Just in case you forgot The Great Obama 2009 “Job Stimulus” Robbery Made Easy

252144_2193569715521_1135522739_32597499_1889525_n

 

February 15, 2009 © Michael G. Leventhal

BarackObamaWebPage.com

“Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things you couldn’t do before.”Thus spoketh White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in November, as Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats made preparations for robbing the American people under the guise of a “job stimulus package.”

In point of fact, the 850 page, $825 billion House legislation is anything but a job stimulus.” 85%of it is a wish list of special interest paybacks and “politically correct” subsidies for pet projects. It was pushed through by Obama being virtually unread by Democrats in Congress.

Almost 40% of it is earmarked to large urban states such as California and New York so they can continue retaining their armies of pampered, highly paid marginally productive government employees. These millions of government workers will continue receiving salary increases,bloated pensions and life long medical benefits that private sector employees can only dream about.

Almost 60 Billion Dollars more is earmarked to reward states for increasing their Welfare Rolls. It negates the 1996 bill that has taken millions off welfare, transforming them into productive citizens. Welfare reform is now a dead issue.

To create the illusion of increasing employment (at a cost of billions to the private sector taxpayer), government payrolls are to be bloated by the hiring of an additional 600,000 federal state and local civil servants.

Among the “smaller ticket items,” totally unrelated to job creation:

BEGINNING OF LIST:

1. $1 billion for Amtrak

2. $2 billion for child-care subsidies

3. $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts

4. $400 million for global-warming research

5. $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects related to global warming research

An enthusiastic Barack Hussein Obama has said this bill will make “dramatic investments to revive our flagging economy,” but that’s far from true. Some $30 billion, or less than 5% of the spending in the bill, is for fixing bridges or other highway projects. There’s another $40 billion for broadband and electric grid development, airports and clean water projects. While inefficient forcreating permanent jobs, it does have intrinsic worth. Thanks to Republicans who dug in, about $20 billion for business tax cuts. This is a very worthwhile stimulus.

Remember, that throughout modern history, jobs programs NEVER provided more than a temporary job stimulus. Only tax cuts have ever provided long term job creation

Special project spending will go to such things as renewable energy funding ($8 billion) or mass transit ($6 billion). The latter is designed to ensure during a time of increasing layoffs in the tax paying private sector, mass transit civil servants (who are paid with private sector taxpayer funds)will continue to receive raises and increases to their bloated pensions and medical benefits.These are municipal Union members, a hard core constituency of Obama and other Democrats.In New York City, a transit worker assigned to nothing more than sweeping floors, has a starting salary of $49,000.00 per year. They retire a fat pension after 20 years.

BACK TO OUR LIST:

6. $600 million more for the federal government to buy new cars

7. $7 billion for modernizing federal buildings and facilities

8. $150 million for the Smithsonian Institute

9. $252 billion in cash benefits for those who pay income taxes or don’t pay income taxes.

It’s for those who work or don’t work. It is even available to Illegal Aliens.

10. $81 billion for Medicaid

11. $20 billion for food stamps

12. An additional $83 billion for the earned income credit for people who don’t pay income

tax, including Illegal Aliens.

13. $54 billion will go to federal programs that the Office of Management and Budget or the

Government Accountability Office have already criticized as “ineffective” or unable to

pass basic financial audits.

14. $66 billion will go for “Education,” as a payoff to teachers unions. In this way, the parents

of children in their classes might be unemployed, but teachers are insured that no matter

what level of competency, their jobs, salary increases, pensions and lifelong medical care

is secure. If you think the intention here is to help kids learn, the House declares on page

257 that “No recipient… shall use such funds to provide financial assistance to students to attend private elementary or secondary schools.” This is a way to keep money from going to non-union teachers.

As Speaker Nancy Pelosi put it, “We won the election. We wrote the bill.” And the Republicans

might want to stand back and let Barack Hussein Obama and his band of thieves take full credit for the theft and results.

To create the illusion of increasing employment (at a cost of billions to the private sector taxpayer), government payrolls are to be bloated by the hiring of an additional 600,000 federal,state and local civil servants.

obama mansionObama’s Chicago Home

 

That filing cabinet is the closest thing to the “Social Security trust fund” that exists.

the forgotten onesMassive fraud on the part of our nation’s leaders, who have plundered every cent of the Social Security Trust Fund and the surplus that was specifically earmarked 1983 by President Regan for the retirement of the baby boomers.”future Presidents knew and took the money regardless.

