Powered by TypePad

« More Obama Bashing | Main | Lots Of Baggage, Lots Of Excitement »

March 26, 2008



Willie Horton rules.


This can be supplemented with a bold "AIDS Unawareness" initiative; again, the idea is to kill 'em before they live to retire.
Dude, we already have most of 'those people' believing AIDS has something to do with sex, instead of being something the CIA adds to the drinking water. How much less aware can we make them?
Y'know, that actually makes me think of a fun puzzler for the progs - SS taxes the first, what, 90k of income, and kicks in from age ~65 until death. Well, blacks have both lower incomes and 6 years' less life expectancy, so SS is a wealth transfer system from blue-collar black people who die in their 60s to white-collar white people who die in their 70s. So it's supported by the holier-than-thou Dems because....


Now that was brilliant!


Given that those retiring (62-65 yo) to Social Security are the WWII years (1943-1946) are probably the ages of the lowest, or near lowest, birth rate in the 20th century, I don't find much to delude myself with, as it only gets worse from here.

Worried that all these smokers and AIDS Unaware will drive up medical costs?
Now I know you didn't mention us fatties, but a couple of months ago there was a study that showed that obese people save the taxpayers money, too. Sure, they cost the medical system more money at earlier ages than their thin counterparts with their diabetes, heart disease, etc., but this was more than made up for in dying off earlier. And that didn't even count the social security boost.

So, there you go, we need a special confiscatory federal tax on health club memberships and vegetables!


When Social Security is converted to a simple welfare program by the introduction of a (as of yet unplanned) "needs-based" test in the not-too-distant future, I should hope that seniors that added to the tax base (i.e. bothered to have children) ought to get some sort of a credit.


The Social Security future is based on disability paying the same as the average income of Americans. The rewards would be in not having children. This would be an expense, not a benefit.

During Bill's years who wouldn't want Social Security disability? Anyone above the $13,000 level. Disability has to be payed at the average income, otherwise we are penalizing people who are disabled - not responsible for their disability. Why wouldn't America treat them equally?

Obama's US and Blair's UK GDP taxes could go to their people, not foreigners. It isn't socialism, but treating disabled people equally.

Jim Miller

Years ago I saw European leftwingers claiming that governments promoted smoking because they could they could tax tobacco heavily, and because it killed people quickly and cheaply, just as they reached retirement age. It was a win-win, if you worked in a treasury department.

Which makes me think . . . I may be wrong, but I think the current Chinese government is not as tough on smoking as some other governments. And I am pretty sure they have decent actuaries there.

Rick Ballard

Perhaps the statisticians are helping to solve the Social Security problem and the illegal immigrant situation at the same time? Very little attention has been given to the Census Bureau's adjustments to the household population, made in January. You would think that wiping out 745,000 Americans (half of them Hispanics) might have been an occasion for comment. The year before the Census adjustment was +321,000 and in 2006 they finished off another 67,000. So the net massacre by Census over three years comes to 491,000 Amercans, gone but with the sure and certain hope that the Census Bureau might once again bring them to "life".

Could it be that the Social Security Administration is simply deducting a count equivalent to the number of phony SSN's for which it receives contributions? I know that seems like a much too obvious and straightforward answer but there was that law passed a bit ago concerning employers being able to check whether a SSN was phony or legit. Maybe some wizard said "hey, let's count up the current phonies" and the result cheered everybody up. For about 10 seconds.

How do you let the horrid "public" know precisely how many phonies are contributing? Especially when the mismatch with the phony illegal count by Census would be revealed? I suppose it's best to dribble the news out piecemeal. There are still two years left until the 2010 Census - and a full revelation.

Thomas Collins

This Social Security hocus/pocus is a joke. If a private trustee took your funds, spent it on current household expenditures of the trustee and deposited an unmarketable security in the trust, I suspect you might not be all that happy with him/her/it. Well, that is the current Social Security Trust Fund system.

Patrick R. Sullivan

It's old home week:

While it has been evident for years that illegal immigrants pay a variety of taxes, the extent of their contributions to Social Security is striking: the money added up to about 10 percent of last year's surplus - the difference between what the system currently receives in payroll taxes and what it doles out in pension benefits. Moreover, the money paid by illegal workers and their employers is factored into all the Social Security Administration's projections.

