House of Paine

let the braying begin

god love those hee haw queens 
at the nueva times .....



=====================================


 this iz from 

the board of famous editors ;

-----------------------------------------


" Even before the debate 
has truly begun
 over the centerpiece 
of President Bush's
 second-term domestic agenda 
 creating private retirement accounts 
within Social Security 
 White House and Congressional budget leaders
 have been floating 
the idea that it won't require 
a major increase 
in the federal budget deficit. 

This is dangerously misguided.


 Unwilling to raise taxes,
 Congress and the administration 
will have to borrow well over $1 trillion
 to turn the president's wish into reality.


---wait a minute
what are they worried about?
the present system is heavily in surplus
and funding a chunk ofthe federal deficit

putting this money in a no spend account
changes nothing 
at worst it raises the t rate 
get me at worst   
cause the capitive investment 
in the trsut funds 
is now competed for 
            against other securities ------------

For a country 
that already needs to borrow 
$2 billion a day 
just to stay afloat

---------thats our foreign account
i love the conflation of the fedreal deficit
 with the payments deficit ----
 
that gargantuan price tag 
for privatization 
is one reason it's a bad idea

--- see the shell game ?---------

 It is far from the only reason,
 and arguably not even the main one.

-------thank god sense its no reason at all -----------


 Yesterday, for instance, 
the president's top economist
 said privatization 
would very likely lead 
to major benefit cuts,

--obviously as private account income goes up 
the public payments receed ------------

 which could be devastating
 for people who lost money 
in their private accounts. 

------okay thats true 
especially if the allowable market investments
 are not structured 
ala chile for example ---------------

For now, however, 
the cost issue is moving
 to center stage in Washington.

---------- ok so you got nothin else ?----------

 It is imperative to refute 
the suggestion 
that private accounts would somehow,
 magically, pay for themselves. 

The issue is how to pay full benefits
 to people at or near retirement 
if Social Security money 
starts going into private accounts.

 Since current wage earners 
cover the benefits 
for current retirees,

-------hey ass holes at least mention 
the operating surplus here--------

 every dollar workers 
invest elsewhere 
has to be replaced

------------ wrong dildos wrong 
surplus extraction
 effects nothing but the nominal size 
of  the over all fed deficit
talk about accounting gimmicks thats a huge one 
this will expose----------

This is the so-called transition cost,
 estimated at $1 trillion to $5 trillion.

------------ now its possibly 5 trillion ?----------- 



To convince the public 
that those costs won't matter, 
privatization advocates 
are concocting a ruse 
something like this:

Borrow, say, $2 trillion today 
to establish private accounts,
 with the expectation 
that they'll generate such tremendous 
personal savings 
that the government 
will be able 
to cut future Social Security benefits
 by an even larger amount 
and use the savings 
to erase the debt, 
plus interest, 


------- this mouth full goes no where
if only the present surplus 
is used 
then
this is money not presently 
paid out  by SSI
but lent by SSI to the general budget 
cut out these funds
and 
  the rest of the federal fiscal  out fit
will just owe non SSi creditors 
that same amount

so 
whats the diffif yer SSI'S PAYMASTER?

unless the plan is to screw SSI'S TRUST FUNDS
 down the road
in a way uncle  can't screw outside creditors?----- 

By this sleight of hand,
 the money borrowed 
is not new debt, 
----------- well its not additional debt
only re allocated debt ------------

and there's no need
 to count it toward the deficit

--------the SSI DOESN'T HAVE A DEFICIT LOU ITS GOT A SURPLUS-------- 

Remember how Enron
 used off-the-books maneuvers 
to pretend it had no debt?
 Remember how well that worked out?
-OFF THE BOOKS THATS MORE LIKE WHAT WE GOT COOKIN NOW
WITH THE TRUST FUND TRILLIONS used to cover the fiscal deficit --------
For privatization advocates 
who have been stumped 
by how to pay for the transition
 to private accounts,
this ploy has significant political advantages:

 creating the illusion 
that Social Security privatization 
entails no cost 
would bolster the case
 for privatization 
for an unwitting public. 
--------- if true false yes if false true no ----------

It would also give political cover 
to legislators 
and other policy makers
 who want to be on the president's team 
but may otherwise balk
 at the huge deficits 
that come with playing along


-----are u claiming the rest of the federal defict 
can  be made to appear to disappear
 in the mind of the bewildered citizen beholder
based on this one partial retraction?------ 

What accounting gimmickry won't do 
 and this is crucial 
 is fool America's lenders, 
like the central banks of China and Japan,
 and other participants
 in the financial markets.