Public-issue, marketable U.S. Treasury bonds are default-proof, and that is the kind of bonds that the Social Security surplus revenue was supposed to be invested in. If this had been done, Social Security would be in fine shape today.

* But, instead of using the surplus Social Security revenue to buy such bonds in the open market, the government chose to spend the money and issue IOUs to replace the spent money.*** These IOUs are non-marketable and could not be sold to anyone, even for a penny on the dollar. The government has the legal authority to declare these IOUs null and void.

Q:Hasn’t Social Security been receiving surplus revenue ever since the 1983 payroll tax hike? Isn’t there supposed to be approximately $2.5 trillion in the Social Security trust fund?

The answer to both questions is yes. But there is a problem. Every dollar of that surplus Social Security revenue has already been spent by the government.

In a 1960 ruling by the United States Supreme Court, the court ruled that nobody has a “contractual earned right” to Social Security benefits

 Some did not take the language seriously because they thought it was probably unconstitutional. However, in 1960, in the case of Fleming v. Nestor, the Supreme Court upheld the denial of benefits to Nestor, even though he had contributed to the program for 19 years and was already receiving benefits In its ruling, the Supreme Court established the principle that entitlement to Social Security benefits “is not a contractual right.”

Obama has proved he has no use for the elderly and Hillary has been heard to say some deeply offensive comments on America’s elderly. Obama Care was never about us, it is about power for the progressive Democrats as they speed to their Global Government.

**The ruling class Progressive Democrat elites have promised everything and delivered nothing but failure and economic slavery to the U.S. Government.

Best Answer – Chosen by Asker

Lyndon Johnson was the first President to use social security funds to balance the budget.

 

The next President to use social security funds to balance the budget was Bill Clinton

BILL CLINTON EXCITEDTechnically, social security has been “off budget” since 1990, but *Clinton included it in his budgets to reduce the deficit, to actually show a surplus in his last two years in office. *The surplus wasn’t real since the government ran a deficit without including the social security surplus. (That is why the national debt increased in those years, despite the fact that the budget was supposedly in surplus)

Government has chosen to use the SS payroll tax revenue as general revenue and has issued IOUs in the same amount as the amount of money spent. The IOUs are not real bonds. They are printed on a laser printer in an office of the Bureau of the Public Debt located in Parkersburg, WV. Once printed, the IOU documents are carried across the room and place in a fireproof filing cabinet. That filing cabinet is the closest thing to the “Social Security trust fund” that exists.

Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn warns. “We have stolen $2.6 trillion from it. We put paper money in there. The problem is, we spent the money – we didn’t just take it, we took it and spent it,”
“There’s no question that there’s an IOU in there,” Coburn said. “But our country’s borrowing $4 billion a day.

206165_453413278032501_108773658_n

 

 

 

The Culture of Death: The Assault on the elderly

large group we wont take it any moreThe Culture of Death: The Assault on the elderly.( History books will read that Lincoln freed the slaves and Obama enslaved the free.)

From Obamacare, and Death Panels by ray harvey

When it is the government, rather than private individuals through the open market, deciding what is or isn’t “unnecessary care,” and deciding what care to get “rid of,” then that by definition is government rationing. Government acts by compulsion. If government decides what is “necessary,” and grandma’s hip-replacement surgery is deemed “unnecessary” even if grandma wants the surgery, then grandma’s care has been rationed by the power of the state — no matter what words you use to describe it.

Here is what Barack Obama told the New York Times regarding his desire to control your health:  “The chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here. [Therefore] I think that there is going to have to be a conversation that is guided by doctors, scientists, ethicists. And then there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place.”

It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels. And Obama also said “that’s part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance”.

**Keep in mind that this unspeakable injustice would all be avoided if your inalienable right to your own life — and only your own life — were recognized as it should be.

In response to that despicable ideology, no less than Nat Hentoff — a civil libertarian about as far to the left as the socialist Noam Chomsky — wrote the following: “I was not intimidated during J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI hunt for reporters like me who criticized him. I railed against the Bush-Cheney war on the Bill of Rights without blinking. *But now I am finally scared of a White House administration. President Obama’s desired health care reform intends that a federal board (similar to the British model) — as in the Center for Health Outcomes Research and Evaluation in a current Democratic bill — decides whether your quality of life, regardless of your political party, merits government-controlled funds to keep you alive.

