TIME TO RETHINK THE PARADIGM; AMERICA ELECTS BUREAUCRATS TO MAKE DECISIONS, ABOUT WHAT HANDOUTS THEY SHOULD GET!
By John R Hernandez@JRH-2015 NDMH/CRFN
"In the face of all of this, and having had my sidekick eat a previous revision to this note. It's taken me a couple of hours to get a hold of myself; after seeing my work disappear at the click of a key. Suffice it to say. I must give respect to whom deserves my respect. And try to continue with that revision; that went to Heaven I guess? Elizabeth Warren Senator from Massachusetts stood her ground back on November 18, 2013. While being psychologically attacked by her peers on the question of adjusting social security either to the PCI or PCI-E? Which she favored, although it was the better halve of two evils those on the other side of the aisle were trying to push through.
There are a ton of great people out there who are working tirelessly for causes that we all do and should care about. Many of which are being mentioned here and on this I think we are all on the same page. But, what I like about Elizabeth Warren and I carefully point this out. Is that she stuck to her guns not only back in 2013 but, in the recent conversation and arguments over the same issue of Social Security. Let's face it, there are a lot of gavones out there who could care less about the poor and less privileged. Having said that, Michael McAuliff, Politics, Huff Post wrote the column that I'm about to quote from in Elizabeth's own words. Take a look at this from McAuliff''s article, "Warren blasted that [PCI] approach in a Senate floor speech Monday, saying that, retirement security has become a "crisis" in America in which two-thirds of seniors depend on Social Security for the majority of their income."
She then went on to say in Michael's article that,"Chained CPI falls short of the actual increases in costs that seniors face, pure and simple," Warren said. "Chained CPI? It’s just a fancy way of saying cut benefits." She took special exception to a Monday Washington Post editorial that called expanding Social Security "wrongheaded" and suggested the nation should instead be more concerned about the higher percentage of children living in poverty. Warren said that argument was the "uglier side" of the debate."The suggestion that we have become a country where those living in poverty fight each other for a handful of crumbs tossed off the tables of the very wealthy is fundamentally wrong," Warren said. "This is about our values, and our values tell us that we don’t build a future by first deciding who among our most vulnerable will be left to starve."We don’t build a future for our children by cutting basic retirement benefits for their grandparents," Warren said. To forecasters predicting that Social Security is on the path to insolvency, Warren noted that the safety net is actually pretty sturdy at the moment."Social Security has a $2.7 trillion surplus. If we do nothing, Social Security will.." SOURCE: Article from 11/ 18/2013, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/18/elizabeth-warren-social-security_n_4298336.html
I did not want to rain in on Michael's parade since it is a great article. You guys aught to read his piece on Huff, and Elizabeth's fighting words. We need this kind of dedication and compassion in the next administration! Feeling vindicated here after touting this great article, and dedication by a compassionate public servant. Let me just say that we need to have more people like her that are on fire for the issues that resonate with every day folks and not just those of the special interests! Suffice it to say that politics on both sides of the aisles has become a bit too arrogantly cancerous and overly polluted with elitists carpetbaggers!
Think of it this way. Electors are voted in as fiduciaries of the people that have elected them into office. We shouldn't have to beg them to get them to do their jobs in the best interest of those who elected them. How foolish do Americans have to be when they elect officials who give them the shaft, each and every year? They were elected to make decisions about the funds the government gets to share, to distribute back into the society. Government programs, social programs, infrastructures, research and development, decease control, agriculture, academics, science, environment, defense, etc.,..!
The shame of it is; that like unborn children, the handicapped, poor, and underprivileged. All have the same thing in common with the aging. Their vulnerability to getting thrown under the bus. Not just only by those down on the ground floor. Family members, work mates, house mates, and care givers. But, those on top who sit behind desks all day, who get three square meals, whose bills are all paid for the most part, whose pensions are fat, who get to go on junkets, who only work three parts of the year, and who will never have to stand in line in a social security office; waiting to be called up.
If you don't have to worry about your retirement, spending the rest of your life alone somewhere wasting away, or having to make decisions about what protocol of care to take. When children don't have a choice whether they're going to live or die? As long as abortion hangs over their heads. When the poor, the handicapped, and the aging all have to sit back and wait. For those on Capital Hill to make decisions about life and death, over coffee and donuts! This is what America gets, when they elect bureaucrats to make decisions about what handouts they should get!" JRH-2015 NDMH-CRFN
Revised. JRH.
- Definition of PONZI SCHEME: an investment swindle in which some early investors are paid off with money put up by later ones in order to encourage more and bigger risks
No comments:
Post a Comment