-------------right 
but this plan surely 
does nothing to reduce 
over all social savings 
(ie the forced savings aspect is preserved)
 but merely 
 re allocated it to all securities 
not just treasuries--------

 Whether it's recorded 
on the nation's books or not,
 ever more government borrowing will, 
sooner or later,
 reduce lenders' appetite 
for Treasury debt, 
forcing up interest rates 
as the government scrambles 
to attract the money it needs.

----------maybe interest rates 
will be higher 
then other wise maybe not 
one thing seems cretain
this should not alter the payments balance 
and increase foreign borrowings -------------- 


This is not a distant 
and theoretical danger.
---no but it is totally un related 
to the private accopunt proposal----------

 Last month, Alan Greenspan, 
the Fed chairman,
 flatly stated that America's 
lenders would eventually tire
 of financing our deficits.


------- no actually he was up on his toes as usual
and said "could" not "would"-----------
 
 Underscoring his comments,
 the yield on the benchmark
 10-year Treasury note 
hit a four-month high this week

--------wow four month high 
you dip shit 
call me when we hit the 40 year high ----------

 
as the ever-weaker dollar
 continued to lure investors away
 from dollar-based debt.
 -------------- lure who CB's or specs or both or neither -----------

The immense additional borrowing 
envisaged by privatization advocates

-so far i see no additional over all borrowing
just uncle upping his outside arms length borrowing 
and that off set by an equal increase 
in domestic "forced"outside savings thru the emergence of these private accounts  -------------

this  would accelerate and intensify 
these disturbing trends,
------------ no ----------
 precisely the opposite
 of what the government 
should be doing. 


trying to hide the borrowing 
-------- no now uncle's borrowing is hidden ------------

would create the impression 
 an accurate one, as it turns out 
 that our government 
is fiscally irresponsible.

-------------- well yes i still beat my wife --------------------

 The global financial community
 would respond by upping
 the pressure
 because lenders demand tougher terms
 from feckless borrowers. 
---- here's the usual we're just a real big denmark analogy
non sense we are the empire brother 
our currency  can not fail -----------

Privatization advocates 
will tell you 
that the cost of creating 
private accounts today 
must be compared
 with the cost of doing nothing 
to reform Social Security. 
--------- watch this twist -------------
This is specious.
---no THIS HERE  is specious -------------------- 

First, no reasonable person 
is suggesting that nothing be done. 

---------- I'M WILLING TO
AS IS ANY ONE THAT READS THE REPORTS 
ON THE STATUS OF THE SSI  SYSTEM
IF LEFT ALONE 
I E SOLVENT TO 2027 AND BEYOND -------------


The proper comparison 
is between a plan
 to borrow trillions 
---------- OK THE PRESENT SSI "LENDING"
 IS ALREADY
IN THE TRILLIONS --------------

and a plan to phase in 
slowly a modest package 
of tax increases and benefit cuts

---------- GOD THIS COULD BE 
 DOC BOBBY RUBIN TALKIN HERE
 CASTRATER GENERAL OF 
 THE GREAT AMERICAN WORKING OX HERD ----------

 that would preserve
 the current system's 
essential protections 
without borrowing 
or dubious accounting

-ONLY DUBIOUS SCREWING OF THE WAGERY-----------

Second, borrowing 
to finance the transition 
to private accounts 
could very well cost
 more than doing nothing.

 If private accounts
 didn't perform as well as
 their proponents hope
 and the proponents are by and large 
a very optimistic bunch 
 the government might need 
to take on even more debt
 decades hence 
to rescue the old people
 who ended up 
without adequate retirement income



- IE SOME FOLKS WOULD BE BETTER OFF IN TREASURIES 
WELL STEER THE ACCOUNTS THAT WAY THEN --------------- 


Solid accounting 
must underlie Social Security reform

--WHAT OAFISH POMP YOU HAVE HORSE MOUTH-----------
. 
Once that's in place,
 let the debate begin.

 -----WELL U AIN'T WORTH DEBATING YOU VICIOUS 
DECEITFUL PACK OF NON PROFIT BURGER BRAINED
ELITEST JEZEBELLS  ------------