The members of that ultimate federal board will themselves not have examined or seen the patient in question. For another example of the growing, tumultuous resistance to “Dr. Obama,” particularly among seniors, there is a July 29 Washington,  Emanuel writes about rationing health care for older Americans that “allocation (of medical care) by age is not invidious discrimination.” (The Lancet, January 2009) He calls this form of rationing — which is fundamental to Obamacare goals — “the complete lives system.” 1996, he wrote that ***”services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed.”

Rationing is a basic part of Obama’s eventual master health care plan. Here is what Obama said in an April 28 New York Times interview (quoted in Washington Times July 9 editorial) in which he describes a government end-of-life services guide for the citizenry as we get to a certain age, or are in a certain grave condition. Our government will undertake, he says, a “very difficult democratic conversation” about how “the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care” costs.

Ezekiel J. Emanuel, Chief Heathcare Advisor to Obama and brother of Rahm Emanuel said.”Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely ‘lipstick’ cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change. Savings will require changing how doctors think about their patients. Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others.”

(comments) Here is what will happen first:

“…I’m sorry sir…we cannot schedule that appointment for you in November 2010 to have that melanoma removed because you have not undergone your mandatory annual counseling after age 65…oh, of course you are right. I know you are only 62, but they did move the age down again this year…we have an opening in three months with the counselors office…would you like that?”

This is fully expected, but It will not be the people you will be FORCED to talk to in order to receive your care, nor the intentional delays in care that will be the most insidiously evil facets of this. It will be the conversations like this one below that will become commonplace that ONLY BEGIN to illustrate what it is all about:

“…Hi Jan, how are you?  I heard your father is resisting counseling. It must be difficult, I know. There just seems to be so much of that lately. I know I am only 40 years old, but I don’t understand why people like your father are so opposed to this.

I went with my mother to her counseling session, and while she was angry because she was supposed to have another five years before she had to go but they moved the age down again, she went anyway. I thought she was really rude to the counseling agent, who was just a young woman only doing her job. Hm.

Someone told me they are only hiring young women as counselors now, because the men who were doing it just got angry too easily and shouted at people to just “sign the damned papers”. Hm. I tried to tell my mom why they have to do this, but she said they do it just to get rid of old people to save money.

The counseling agent gave my mom a copy of the book “Death is Joy”. I read it, and it makes a lot of sense to me. Of course, when I was going to school, we didn’t have to read it, but now they have required classes they take every year beginning in first grade.

Suzie is in third grade and is taking the course this year that deals with the chapter on keeping birth rates down, and Tommy is in his senior year where they cover the financial aspects of care for the elderly. He was so excited, he said that since they have implemented this national care program, the number of elderly people has dropped dramatically, so they can spend more money on programs such as monthly equality checks for the economically disadvantaged and reparations for the descendants of slaves. I think it is wonderful.

He asked me why so many elderly people are so selfish and refuse to accept counseling…I didn’t really have an answer for him. Hm. Now, don’t be defensive, I am not criticizing your parents.I am just saying, it is a problem.

They had an hour-long program on PBS about this the other night, and they were saying how the people who are being selfish about this and refusing to take advantage of early exit programs that pay cash to their children are being so self-centered because they grew up in a time where everyone was self-centered and were interested only in money. You know, they showed films from the days of the capitalists where there were people who had what they called ‘gas-guzzlers”, and they used to make so much more money than they needed to live comfortably, so many people were going without health care because they were taking all the money…”

Then, just wait until they pass legislation for a “Death Benefit” that will be paid to the families of elderly people. That will be the icing on the cake. It will be presented as a compassionate gesture to help the families with their grief, and will put at ease those people slated for “end of life” counseling. I can see the conversation on this as well:

COUNSELOR:  Thank you for coming in today, sir. Now, let’s see…you have high blood pressure, rheumatoid arthritis but more importantly, positive genetic tags for vascular/heart disease, Alzheimer’s, matricular degeneration and three types of cancer, prostate, esophageal and colon. Prostate and colon are very high. We see one of these two expressing itself in the next three years.

MEEr…really?

COUNSELOR:  Yes. This is all very scientifically based, and the results are incontrovertible. There is no mistake.

ME:  Ahhh…could I speak to a doctor about this?

COUNSELOR: I am afraid not, sir. The rules are physicians are for direct care only,   and nothing else. Federal Statue HCR23.1771-b mandates that I communicate this information to you, and inform you of the various options.