Illegal immigration, Marcelo Suárez-Orozco, co-director of immigration studies at New York University, noted sardonically, could provide "the fastest way to shore up the long-term finances of Social Security."

AJ Lynch

Hmmm $13 Billion represents Fica taxes collected on behalf of almost 4 Million illegals if they make an average of $26,000 per year or $500 per week.

Here is my math:

$26,000 x 12.6% FICA from both employer and employee = $3,276 per average illegal. Then I divide the $13 Billion by $3,276 to get 3,968,254 illegals.

This of course would not include illegals working off the books.

Hammers Slammers

The whole AIDS thing can't be mentioned and should be removed from the thread.

Were you not aware that the AIDS virus was developed by Big Whitey to eradicate blacks, specifically black preachers?

Get with it, get down and feel the power of Audastic Hope!

Ernst Blofeld

Actually, promoting AIDS would be bad, since it would deprive the government of much of the stream of income from a long working life. You want to concentrate on killing the geezers just as they retire, not while they're still net taxpayers. It's also sub-optimal in that the deaths are often drawn out and medical care-intensive. What you're looking for is sudden violent death at age 65.

A skydiving and hang gliding program for senior citizens would fit the bill nicely. Or maybe give a free Ducati motorcycle to everyone with their first social security check.


You forgot National Health Care!

Think about it. We keep the tax payers alive and then when they get 65 ...

Bureaucrat: Sorry ma'am. You'll just have to wait another 6 months for that doctor visit.
64.5 Yr Old: But, the doctor said I must get some medicine now!

6 months later ...
Bureaucrat: Ma'am? You can see the doctor now.
now 65 Yr Old: Gah! (Old lady lies on floor ... no signs of life)


That was a nearly brilliant bit of misdirection - humor that provides red meat, a supposed gotcha, a hint that pointing out facts seems to imply that liberals want to fleece the undocumented. Wait, strike that last part, I didn't mean to imply that that's what you were doing. And then the reductio gallops off... somewhere.

Too bad the actual numbers actually refute some of the arguments made back when to try to tie SS to immigration, and Logan's Run health care humor is the best you can do to refute a pretty modest factual assertion. But I applaud the effort, and you seem to have fun doing it, so rock on.


Actually, the tobacco companies raised that bit of news about Social Security net savings when states were suing them for "increased medical costs" 20 years ago....


On the other hand, there isn't one problem that the state of California has that millions of illegal immigrants do not make worse. That needs to be added into the equation. Illegal immigration has a massive negative effect on society. Just of the cost of printing everything in two languages has to cost billions a year. The "other-migrants" are part of another forced wealth redistribution scheme brought to us by the same people who brought us the income tax.


I'm wondering into whose social security accounts is that extra money from illegals being dumped? Can you get an SS card if you are illegal? If not, then the money is going into a SS acount # of someone else. What happens when the IRS comes knocking at that persons door, asking for more taxes based on the extra income as proved by the SS contributions from the illegal? This has already happened in at least one state.


Do you get the feeling, the strong feeling, that when someone tells fishbane a Dick Cheney hunting joke he just laughs and laughs and laughs?


Illegal immigration is to America today what the opium trade was to China in the 19th century. Like the opium trade, it has the effect of corrupting the entire society from top to bottom. But when you're high, you tend not to be aware of problems. And when you are an addict, you tend to react with fury to those who point out your affliction.


Everybody thinks that the key issue that will come up before the next Supreme Court is Roe v Wade.
I beg to differ. Somewhere in the bowels of the Federal justice system a case is brewing that demands Social Security benefits paid to illegals that can prove that they've paid payroll taxes under a false name and SS number. It's only a matter of time and it's going to shock everybody.

Rick Ballard


CNNMoney is usually pathetic in its reporting and this piece concerning the fact that "buying low" might have some smidgeon of value to an investor with an IQ above room temperature is a case in point.

What I found interesting is the fact that CNN has to advertise for hard luck stories. Scroll to the bottom of the article and you find:

Have you lost your job, your business or your home? Are you raiding retirement accounts to pay the bills? We want to hear from you. Tell us how you're being affected by the weakening economy and you could be profiled in an upcoming story.

