it's not like that. It's not a bank account. It's a very different beast.
As an example, you become suddenly unable to work, it kicks in right away, even if you didn't pay for a long time. That's very different than a bank account. If you live a long time, it continues to pay you.
There may be issues with cost of living adjustments, but the only reason we don't do those more often is that the aforementioned rich sociopaths insist it's better to give tax breaks to the wealthy. They'll tell you that Social Security is intended only to supplement your retirement, not to be the full amount, and yet they'll back penalties for trying to draw money out of Social Security if you're also getting other income. That's not really how supplements work, and it's a disincentive to additional work.
But my point is that the contract is not for a specific quantity of money. It is a social contract, that you pay into it while you're able and you are paid when you're not able. We could do better on the getting paid part, but the point is for it to keep you from falling into poverty, to add dignity.
It's worth noting that Social Security did not arise in a vacuum. While people COULD invest their money, a lot of people didn't, or else were losers in that gambling. Before Social Security, in the 1930s, the elderly poverty rate in the depression was something like 70%. So there is an objective way to understand what this did for the public. Some have called it the most successful anti-poverty program in the history of the US.
And if we were really worried that investing in the market were a better bet, we could arrange for the Social Security trust fund to do that. That's just an implementation detail and has nothing to do with the overall social promise. If DOGE wanted to do something HELPFUL, instead of aggressively dismantling all of the US government's ability to provide value to the public, they could analyze whether there are better ways to manage the funds.
But, ultimately, government is not a business and social security is not a profit & loss center, even if it's popular for some who don't like it to portray it that way. It mostly pays for itself, but from a moral point of view, its real purpose is to say that we as a society need to have a commitment to our sick and elderly, to assure they are taken care of, BEFORE we declare a profit. If we as a nation are able to give tax breaks to rich citizens only by cutting social programs, then the rich are preying on the poor. The health and welfare of all citizens is our first priority as a nation. We should not be preferencing the already-preferenced before we have attended to that.
1/2 (continued next post)
#ElonMusk #Trump #GOP are STEALING OUR MONEY
"Republicans and their morbidly rich donors have hated #SocialSecurity ever since it was first created in 1935. They’ve called it everything from communism to socialism to a Ponzi scheme, which Musk just called it this week ('the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time,' no less). In fact, it has been the most successful #antipoverty program in the history of America, one now emulated by virtually every #democracy in the world."
https://newrepublic.com/article/192404/trump-musk-destroy-social-security-started
Robert Bolton, Puritan minister, writes on greed, which grow like gangrene on the heart, squelching the fear & grace of God. It’s a fire that burns any natural affection to family, friends, acquaintances, even beasts.
Do we treat this with equal seriousness today; or could we even find more preachers who preach against preaching against greed?
How can you practice fear of God and affection to kindred, friends, and beasts today?
#Biden’s… #budget lays out broad policy planks that many leading #liberals have pushed him to embrace….W/ #Republicans in control of the #House, the proposals stand little chance of becoming #law, but they set the stage for a likely rematch w/ #Trump…. In a $7.2T budget for fiscal yr 2025, Biden would have #Congress offer universal #prekindergarten #education, provide 12 wks of #PaidFamilyLeave & #MedicalLeave, expand #AntiPoverty #TaxCredits & create a new #tax break for first-time #HomeBuyers.
Hello, #intro time I guess.
First, worth saying I'm actually very happy to be here rather than the bird place. First time I've felt some genuine excitement and optimism about anything tech related in ages.
Anyway, I'm a lawyer, dad, greeny, lefty. Generally post about #humanrights #equality #scotland #antipoverty #scifi #puns and whatever else takes my fancy.