ME: But you don’t know anything about medicine! You are a clerk, nothing more! How can I discuss this issue with you?

COUNSELOR: Sir, I have taken all the courses coming through High School, and attended the Life Counseling University courses offered by the government   I graduated in the top half of my class. I do understand the issues here.

MEBut…but…

COUNSELORLook, sir. You are getting old, and are soon going to be a burden on society. You don’t have cancer right now, and can still think and get around, but for how long? You need to think about your children and their children. We offer a special financial compensation package that will help them bear the grief of your passing, to be paid out upon your death. With your approval, we emailed them an official forms packet before this meeting.

ME:  I approved that?

COUNSELOR  Well, yes sir. The electronic copy is right here with your  signature (TURNS SCREEN TO FACE ME).

ME:  I never signed that!

COUNSELOR: Sir, didn’t you read the codocil that was automatically added at the bottom of your government supplied Will and Last Testament session that we finished up your first End of Life session you had with us last year?

You did click the button that said “I approve all the changes” and you did use your voice authentication to say “I do approve”.

ME:  What! What is going on here? I…

COUNSELOR: Your two sons and your daughter who came in with you today have been in communication with our department on this.

(Smiles) I think it is great that the government approves time-off pay for employees to attend these End of Life meetings for their parents. I’ll call them in…

ME:  Hey!  I am not finished discus…

(DOOR OPENS, CHILDREN ENTER)

SON 1: Dad, I am so glad you signed up for the Early Exit Death Benefit. I was really behind on my tax payments for last year, and that will put me over the top…

ME:  You…what?

SON 2:Yeah, dad. Billy is graduating from high school, and we want to send him to a quality college, but we could never afford it. But now we might…thanks to you.

Daughter: Oh, Daddy (tears in her eyes) I know none of us live forever, and I will miss you so much, but this money will allow me to pay th license fees to the government so I can open my dream business! Without you…

ME: HEY! WTF is going on here? I am not “ready to die”, I feel pretty good, I could live for another twenty years! I didn’t sign that damned thing, they just threw all this stuff in front of me! This is effing stupid! (TURNS TO COUNSELOR) Look, I don’t know what kind of crap you set in motion, but undo it. I didn’t sign up for this.

COUNSELOR: (PRIGGISH, TIGHT LIPPED LOOK ON HIS FACE) Sir…you have already been scheduled for next year, and your family has been paid that benefit in advance as the law allows. We cannot undo it. See the text that you signed (TURNS SCREEN) states explicitly that this if final and cannot be remanded…

ME: (SMASHES SREEN WITH HAND) LOOK! I DON’T GIVE A RAT’S ASS IF YOU HAVE TO BURROW THROUGH THE WIRES BACK TO THE CENTRAL COMPUTER SYSTEM YOURSELF, USING YOUR SLIMEY PENCIL NECK AS A LEG TO DO IT SO YOU CAN UNDO THIS ROYAL F*CKUP ON YOUR PART…

COUNSELOR: (HAND CUPPED OVER SPEAKER, EYES ON ME, WHISPERING) We have a 22-22 in here…get in here right away… DAUGHTER: (WAILS) How could you be so selfish?

SON 1:Great. I might as well go down to the Tax Police right now to get fitted for the volunteer industry uniform…How am I going to tell Billy he can’t go to the Barack Obama University? How?

DOOR OPENS, BURLY UNION GUYS IN BLACK COVERALLS RUN UP TO ME AND TASE ME. ALL GOES BLACK

Emanuel has said installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely ‘lipstick’ cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change. Savings will require changing how doctors think about their patients. Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others.”

Democrats are generally slow on the uptake as they have been taught in their leftist schools to not use their minds and eyes and ears but rather to trust their loving government. One has but to study history to see the error of such blind trust in mankind as governments throughout history have murdered more innocent people than any given human institution.

Now they want to kill the elderly when they come to collect the money due them in their old age.

