Peter Schiff Points Out Obama and the Left’s Hypocrisy with the Appointment of Jack Lew to Treasury Dept (Video)

I love Peter Schiff. He hits it out of the park in this video. Obama, and his left-wing fluffers, scream that they hate the rich and “fat-cat” bankers but seem to have no issue when Obama appoints them into his cabinet and gives them positions where they can screw the taxpayers even more. As Schiff says “it’s all an act.” Politicians only care about themselves and are screwing us to make themselves rich. Got to love liberal hypocrisy.

Read Full Post »

Researchers Say Social Security Crisis is Worse Than Government Predicts

Except those of us who know that Social Security is paying out more than it takes in under Obama and due to Obamanomics.

From NYT:

CONGRESS and President Obama have pushed through a relatively modest stopgap measure to avoid the “fiscal cliff,” but over the coming years, the United States will confront another huge cliff: Social Security.

In the first presidential debate, Mr. Obama described Social Security as “structurally sound,” and Mitt Romney said that “neither the president nor I are proposing any changes” to the program. It was a rare issue on which both men agreed — and both were utterly wrong.

For the first time in more than a quarter-century, Social Security ran a deficit in 2010: It spent $49 billion dollars more in benefits than it received in revenues, and drew from its trust funds to cover the shortfall. Those funds — a $2.7 trillion buffer built in anticipation of retiring baby boomers — will be exhausted by 2033, the government currently projects.

What added to this SS deficit? Obama’s payroll tax scheme and economic policies that saw unemployment above 8% for four years and the mass exodus of Americans from the labor force (31-year low in the labor force participation rate). Less Americans working = less SS taxes collect.

Those facts are widely known. What’s not is that the Social Security Administration underestimates how long Americans will live and how much the trust funds will need to pay out — to the tune of $800 billion by 2031, more than the current annual defense budget — and that the trust funds will run out, if nothing is done, two years earlier than the government has predicted.

The Social Security Trust Fund is a myth. It’s nothing more than IOUs because politicians, in both parties, have robbed our retirement fund to pay for other entitlement programs. Social Security is adding to the national deficit, despite what liberals claim.

We reached these conclusions, and presented them in an article in the journal Demography, after finding that the government’s methods for forecasting Americans’ longevity were outdated and omitted crucial health and demographic factors. Historic declines in smoking and improvements in the prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease are adding years of life that the government hasn’t accounted for. (While obesity has rapidly increased, it is not likely, at this point, to offset these public health and medical successes.) More retirees will receive benefits for longer than predicted, supported by the payroll taxes of relatively fewer working adults than projected.

Remarkably, since Social Security was created in 1935, the government’s forecasting methods have barely changed, even as a revolution in big data and statistics has transformed everything from baseball to retailing.

This omission can be explained by the fact that the Office of the Chief Actuary, the branch of the Social Security Administration that is responsible for the forecasts, is almost exclusively composed of, well, actuaries — without any serious representation of statisticians or social science methodologists. While these actuaries are highly responsible and careful and do excellent work curating and describing the data that go into the forecasts, their job is not to make statistical predictions. Yet the agency badly needs such expertise.

Continue reading>>>

Read Full Post »

Trustees: Social Security and Medicare Closer to INSOLVENCY

It’s OK, Obama is pushing the entire US towards insolvency.

WASHINGTON — The nation’s Social Security andMedicare programs are sliding closer to insolvency, the federal government warned Monday in a new report underscoring the fiscal challenges facing the two mammoth retirement programs as baby boomers begin to retire.

Medicare, which is expected to provide health insurance to more than 50 million elderly and disabled Americans this year, is expected to start operating in the red in its largest fund in 2024, according to the annual assessment by the trustees charged with overseeing the programs.

And the Social Security trust fund, which will provide assistance to more than 45 million people in 2012, will be unable to fulfill its obligations in 2033, three years earlier than projected last year.

“We must take steps to keep these programs whole for the future,” Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, the senior trustee, told reporters on April 23.

When the Social Security and Medicare funds are exhausted, they will still be able to pay benefits because they will continue to collect tax revenue. But the deficits would probably force major cuts.

The dismal outlook was fueled in part by the sluggish economy, which has slowed growth in payroll taxes that sustain the trust funds, according to trustees, who include Cabinet secretaries and two public representatives.

That sparked a new round of calls from around Washington on Monday for a new effort to tackle the entitlement programs. Most immediately, the trust fund that pays for disability benefits is projected to run out of money in just four years.

Continue reading>>>

Read Full Post »

Second Year In A Row: Geithner Says President’s Budget Plan ‘Unsustainable’ (Video)

For the liberals who troll my blog, unsustainable means Obama’s historic spending spree is pushing us towards insolvency.

