Listen, he gets it. If he speaks I listen. If he moves out of the way, I follow without question, he is that good. But he’s not perfect. And there are times he and I just will not be on the same page.
The trial balloon 401K seizure idea is definitely one of those issues. Recently, there have been a number of proposals brought forth by both sides of the political spectrum. As different as they may be, they do have one thing in common- as my friend reminded me yesterday- that they think the idea of balancing out the insolvency of Social Security by using the trillions of dollars in privately held retirement money in this nation is a good idea.
He spent time explaining it to me. The frustrating part was he absolutely understood my conservative issues over private property rights and the concept of government taking REAL money from me- by force- and replacing it with a Wimpy’s promise of paying me back “next Tuesday” with a guaranteed return of 3%. This is so wrong it actually grates on me like fingernails on a chalk board.
The idea is simple in its concept- a direct seizure of real funds transferred to the government for “management” by the same people who manage Social Security (yes, the irony, I get it) with a guarantee of return of three percent. Now, they claim the account would actually belong to you, just held by the federal government for you. Jeezz, thanks?…
But why? Well, it seems the federal government doesn’t believe you save enough, or that is the justification they put forth, so they are just trying to help. So their idea is to force you to save, buutt only in a program that buys government debt… convenient to say the least. I asked him if it was my account, could I opt out of buying government instruments and instruct the SS people to invest in private instruments. He thought the answer would be no. So, I guess its NOT my account after all is it.
On the Left, there are people like Theresa Guilarducci who are arguing for a Guaranteed Retirement Account (GRA). Her proposal is a thinly veiled effort to redistribute wealth across the lower levels of workers, something Joe the Plumber might recognize.
What this is really about is taking money from a trillion dollar PRIVATE market and putting it under the control of the federal government in order to shore up a failed program.
And my friend agrees with them. Yes, much to my surprise he simply stated the fact is the system is going under and this is one way to shore it up. I told him my problem was two-fold. One, they have no right to take from me what is mine then force me to “invest” in the government under threat of fine. (Wait until the Obamatax taxes actually hit the citizenry, the whole idea of forced taxation may take on a new meaning to those who thought that stuff was free.) Of course all with the promise that they will provide for me in my old age. Is that promise real? Of course not, just ask the Greeks who were promised the same thing and now find their pensions slashed. The government can do anything it wants, when it wants, if no one can stop them. We are seeing that unlimited power mindset show itself in almost every aspect of our society today. You can’t trust a government to keep its promise. Here is an example of just that. Oh and by the way, follow the link in the article about the government cheating to get its way (I’ll highlight a small part of it).
Hey, no bigs. Its just a 100-year-old company and Californias only surviving cannery, a sustainable, family-owned operation employing 30 people. The Drakes Bay Oyster Company has been in a seven-year fight with the federal government and environmental groups over whether its 40-year lease would be renewed this week. The Lunny family, which owns the oyster farm, was among a group of families that sold their ranch lands to the National Parks Service in the 1970s to protect them from developers, with the understanding they would get 40-year-leases renewed in perpetuity. After buying and operating the oyster farm without incident they were even featured as outstanding environmental stewards by the National Parks Service the Lunnys learned in 2005 they were accused of bringing environmental damage to an area the NPS and environmentalists were anxious to designate as the nations first federally recognized marine wilderness.
Sec. of the Interior Ken Salazar decided todaythe farms lease will not be renewed, despite some support for it from from Sen. Dianne Feinstein and serious questions raised by scientists about the research used to impugn the Lunnys.
After careful consideration of the applicable law and policy, I have directed the National Park Service to allow the permit for the Drakes Bay Oyster Company to expire at the end of its current term and to return the Drakes Estero to the state of wilderness that Congress designated for it in 1976, Salazar said in a statement. I believe it is the right decision for Point Reyes National Seashore and for future generations who will enjoy this treasured landscape.
Here is part of the link:
The findings mark the second time in a year that the Park Service has been put under a spotlight for essentially fudging data in its attempts to show that the Drakes Bay Oyster Co. harmed the environment.
While the report did not specifically accuse anyone of misconduct, it raised serious questions about governmental misuse of scientific data.
“I find it troubling and unacceptable that the National Park Service exaggerated the effects of the oyster population on the … ecosystem,” U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., wrote in a letter Tuesday to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.
In fact, the farm, which operates under a federal lease until 2012, had no demonstrable negative impacts on the bay’s ecosystem, harbor seals or native eelgrass, biologists with the independent National Research Council found.
The findings were widely seen as vindication for the oyster company, which has been embroiled in a rancorous dispute with the Park Service over its impact on the pristine estuary along the Point Reyes National Seashore.
Started in 2005
The trouble started in 2005, when Kevin Lunny, a local rancher, purchased the oyster farm from Johnson Oyster Co. He was required to get a special-use permit from the California Coastal Commission, which had placed a cease-and-desist order on the property as a result of previous problems.
In the midst of those negotiations and discussions about extending the 2012 lease, the Park Service came out with accusations of environmental damage, setting off a series of dueling scientific reports.
“What has happened is the National Academy of Sciences has shown that all the claims made by the National Park Service are wrong,” Lunny said. “It gives us a clean bill of health.”
If the government is pissing over a few oysters, can you imagine the stuff they’ll pull when they get control over your entire savings?
How do you control a man? You control the way he lives, his work, his income, his taxes, his healthcare and his old age. Once you have that, you have everything.
And as much as I respect my MENSA bright buddy, the thought of having the same idiots in charge of my old age who were in charge of the last old age fund is just suicidally stupid.
I mean really??