There is a marked tendency among those who have been too long in government and especially those who subscribe to the share-the-wealth philosophy of socialism, to believe that all money essentially belongs to government and that it is only in the hands of private citizens because government chooses to let them keep it, at least temporarily. For them, the needs of government are greater than the rights of the citizens; once they reach the limit of what they can feed into the giant maw of the state from taxation, they will start to look for back-door taxes, and pensions and retirement accounts will be hard to resist.
This attitude is fundamentally wrong. It is a critical violation of the right to own property and enjoy the fruits of your labor, which is part of natural law; fought for in the revolution, explicitly recognized in the Bill of Rights. The money in your 401k, or any other retirement plan, is not the government's money. It is not your employer's money. It does not belong to the collective population. It doesn't belong to the "less fortunate." It is your money and belongs to no one else. When government tries to take it in violation of the terms they previously agreed to, they are no longer a legitimate government. On that day they will have become tyrants.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Glenn Contrarian
"Things would be a lot easier in a dictatorship, so long as I'm the dictator." George W. Bush
Bush: My aides will ignore the Congressional subpoenas
Palin: My aides will ignore the Congressional subpoenas
Cheney: The VP is NOT part of the executive branch.
Bush: "Stop throwing the Constitution in my face! It's just a god****ed piece of paper!" (said to Republican leadership questioning the constitutionality of the Patriot Act)
Yes, Dave, we certainly should be careful of tyrants, of those who feel themselves to be above the law.
2 - Lumpy
for all that bush has reduced government interference in the lives of millions and his worst excesses have hurt less than a handful of americans.
3 - bliffle
Did I understand aright, that Dave is in favor of socializing private pensions? This is exactly the opposite of privatizing Social Security. Never thought I'd see the day.
The Tax Policy Center says that the McCain tax cuts will reduce revenue $3.6trillion over 10 years and Obama will cost $2.7trillion (sounds like Obama wins that one).
Tax Policy Center
How to pay for it?
One of the big fat pigs in the budgets of Americans is our healthcare system, which costs about 15% of GDP ($14T/year), about $2T/year. Most modern industrial nations spend 6%, 8% or maybe 10%.
We spend a lot of money every year for the exquisite pleasure of seeing poor impoverished people suffer and die because they can't afford our health insurance rates.
We may have to give up that pleasure. I know it's hard, and I know that many people will complain that they will be deprived of retiring to their plush offices, putting their feet up on that acre-sized mahogany desk, and opening the newspaper to read another heart-wrenching story about some poor sucker who got stiff-armed by the medical system until he finally died.
But it may be necessary to Make The Sacrifice. To cover President McCains proposed new deficits we'll need $360billion/year, assuming linear amortization.
If we go to Universal Healthcare single payer system we can reduce net healthcare cost from 15% to 10%, at least, which means from $2.1T to $1.4T, a savings of $700billion per year.
Hey! That covers it. And leaves money to pay the war expenses! Whooppee! Why didn't we do this years ago?
We can even get the US government to put money back into the SS fund that it borrowed in the past.
4 - Dave Nalle
Did I understand aright, that Dave is in favor of socializing private pensions?
No, you didn't get the article at all.
This is exactly the opposite of privatizing Social Security. Never thought I'd see the day.
You didn't.
Bliffle, what we would sacrifice with socialized medicine would be our quality of care, speed and efficiency of care and ultimately our lives.
Under our current system it is not the poor and impoverished who suffer and die. They are covered by Medicaid. It is the working class people who don't make health insurance a priority - at least in part because it is expensive.
What socialized medicine does is make sure that they are all covered, but the cost is that everyone dies sooner and the suffering is spread around.
Dave
5 - Arch Conservative
"Pension funds, 401k plans and personal IRA accounts have a total value of trillions of dollars. If the government were to seize those assets and then replace them with low-yield, low-risk government bonds of equivalent value, it would give the government a huge cash infusion, and offer a more stable alternative to private citizens than controlling their own retirement investments."