Agendized bureaucrats and their minions in the medical community do not possess an inherent right to hasten that journey because they view us as a drain on the financial coffers of the State, or because stupid men believe the populations of the nations are responsible for cyclic weather change and floods and droughts. And, by reducing the population of the United States we will somehow make the world a better place. The sole purpose for euthanizing the elderly is to reduce the drain on a bankrupt Social Security and Medicare system. The government of the United States not only stole the Social Security Trust Fund to finance the Progressive Democrats Welfare State, now they want to kill the elderly when they come to collect the money due them in their old age.

hillary-in-blue-hijab-300x205

Bill Clinton was so concerned about AIDS that on Nov. 12, 1993 as Hillary’s Health Security Act was in its death throes, he suggested that a provision be added to the bill mandating a one-time screening for AIDS be done on all US citizens. Clinton also proposed having the CDC require every citizen with full-blown AIDS to be confined to AIDS sanatoriums until they were no longer contagious, or until they died. The sanatoriums were to be situated in sparsely-populated areas of the country. Upon admission, patients would be required to sign living wills with euthanasia previsions that could be triggered by proxy when their healthcare providers deemed them to be “terminal.” The AIDS provision Clinton wanted to add to Hillarycare does not appear to be in Obamacare. However, the same federal Health Board that will be charged with the responsibility of doing the cost analysis on the merits of keeping the elderly alive versus denying them lifesaving procedures will also be responsible for preparing a cost analysis on the value of keeping terminally-ill AIDS victims alive on the public dime.It’s interesting to note that the gay and lesbian population actively campaigned for Clinton in 1992 and 1996.  Just as- the elderly—the primary target of the Obamacare Health Board—actively campaigned, and voted, for Barack Obama in 2008.               , And try to convince the gay and lesbian community that, if Hillarycare hadn’t failed, most of them would be spending their final days in an isolated AIDS sanatorium somewhere in the Badlands. And the blue-haired seniors in Florida and Arizona may find that their next flare-up of irritable bowel syndrome, or their next broken hip, might land them in a terminal care unit of their local hospital where those who linger while dying go to die, instead of sitting around bragging about their latest hospital adventure at the assisted living center.

Obama_1_nose_in_the_air_cropped  Obamacare, which supersede all current health options (including those offered by private carriers) enacted into law, your signing a living will that requires all extraneous means be used to prolong your life will not save, or prolong, your life for one minute if the Health Board rules that you have exhausted your “healthcare options.” The Health Board will hold the power of life and death over healthcare recipients who are construed to have either terminal or catastrophic illnesses, or, if they are victims of expensive chronic illnesses that historically drain financial resources without healing the patient, the Board will have the right to deny procedures or surgery even though they may enhance the quality of life of the patient

The 15-member Obama Health Board was created under HR 1, The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The board will gain its authority from HR 3200, The America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009. The board, which the legislation purports to be an advisory panel created to perform cost analysis of all phases of the stimulus plan is, in reality, a panel of physicians and healthcare providers whose role it will be to determine at what point it is no longer cost productive to sanction the use of taxpayer dollars to save the life of a patient who requires a surgical procedure, medical procedure or lifesaving medications to correct a medical malady that threatens the life of an elderly patient or someone with a catastrophic illness.

The American people—thanks to Hillary Clinton—now have a more complex understanding of how, by design, universal healthcare puts into place the foundation of regulations that will allow government to control not only the lives of the people, but their mobility as well. Universal healthcare provides government with the platform that will surreptitiously allow them to, ever so slowly, steal the liberty of the People under the guise of taking care of them.

Like Obamacare, Hillarycare also contained provisions to ration healthcare to the elderly and also to catastrophically-ill people whom statistics said would drain the finite resources of the public healthcare system and bankrupt it if caps were not placed on catastrophic care.The specific language that deals with the rationing of healthcare to the elderly found in The America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (which was drafted in part by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

Massive fraud on the part of our nation’s leaders, who have plundered every cent of the Social Security Trust Fund