Now there's a mark of just how desperate things have become - news gimps have to advertise to find hard luck stories.

What's this country coming to?


Wow, Rick. I wonder what kind of fools sign up to be profiled - will be interesting to see.


Probably Spitzer's girls but is that really caused by the subprime mess?

Rick Ballard

Remember the Slacker Family Saga? How Dad had to choose between actually finding a job with health benefits or only partially protecting his property by buying cut rate health insurance for the kids (leaving the parents uncovered)? Pelosi's old contacts in Baltimore had to rummage around for that one, too.

I guess "poor decisions may have adverse consequences" is simply too complicated a concept for it too be explored by the media.


Rick, the Frosts are exactly who I was thinking of. I always remember my slacker friend's response when challenged as to why she spends money on weekly delivery of organic groceries instead of health insurance for her kids (they're covered under S-CHIP): "I just think it really sucks that so many people's lives/job situations are based on insurance!" Uh, that's called reality in grownup land...

Marianne Wooten

George Soros offered a solution to the future of Medicare and Social Security. He suggested that the government "ration medicine" so that only the healthy can get medicine. He launched a program called 'The Project on Death in America' which allowed only pallative care to people with chronic
diseases. This would take care of many elderly and some of the young. He must have had a lot of disagreement on this bacause he inactivated it for the time being. I am sure he will try to open it again when he gets a President in office.

Tom Maguire

a nearly brilliant bit of misdirection.../i

A possible site motto, although "Go, Balloons" always makes me laugh and so nicely symbolizes the current Dem inability to execute.

Cecil Turner

. . . a hint that pointing out facts seems to imply that liberals want to fleece the undocumented.

I read it that the illegals were paying into a system for which they weren't entitled later benefits, and hence we Americans were fleecing them to shore up an otherwise sinking SS system. You wanna have the libs take credit for that, fine. Don't see the draw, though.


"10 percent of last year's surplus"is what percent of total taxes paid?

Why is their money kept in a special place where only "surplus" cash is kept. I think this way of representing the total is very misleading.

Rick Ballard

CNN's Hard Luck Winner for today. She seems very capable and I hope she finds work soon. She needs to get ole 'estranged' to kick in a bit and she might consider taking a hit on the chateau to get out from under that $2,500 per month interest only payment. A $500K mortgage and unemployment won't work together for very long but some people actually maintain a cushion that will carry them for at least a month.


OT but Ledeen has an interesting take on Iran and Iraq:

Michael Ledeen sheds some light on the fighting in Basra--Khameni made some major mistakes in Iraq:
[quote]At the outset of the war, Khamenei and his ilk fully expected to gain the support of most Iraqi Shi’ites, and to create little regional islamic republics, starting in Basra. They spent an enormous amount of money, buying local properties, opening stores and offices (I heard of one with a sign on the door: “Iranian Military Intelligence”), bribing local officials and businessmen. Today, on the most reliable accounts, most Iraqi Shi’ites (and Sunnis, for that matter) despise the Iranian regime, blame it for most of the violence, and are fighting Iranians and their proxies throughout the land. When Ahmadi-Nezhad came to Baghdad, the country’s spiritual leader, Ayatollah Sistani, declined to meet him, even as thousands of Iraqis demonstrated in the streets against Iran. Sistani could probably have shut down the demonstrations…
Then there is the question of Maliki and his government, in which Iran has invested so many resources. As some clever person once said, you can’t really buy anyone in the Middle East, at best you can rent him for a while. Any Iraqi leader must take out insurance with Tehran, because the mullahs can kill a lot of people in Iraq. But al Qaeda is now on the verge of extinction there, and there is a bottom-up war against the militias from Sunni and Shi’ite alike. Democracy works its magic, even in the Middle East, and Maliki wants to keep his job. Right now, that requires him to fight the Iranian-sponsored militias. There must be a lot of teeth gnashing in Tehran these days, and lots of colorful curses aimed at Baghdad.
So Iran is hoping to make its pass, but the roll of the dice in Basra looks more like snake eyes coming up.[/quote]


The comments to this entry are closed.