 

Read Full Post »

The Audacity! Timothy Geithner wants You to blame Republicans for Obama spending the US into Default

I hope they buy this bullshit I'm selling!

Yes, those evil Republicans are responsible for Obama’s record spending and for voting against his record spending budgets passed by Democrats. Whodathunkit? A taxcheat that is dishonest and who said the U.S. is insolvent.

CNBC reports:

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Thursday told Republican lawmakers that they would shoulder the blame if the country got too close to defaulting on its debt and roiled markets worldwide by not approving a debt limit increase.

Did Republicans force Obama to sign those spending bills or was it those Democrats who controlled both the House and Senate. You know, the same Democrats who put forth those spending bills and voted on them. The same bills Obama never…ever used his veto pen to reject.

In yet another warning about the perils of not allowing the U.S. to borrow more to fund spending already approved by Congress, Geithner said it would be deeply irresponsible for lawmakers to use debt limit negotiations for political gains.

But…but…but this is what Obama did when he voted against raising the debt ceiling under President Bush.

Congress must agree to raise the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling or the legal amount that the country can borrow. But Republicans have said they are unwilling to do so without reforms on government spending and have threatened to take negotiations to the deadline.

“(Lawmakers) will say there’s leverage in it, we can advance it. But that would be deeply irresponsible and they will own the risk,” Geithner said.

But…but…but in 2006, Obama said it was irresponsible and a lack of leadership to raise the debt ceiling.

“It won’t happen in the end, but if they take it too close to the edge, they will own responsibility for that miscalculation,” he said.

Yes, the Republicans, who haven’t passed a budget since 2007, is some how responsible for Obama and the Democrats spending us up to the edge of the debt ceiling. Again, when will these loons take responsibility for their historic spending spree?

Continue reading>>>

Read Full Post »

Federal Reserve: Hey…the US is approaching INSOLVENCY

And Obama starts a war that will cost untold billions. It’s OK taxpayers. Maybe the Fed will print more money with a 3rd round of quantitative easing.

CNBC.com reports:

The United States is on a fiscal path towards insolvency and policymakers are at a “tipping point,” a Federal Reserve official said on Tuesday.

“If we continue down on the path on which the fiscal authorities put us, we will become insolvent, the question is when,” Dallas Federal Reserve Bank President Richard Fisher said in a question and answer session after delivering a speech at the University of Frankfurt. “The short-term negotiations are very important, I look at this as a tipping point.”

But he added he was confident in the Americans’ ability to take the right decisions and said the country would avoid insolvency.

Americans aren’t the problem, its the overspending politicians in Washington who have a spending problem.

“I think we are at the beginning of the process and it’s going to be very painful,” he added.

Fisher earlier said the US economic recovery is gathering momentum, adding that he personally was extremely vigilant on inflation pressures.

Just ignore the revised GDPs that continue to prove the opposite. Food and energy prices have already been affected by inflation. Look around, the numbers don’t lie.

“We are all mindful of this phenomenon. Speaking personally, I am concerned and I am going to be extremely vigilant on that front,” Fisher said in an interview with CNBC.

Read Full Post »

Is the Federal Reserve Cooking the Books?

The answer is YES.

CNBC reports:

Concerns that the Federal Reserve could suffer losses on its massive bond holdings may have driven the central bank to adopt a little-noticed accounting change with huge implications: it makes insolvency much less likely.

Looks like the Federal Reserve is “too big to fail.”

The significant shift was tucked quietly into the Fed’s weekly report on its balance sheet and phrased in such technical terms that it was not even reported by financial media when originally announced on Jan. 6.

But the new rules have slowly begun to catch the attention of market analysts. Many are at once surprised that the Fed can set its own guidelines, and also relieved that the remote but dangerous possibility that the world’s most powerful central bank might need to ask the U.S. Treasury or its member banks for money is now more likely to be averted.

“Could the Fed go broke? The answer to this question was ‘Yes,’ but is now ‘No,’” said Raymond Stone, managing director at Stone & McCarthy in Princeton, New Jersey. “An accounting methodology change at the central bank will allow the Fed to incur losses, even substantial losses, without eroding its capital.”

The change essentially allows the Fed to denote losses by the various regional reserve banks that make up the Fed system as a liability to the Treasury rather than a hit to its capital. It would then simply direct future profits from Fed operations toward that liability.

If this was a private corporation, the accountants would be in prison. The Fed has no one to answer to and can print money as it wishes. Now its cooking the books to hide losses.

Continue reading>>>

Read Full Post »