Massive fraud on the part of our nation’s leaders, who have plundered every cent of the Social Security Trust Fund and the surplus that was specifically earmarked 1983 by President Regan for the retirement of the baby boomers.”future Presidents knew and took the money regardless.
Public-issue, marketable U.S. Treasury bonds are default-proof, and that is the kind of bonds that the Social Security surplus revenue was supposed to be invested in. If this had been done, Social Security would be in fine shape today. But, instead of using the surplus Social Security revenue to buy such bonds in the open market,** the government chose to spend the money and issue IOUs to replace the spent money.*** These IOUs are non-marketable and could not be sold to anyone, even for a penny on the dollar. The government has the legal authority to declare these IOUs null and void.
Hasn’t Social Security been receiving surplus revenue ever since the 1983 payroll tax hike? Isn’t there supposed to be approximately $2.5 trillion in the Social Security trust fund? The answer to both questions is yes. But there is a problem. Every dollar of that surplus Social Security revenue has already been spent by the government.In a 1960 ruling by the United States Supreme Court, the court ruled that nobody has a “contractual earned right“ to Social Security benefits.
some did not take the language seriously because they thought it was probably unconstitutional. However, in 1960, in the case of Fleming v. Nestor, the Supreme Court upheld the denial of benefits to Nestor, even though he had contributed to the program for 19 years and was already receiving benefits In its ruling, the Supreme Court established the principle that entitlement to Social Security benefits “is not a contractual right.”
Obama has proved he has no use for the elderly and Hillary has been heard to say some deeply offensive comments on America’s elderly. Obama Care was never about us,it is about power for the progressive Democrats.as they speed to their Global Government.
The ruling class Progressive Democrat elites a have promised everything and delivered nothing but failure and economic slavery to our bloated leviathan called the U.S. Government

USA traitors have created the Social Security Totalization schemes

by Mark W Lowry

Carter ,Bush1, Bush2, and Obama have all worked to create a One World Government.

Did anyone ask Americans if they wanted a Global Government??? Carter was first President to sign totalization agreement in 1978 and future Globalist Presidents have secretly turned our country over to it. Our corrupt traitor elected officials are blaming hardworking Mainstream American Citizens for the Social Security Insurance trust going bust. The tragic destruction of the USA is the result of global government funding by our government and is not the responsibility of its citizens. The traitors need to take credit for their hard work to create the global government under control of the international moneyed families and their closely held global corporations.

That is what has bankrupted USA Social Security. The lie about a decrease in USA workers is a lie. Older workers are working much longer now because Social Security Benefits are not enough to live on. The elderly are taking jobs the teens used to take.

The illegals sit on their —  and draw the money. Many of them in the nation they came from. They only have to be here for a year and half to get benefits sent to Mexico (  totalization agreement with Mexico)   or any other country with a totalization agreement and pick up their dependent families as beneficiaries too. Chain migration, and the preposterous anchor babies of foreign citizens along with tourist-birth babies that provide citizenship status and Social Security benefits to people around the world under Totalization agreements has destroyed the USA financially, socially and legally.

The goose that laid the golden egg for multinationals is dying an agonizing death. There is no blood left in the USA turnip. Totalization agreements designed to provide multinationals with more profit are failures for the USA

Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:43 AM Subject: $2 trillion paid to foreigners in USA not discussed in pseudo debt debate. Additional global governance $trillions costs not discussed.To: The massive expense of welfare payments to illegal foreign mercenaries on our soil is the key to our indebtedness. USA traitors have created the Social Security Totalization schemes where we pay for Social Security Benefits now for workers from 21 nations.

We also pay for most of Mexico’s Social Security benefits. The annual expense was only $2.6 billion in 2002 to a reported 418,000 foreign beneficiaries outside the USA. Ten years later that amount sent to foreign nations must be well over $3 trillion a year.

The annual Federal debt is $14 trillion. There is a minimum federal expenditure of $2 trillion for all federal expenses related to housing, feeding, and protecting illegals and “legal” foreign citizens in the USA. Some comes from pseudo refugee programs and other open door programs that permit over 4 million people to enter the country each year legally. Another 4 million or so enter illegally.

The USA is permitting an invasion of over 8 million people each year to assure our nation is demographically destroyed. This enormous growth in illegal and legal residents as well as foreign citizens who are now provided USA welfare and Social Security benefits can not be sustained under any situation. The growth in beneficiaries is documented here: http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/chartbooks/disability_trends/sect01.html Note these numbers only reflect the primary beneficiaries and not all the dependent beneficiaries. For instance, one eligible illegal may have 10 children getting benefits. The 56 million number of beneficiaries now is a low estimate but reflects a 100 percent increase since 1970 when Carter started the Totalization Agreements. Cost increases after the 1983 Reagan Amnesty were dramatic.

By Marti Dinerstein September 2004

 

Examining a Lopsided Agreement with Mexico

By Marti Dinerstein

September 2004

 Since the late 1970s, the United States has entered into a series of bilateral “totalization” agreements that coordinate the U.S. Social Security program with the comparable programs of other countries. To date, 20 such agreements are in force. They have been financially beneficial to U.S. workers and their employers and the associated social security payments to foreign nationals have been reasonable. As such, totalization agreements have been non-controversial. Congress has never voted to disapprove one.

