Corporate Communism
In spite of my record to the contrary,I do like to give President Bush credit for his achievements as often as I can. I believe he is to be commended for placing the responsibility for providing for ones own retirement in the hands of the individual via privatizing, and I heartily endorse his efforts to encourage Americans to"take the power back" from
big government at every opportunity.I also have to give the president credit for deftly using a free-market spin to sell his idea,while in fact screwing us using the old"bait and switch" concept.
It seems the old "Skull and Bonesmen" have grown bored with simply lobbying for increased taxes,and government spending to fill their pockets
and control us with our own money. Now the plan is to"allow" you to put your money into a so-called"private' account. A private account that will
be used for purchasing shares in the stock market. And just whose shares will we be purchasing, pray tell? Why, the good old Yale boys,of course!
You can bet that this won't only be in the best interests of the depositor
(ie.victim),and like the present system,conveniently,won't be available for withdrawal at the time of its,or your,maturity.
You know,when socialism is privatized, don't you think it deserves a new
name,one that complements its increased status? How does "Corporate Communism"sound? The Revolution will not be televised.
big government at every opportunity.I also have to give the president credit for deftly using a free-market spin to sell his idea,while in fact screwing us using the old"bait and switch" concept.
It seems the old "Skull and Bonesmen" have grown bored with simply lobbying for increased taxes,and government spending to fill their pockets
and control us with our own money. Now the plan is to"allow" you to put your money into a so-called"private' account. A private account that will
be used for purchasing shares in the stock market. And just whose shares will we be purchasing, pray tell? Why, the good old Yale boys,of course!
You can bet that this won't only be in the best interests of the depositor
(ie.victim),and like the present system,conveniently,won't be available for withdrawal at the time of its,or your,maturity.
You know,when socialism is privatized, don't you think it deserves a new
name,one that complements its increased status? How does "Corporate Communism"sound? The Revolution will not be televised.
posted by theoldsage @ 10:22 AM
4 Comments:
At 9:05 AM ,
RightWingRocker said...
Everyone benefits, Sage. That's the point of capitalism.
No, it's not perfect, but as we've both said before, there's nothing out there that can bring prosperity like capitalism.
There will probably never be anything in the way of an economic system that can do away with losers and only have real winners. Of course, to do away with losers would mean doing away with loser mentalities, and that will never happen. That's why capitalism is best.
This is in no way communism, so I say that your title and, if that is your premise (which I can't say it is), is flawed.
the problem I have with people complaining about this sort of thing is that these people are providing opportunities for others to earn money for themselves. Why punish them? Why exclude them from the equation? It's not as sinister as you would like us to believe. Trust the optimist on this one.
RWR
At 11:56 AM ,
theoldsage said...
Yes,but they don't benefit equally,and in this instant,they don't even benefit fairly.That is the point of"communism'.
It seems to me to be at least a little underhanded for the president to suggest that individuals that have already been taken advantage of by the powerful people of the world,reinvest,and further enrich these same people via privatizing,and the stock market.This is especially true when
you consider the intricacies of manuevering the market,and the potential
for real success/failure.
The reason that I refer to this as communism is because it is an attempt by a self-proclaimed elitist group to maximize its own potential,while making sure that the rest of us have little,if any access to that potential,all the while painting a picture of normalcy(we're on your side ole buddy)
when they are actually screwing us.And,in this case,with our own money.
The people who have paid the tax imposed on them by the government to be used for
financing their retirement since 1935 are not "losers",nor do they have a loser mentality. They worked hard for many years paying into a system that has been
bankrupted by the same group of people who are now trying to "fix"the problem.
There is no way that I would trust them with my money,just as there is no way they are going to trust me with theirs.
As I said earlier, I do support the president in his proposal to privatize the social security system.The less government the better can be applied in all instances.As an alternative plan,why not create private retiremment saving accounts,and then transfer say ten percent of an individual's gross income
into that account. The account belongs to the individual,but is held in 'trust until he/she reaches retirement. It cannot be opened for any reason prior to that time,save the person's death in which case it would be transferred to any survivors/inheritors.If at retirement the
individual in question chose to "play the market"that would be entirely up to him.
Of course his next check would be determined by his 'success',or lack thereof.
Capitalism,like the government that is funded by it,is a necessary evil,Ithink we can both agree on that, but I think
there needs to be more than just the option that has been advanced and promoted by the president as there are 'many more spokes to the center of this wheel!"
At 8:25 AM ,
RightWingRocker said...
As you know, Sage, I don't share your cynicism with regard to the businesspeople of America.
However, I do believe that your idea is good, as long as there is an opportunity for investment of at least part of the "private retirement savings account" during the beneficiary's lifetime. A multitude of choices should be available here, as with any real investment situation. Risky investments such as government programs (i.e. Socialist Security) might even be on the table, though I do question the constitutionality of government-sponsored retirement programs.
Strip your comment of the cynicism, and I agree wholeheartedly! HAHAHAHA
RWR
At 8:27 AM ,
theoldsage said...
I do too,Rocker, but I'm just afraid that
without some kind of outside"discipline'
some people would still manage to fritter away their stash,which would put us back to square one!
Remember, a cynic is a realist with experience.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home