Sorry 'bout the lack of posting

Blogs are a lot of work. I currently have a baseball team to coach, a Cub Scout den to lead, a history class to work on, and in my spare time, still need to go to work and bring home the bacon! So, blogging will be light--very light. If I have time, and something to say, I'll add a post or two. Mostly this will serve to keep Liberty Unlimited alive until I have the time needed to dedicate to it.

Cheers!

Private Accounts and Solvency

In my last post on Social Security, I went over the first key concept: Social Security is an unfunded liability, i.e. paid now or later, the debt exists.

The next key concept you need to understand about fixing Social Security is the idea of private accounts. The question is this: Will allowing workers to deposit some of thier Social Security payroll taxes into a private retirement account do anything to fix the long-term solvency problem with the current system? The short answer is YES! (contrary claims by Dems notwithstanding)

Those opposed to private accounts claim a number of things: It won't do anything to pay for the transition costs; The stock market is risky; blah, blah blah.

The fact of the matter is this: The Dems don't want to do anything to Social Security that would take away a source of revenue for thier precious social programs. That's right, a portion of your Social Security taxes are paying for gum'mint programs! "Bt what about the trust fund?", you may ask. Doesn't exist. Each year, the Social Security Administration pays current retirement benefits from the payroll taxes of current workers. Right now, more money is collected than paid. The surplus is used to buy bonds from the government. The revenue generated by the sale of those bonds pays for any number of precious programs. Guess what. In 2017, or so, if nothing changes, payroll taxes collected start to equal payments. No more bonds for the government. That is the real crisis.

But I digress. On to private accounts. How do they fix solvency? It is simple, as you increase the amount of money put into the accounts, you also transfer the payments from the current system to the accounts. Private accounts are the way to keep the debt from building as we are paying off the current--already owed--debt.

Jack Kemp has a great piece over on Townhall.com. More here, here, and here.

And don't forget to make a trip over to Social Security Choice.

On banning guns

Kevin over at The Smallest Minority posts a well-written, thought out response to a poorly written, emotion-driven letter to the Tucson Weekly.

His post does a great job illustrating the tactics that gun-grabbers use to further thier cause, i.e. dubious statistics and emotional outcrys. The letter seems to be right out of the anti's playbook, and those of us not afraid of the Second Amendment would do well to remember the arguments Kevin uses.

Rest in Peace

Terri Schaivo has died.

Go with God Terri. My prayers are with your family, all of them.
God, help us to understand, cope with and learn from this tragedy.

Congressional Medal of Honor to be awarded

Stories like this always give me goosebumps. I am always amazed at the courage and charisma displayed by our men and women in uniform. The other thing I marvel at is the response is usually "I was just doing my job." How about this for a "job":

Smith, 33, died behind the trigger of a .50-caliber machine gun as he fought off an Iraqi attack near Baghdad's international airport. He's credited with saving more than 100 American lives and killing at least 50 Iraqis.

I'm sure there is even more to the story. SFC Smith, I salute you. Godspeed.

Hat tip: Polipundit, because you probably won't see much of this in the MSM.

60 Days

Mr. Kerry...hello? It's been 2 months now. When are you going to sign that SF-180?

The folks over at Decision08 have named John Kerry as "Weekly Jackass Number 17." Why can't I think of this stuff?

Hat tip to Polipundit for pointing me there.

Unbelievable

George Felos, Michael Shaivo's lawyer has a book out. And people wonder (maybe they don't) why most non-lawyers view lawyers as slime.

I'm speechless.

Hat tip: WILLisms

The Big 3

Despite the near continuos coverage in the MSM of the Teri Schaivo and Michael Jackson cases, other things continue to happen in the world. Politically speaking, the Big 3--Social Security, Judicial Nominations, and Immigration--will dominate the next election cycle. Elections matter, and you owe it to yourself to get informed.

For all your Social Security needs, look to Social Security Choice.

Info about Judicial Nominations can be found at Confirm Them.

Current news on Immigration and illegal immigrants can be found at Michelle Malkins new project The Immigration Blog

Social Security-key concepts

For those who think the Democrats are interested in Social Security for anything other than their own political gain, take a trip over to Social Security Choice. The fact is, Democrats have yet to put any plan on the table, instead waiting it out because they fear that the first plan--like so many first plans in Washington--will be dead on arrival. They remind me of little children throwing at temper tantrum--"If we can't do it our way, then we don't want to do it...waaaaaaaa!"

Know this--the Democrats have no interest in letting you control any of your Social Security money. Because to do so would take control of your life from them. That, my friends, is something they can't stand.

There are a few key concepts you need to understand regarding Social Security. The media does a HORRIBLE job of making them clear (big surprise!), but you need to remember them.

First, Social Security is an unfunded liability. This means that there is no pot of money sitting around to pay benefits--todays benefits are paid for by todays payroll taxes. The benefits promised for next year and beyond--your benefits, possibly?--ARE NOT PAID FOR yet! The key concept is that the debt for those benefits ALREADY EXISTS. Remember that when you hear politicians talk about "transition costs." Social Security already owes the money--the only debate is when to pay it. Consider this scenario: You buy a nice new bedroom suite and desk. Altogether the furniture costs about $2500, and you buy it under a "2 years same as cash" program. Most likely this means that you open an account for credit with the store. 20 months later, you realize you haven't paid anything on the furniture, because the bill every month said "$0.00 due." Now you have 4 months to come up with $2500. That's $1125/month. Ouch. On the other hand, you could leave it on the store's credit, but the debt has been accruing interest (probably around 20%) the entire time, and will be added to your bill as soon as the 2 years is up. So now you will owe the store significantly more than the original $2500--don't ask me to do the math--but the payment will be less than $1125/month. Or, you could move it to a lower interest credit account. The best thing to do would be to pay it off--the debt that already exists--and be done with it. That $1125/month is the transition cost. It hurts, but it fixes your problem and eliminates the debt.

Up next: Private Accounts

Culture of death

I've been wanting to post on this, but a combination of no time and a deflated feeling I've gotten each time I hear a Teri Shaivo update have precluded posting.

While I feel for Teri's family, the thing that has me delfated the most is the culture of death that surrounds the reports on this case. I do not know her true condition. There are numerous conflicting reports. However, I cannot understand how it can be more humane to starve this woman (with no advance directive), than it would be to let her loving parents take care of her and let her husband (continue to) get on with his. Now it appears that all of the appeals have been exhausted, and I can live with that, specifically, in this case.

What I don't like is the underlying basis in this country for all of those decisions. I am a regular fan of Neal Boortz, but I have to disagree with his analysis--mostly because it doesn't seem like he did any. He seems to say that even if you don't have any written, legal documentation of your wishes, and your coustodian doesn't think, for whatever reason, that your life is worth living anymore, then you should be starved to death. My problem is this: who gets to decide if your life is worth living? Well, in this case, it was the government. I seem to remember reading about another government deciding which lives were worth living and which lives weren't.

That is why, although I initially struggled with it, I ultmately agreed with Congress. Look, I am no fan of the Federal Government--I am a states rights guy. However, I don't see how the legistlation passed by congress will do any harm. As a matter of fact, Congress does have oversight of the courts, and it seems to me they were exercising that oversight. Besides, shouldn't Teri Shiavo have at least the same review as a felon sentenced to die?

The bottom line is this: Ask yourself what had to happen each day for Teri Shaivo to live? She had to be fed. The same as you and me.