But the proposed totalization agreement with Mexico is profoundly different from prior agreements in four important ways:

1. One-sided.

Unlike the 20 existing agreements, a totalization agreement with Mexico would be one-sided. Its beneficial effects to U.S. workers would be miniscule compared to those received by potentially millions of Mexicans. It is expected that the totalization agreement with Mexico would:

Provide only modest tax savings for American workers and their employers compared to other totalization agreements.

Entice Mexicans to remain in the United States for the 10 years it takes to vest for U.S. Social Security (versus 24 in Mexico) in order to maximize their retirement income. The United States pays out far more to low-wage workers than they contribute to the system. In contrast, Mexico only pays out what was contributed, plus accrued interest.

Permit Mexicans to return home and have their spouses and dependents receive U.S. Social Security benefits they would not have been entitled to without a totalization agreement.

Permit partial Social Security benefits to be paid to those who worked in the United States as little as 18 months (six quarters).

Eventually compel the United States to pay out billions in retirement benefits to Mexicans for credits they acquired while using fraudulent Social Security numbers prior to obtaining legal status.

Lure even more Mexicans into the United States illegally in the hopes they would obtain amnesty, thereby making themselves and their families eligible to receive U.S. Social Security benefits once the worker returned to Mexico and reached retirement age.

2. Perversion of original concept.

The anticipated totalization agreement with Mexico is a perversion of prior agreements, calling into question the appropriateness of such a pact. The norm in existing bilateral totalization agreements assumes employees of corporations are asked by their employers to transfer to the other country for a specified period of time. Employees and employers in both countries have been contributing to their respective social security systems. The dual objectives of existing totalization agreements were to secure tax savings for the employees and employers of both nations by eliminating double taxation and to guarantee an old age pension to those who contributed to both social security systems by “totalizing” the years worked in both countries. Employees legally enter the partner nation with documents verifying they are authorized to work. Virtually all of the existing 20 totalization agreements are with developed nations whose social security retirement benefits are at parity with those in the United States, providing no incentive to stay and vest for U.S. social security.

In contrast, most Mexican workers entered the United States illegally, were not affiliated with a corporation, previously lived in poverty, and paid no social security taxes in Mexico. There is no benefit parity for American workers in Mexico as it takes more than twice as long to vest for Mexican social security (24 years vs. 10 years in United States) and the benefits are far less generous than those in the United States.

3. Most Mexicans here illegally. None of the existing totalization countries accounts for even 1 percent of the U.S. illegal population and jointly comprise only 4 percent of the total number of illegals. In contrast, over half of the Mexicans living in the United States are illegal aliens. The size of the illegal population from Mexico more than doubled in the last decade and now accounts for 69 percent of the U.S. illegal population. (1974)To adopt a totalization agreement with Mexico would put the United States in the ludicrous position of offering Social Security benefits to potentially millions of Mexican workers who showed contempt for our laws by illegally crossing our border and by fraudulently obtaining the Social Security numbers (SSNs) needed to qualify for old age and disability benefits.

4. Huge costs.

It is extremely difficult to estimate the potential long-term drain of a Mexican totalization agreement on the U.S. Social Security trust fund, but it has the potential to dwarf all the other agreements combined. Serious questions have been raised about the assumptions made by the Social Security Administration (SSA) and the rigor of its analysis. Inexplicably, SSA projected its estimates based on the totalization experience with Canada. The estimated number of Canadians living in the United States is 820,000 (vs. 9.2 million Mexicans).(1974) Given the fact that a totalization agreement would cover not just Mexican workers but also their spouses and dependents, it is highly likely that over time, potentially millions of people would receive U.S. Social Security benefits and the cost would be in the billions of dollars.

We dont have to take it anymore. The Obama election says “yes you do”.

 Thousands of pages of regulations smiley-shocked028

obamacare thousands of pages  2,700 page Healthcare Reform Bill. …

With these thousands of pages of regulations, there won’t be a single area of our lives that’s not regulated.

The sole purpose for euthanizing the elderly is to reduce the drain on a bankrupt Social Security and Medicare system.

The government of the United States not only stole the Social Security Trust Fund to finance the Welfare State, now they want to kill the elderly when they come to collect the money due them in their old age.

