« Lessons of Measures 5 and 37 | Main | MSM Doing a Bang-Up Job! »

September 05, 2006

Social Security "Reform" = Economic Imperialism

It looks like President Bush is laying the groundwork for his Social Security privatization plan. As James Petras writes, "The appointment of Hank Paulson, former CEO of Goldman Sachs, the leading Wall Street investment bank, to head the US Treasury Department was a move toward re-opening Wall Street’s battle to privatize the trillion dollar Social Security program… Clearly the Treasury Secretary is party to the strategy of forcing a budgetary crisis by reducing the taxes on the rich and then blaming the costs of the social security and medical programs upon which the middle and working class depend." And as we all know, when Congress faces a budgetary crisis, the first thing that happens is they raid the Social Security Trust Fund.

The attack on Social Security, says Petras, is part of a larger strategy designed to enhance economic empire building. Combined with tax cuts and cuts in Medicare and Medicaid, the massive private investment in retirement savings accounts will fund the expansion of the wealthy in overseas enterprises while putting everyday people here at home at risk.

With Paulson as the leading economic voice and policymaker in the Bush Administration, the big push is to cut social programs, lower taxes and turn over Social Security funds in order to strengthen the expansion of US financial power overseas, both through acquisitions and mergers as well as by direct majority shares in equities. …

With Paulson freeing up more capital for big business, and the latter enjoying greater freedom to borrow risk-free in the Third World, empire building has the material basis to proceed with greater flexibility and with greater competitive advantages.

If the United States truly is a beacon of light in the world, then we ought to seriously consider the results of our imperialist approach to world markets: the bankruptcy of Third World farmers and peasants who can no longer compete in a world market dominated by corporations. Farmers in Asia, Africa and Latin America are all suffering as a result of the "free market" inroads already in place.

It should come as no surprise that the very same web of libertarian players who are presently working to pass term limits, TABOR and extreme property rights measures around the country are also working hard to privatize Social Security. Howard Rich and Ed Crane both have served on the Board of Directors of Social Security Choice (which is co-Chaired by Kenneth Blackwell of stolen election fame). The Social Security Choice website is a project of Club for Growth, a group whose Founder is Steven Moore (Editor for National Review, former director of fiscal policy studies for the Cato Institute, former staff member at the Heritage Foundation, and former staff member for Dick Armey, who is now the head of Citizens for a Sound Economy). Social Security Choice's Director is David Keating (Senior Counselor and former Executive Vice President and Board member for the National Taxpayers Union, member of the Advisory Board for the Initiative & Referendum Institute, and Board member for the American Legislative and Exchange Council). Howard Rich heads up Club for Growth State Action, and Peter Ferrara, former general counsel and chief economist for Grover Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform, founded the Virginia Club for Growth. Even Grover Norquist is getting in on the act. And not to be left out, the Cato Institute, on whose Board Howard Rich serves, has its own website on privatizing Social Security.

Make sure you head over there and read Cato's response to a "dishonest Social Security advertising" campaign – a response that is clearly playing a semantic game. Here's a taste of that piece of nonsense (note the caveats I have italicized):

Americans United, a liberal front group, has been running ads attempting to frighten seniors with scare stories about Social Security reform. The ads suggest that Republican candidates support cutting Social Security benefits in half and, as a result, forcing retirees to spend half as much on food and medications.

These ads are simply wrong on the facts. None of the Social Security reform plans being debated in Washington, including the one proposed by President Bush last year, would cut or change benefits for anyone retired today or nearing retirement. These seniors will continue to receive every penny in Social Security benefits promised to them. To say otherwise is quite simply a lie.

Even younger workers would not really have their benefits cut by the fifty percent claimed in the ad. Younger workers would be given the choice to voluntarily give up some of their traditional Social Security benefits in exchange for being allowed to invest a portion of their Social Security taxes privately, through personal accounts.

Back to the matter of familiar players, it isn't the least big surprising that on the Oregon Catalyst blog, which is run by the Taxpayer Association of Oregon, local puppet for Howard Rich's TABOR campaign, was an entry last week entitled, "Students Launch "Don't Get Screwed" Campaign. According to the post, "Social Security is another government entitlement program that is etching itself more and more into our lives, forcing us to be dependent on the government, rather than allow us the opportunity to be self-reliant. This is a scary thought for freedom-lovers, like me."

This campaign is harping on a common theme that the elite banking and corporate community believes will con everyday people into abandoning our retirement security and plugging our vast resources into their economic imperialist schemes. We see it again, in combination with the theocratic mindset, in this entry at The Conservative Voice:

Your voting determines if you want government to become a cradle-to-grave-nanny-state which demands higher taxation, increased bureaucracy, and as evident from the past, increased corruption and inadequate emergency response and healthcare. Your vote also signifies either your compliance with a secular progressive worldview promoting more government regulations, or a Biblical worldview of personal responsibility, commitment, and respect. … Are you secular or Biblical? …

Social Security: This temporary solution has grown into what FDR feared it would, a permanent dependence on government to provide what the workers could now easily provide for themselves.

Another tactic being used by these people comes from the National Center for Policy Analysis, which is playing to feminists by emphasizing how working wives are not getting their fair share out of the system. And "Team NCPA" offers this "fix" for Social Security's problems:

How to Fix the Problem

• In order to shore up Social Security's financial shortfall, the government must increase the program's income (raise taxes), decrease its expenses (reduce benefits) or find a new source of funding.

• One way to create a new funding source is to allow younger workers to invest a portion of their payroll taxes into a personal retirement account (PRA). Over time, the PRA balances -- with their accumulated interest and dividends -- would replace an increasing portion of retirees' Social Security benefits, saving future tax payers trillions of dollars.

No surprise here, NCPA is primarily funded by Koch Industries (the founders of Cato Institute), the Coors family, Scaife and Olin Foundations, and Exxon Mobil. Exxon Mobil? Yes. You see, these exact same people who want your retirement money also use these groups to work for the elimination of environmental regulations that stand in the way of their profits. They don't care about your health or your retirement. All they care about is your money. But we have just enough of our democracy left that in order for these corporatists to get your money, they have to make you believe it's for your own good.

Their motives are international economic domination and their own wealth; therefore, one must be extremely careful in weighing the information they present to the public. Like many things these days, critical decisions are being demanded from a public who does not have trustworthy sources of information. We truly are like sheep among wolves.

Posted by Becky at September 5, 2006 09:57 AM