Agendized bureaucrats and their minions in the medical community do not possess an inherent right to hasten that journey because they view us as a drain on the financial coffers of the State or because stupid men believe the populations of the nations are responsible for cyclic weather change Agendized bureaucrats and their minions in the medical community do not possess an inherent right to hasten that journey because they view us as a drain on the financial coffers of the State, or because stupid men believe the populations of the nations are responsible for cyclic weather change and floods and droughts. And, by reducing the population of the United States we will somehow make the world a better place.

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Thursday, June 28, 2012

If Britain’s socialist healthcare system is a benchmark for what we can expect from Obamacare, hundreds of thousands of elderly patients face being euthanized through “assisted death” techniques designed to cut costs.

The idea that “death panels” would be introduced through Obamacare as a means of rationing healthcare was discussed during an Aspen Institute conference in 2010 when Bill Gates argued that money should not be spent on treating the elderly.

During a question and answer session, Gates implied that elderly patients undergoing expensive health care treatments should be killed and the money spent elsewhere.

Gates said there was a “lack of willingness” to consider the question of choosing between “spending a million dollars on that last three months of life for that patient” or laying off ten teachers.

“But that’s called the death panel and you’re not supposed to have that discussion,” added Gates.

However, Britain’s socialist healthcare system under the NHS has gone light years beyond death panels and actually introduced a method of “care” that actually has the intended effect of euthanizing patients.

In a recent exposé, Patrick Pullicino, a consultant neurologist for East Kent Hospitals and professor of clinical neurosciences at the University of Kent, revealed that of the 450,000 patients who die annually under the care of the NHS, 130,000 of them were on the Liverpool Care Pathway.

Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP) is a process whereby a doctor identifies a patient who is likely to die and that patient is then heavily sedated while treatment is withdrawn, “including the provision of water and nourishment by tube.”

“If we accept the Liverpool Care Pathway we accept that euthanasia is part of the standard way of dying as it is now associated with 29 per cent of NHS deaths,” Pullicino

You Hillary and you Obama are heinous for pretending to care for what was called our finest generation.And advising euthanizing  our elderly. instead of care and all the morphine progressives say the can have.!!! I believe You Progressives are monsters.

I wonder how this will work when George Soros goes in Hospital (no care and all the Morphine he needs) I doubt it.Its easier to Euthenize others whom you dont know isnt it Hillary?large group we wont take it any more

Smoking Gun: Obama Admits He Cut Billions from Medicare to Fund Obamacare

Townhall.com having fun witha clip of David Axelrod angrily denouncing the fact that President Obama gutted Medicare by $700 Billion in order to partially pay for a brand new entitlement program.Now let’s take a look at a video of Obama in a video saying he would veto anything that would remove his $700 Billion cuts from medicare. Author want’s to make sure it achieves an appropriate level of saturation.( From ABC News)

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/08/15/video_obama_admits_he_cut_billions_from_medicare_to_fund_obamacare

**In an interview with Jake Tapper of ABC News Obama says that one third of the funding for his health care law will come from cuts to medicare. TAPPER: “One of the concerns about health care and how you pay for it — one third of the funding comes from cuts to Medicare.”

BARACK OBAMA: “Right.”

TAPPER: “A lot of times, as you know, what happens in Congress is somebody will do something bold and then Congress, close to election season, will undo it.”

OBAMA: “Right.”

TAPPER: “You saw that with the ‘doc fix’.”

OBAMA: “Right.”

TAPPER ****”Are you willing to pledge that whatever cuts in Medicare are being made to fund health insurance, one third of it, that you will veto anything that tries to undo that?

*OBAMA:Yes. I actually have said that it is important for us to make sure this thing is deficit neutral, without tricks. I said I wouldn’t sign a bill that didn’t meet that criteria

Brace yourselves, Floridians — I imagine you’re going to see this exchange a quite a lot on your television screens over the next few months. Here we have Obama nonchalantly confirming that his unaffordable and unpopular healthcare transformation relied on hundreds of billions of dollars in Medicare cuts. He wasn’t slashing $700 Billion out of (current, not future) Medicare to help that program remain solvent, mind you; he was, er, “re-allocating” that money to help construct a brand new entitlement scheme. The purpose of this eye-popping transfer of dollars, he says, was to ensure that Obamacare would not add a dime to the deficit. In the clip, he affirms that he would have vetoed any bill that added to the deficit

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/08/15/video_obama_admits_he_cut_billions_from_medicare_to_fund_obamacare