I think if they tried it there'd fianlly be blood in the streets Dave.
6 - Bennett
HaHa! This piece was good for a laugh or two. It's comforting to know that damn near everyone who reads it understands that Dave's Spin and Lie Machine adds very little to the debate, other than hot air and bombast.
Lumpy "and his worst excesses have hurt less than a handful of americans."
Tell that to the families of our dead soldiers.
7 - bliffle
Medicaid? Anybody know a doctor who'll take a Medicaid patient? Or even a Medicare patient?
Our private healthcare system is better than any government agency could ever be at stiffing people, refusing them service, and sending them away.
8 - Cannonshop
#8 Leaving aside that portion of your comment in which you shit on Vets and treat their families like garbage for a moment, SIR...
The ARTICLE is about the possibility of Congressional actions to PLUNDER the people, in the NAME of "The People". SIR.
The passage of the $700Billion bailout of Wall-Street Billionaires at taxpayer expense, and the ease with which a supermajority in the Senate and a majority in the congress, backed by a President of the same PARTY to execute such plunder as Mr. Nalle speculates is a real, and serious, possibility.
SIR.
This is particularly true with the kind of friendly media that the party-most-likely-to-hold power has-a Media that refuses to question questionable dealings by incumbents including Chuck Rangel, Chris Dodd, Nancy Pelosi, and Barney Frank (the likeliest architects of such a move, given their positions within the congress, committee seats and such) makes this a real, as in very, very, real, possibility. A government that has no fear of the People and believes it can mollify them with the plunder of the treasury will do exactly the sort of things Mr. Nalle suggests. Particularly in the absence of a strong opposition party, and in the presence of massive amounts of slush-fund-money that can be derived if the benefits happen to go to the right sets of hands (Donors, media types, etc.)
SIR.
9 - Bennett
WTF are you talking about? Sir?
In no way was I shitting on the Vets or Families, just reminding Lumpy that "his worst excesses have hurt" a hell of a lot more than a "handfull of americans".
Get it?
Not my fault Dave has lost all credibility.
Relax Dude, it's not the end of the world any more than the current admin.... never mind.
10 - Heloise
Dave the only crystal ball you seem to be consulting is your balled-up fist shaking at the wind. You and your ilk have no intuition. And that's a plus for those of us who do. Just like you guys called your own side all wrong. I was rooting for Mitt, and just dissed Obama as an empty suit...NOTHING you say could interest me in terms of predictions.
Tyranny and dictatorships?--Bring it!!
Heloise
11 - Clavos
Anybody know a doctor who'll take a Medicaid patient? Or even a Medicare patient?
I don't know about Medicaid, but every one of my wife's drs (12-14 of 'em in the past year) has taken Medicare without objection.
In fact, I haven't met a Dr yet who refused it. There's no reason for them to do so, because Medicare sets the fee standards these days, and all the insurance companies follow suit, so they (the drs) don't get paid less by taking Medicare.
12 - troll
Dave - what's the fucking difference - ?
we can nationalize the pension system and watch the government piss away wealth or we can privatize it and watch trillions evaporate in market fluctuations
(in either case the wealth re-materializes in the hands of the big shots)
13 - Dr Dreadful
"Speculation and fearmongering abound. Obama's Marxist background and openly socialist rhetoric..."
You wrote that without even blinking, didn't you, Dave?
14 - Jon Sobel
"Obama's Marxist background"?
[shakes head, returns attention to events on planet Earth where - hey, look, socialism! There's some, in Scandinavia. There's some in an obscure Arctic state (oops, that's Alaska - hush up everybody)]
15 - Ruvy
When are you going to write about the tango, Dave? We cashed out our pensions to move here, and the only thing about Argentina that interests me is the tango.
If you must talk about Argentina, move on to other topics. You can write about how their currency and banking system collapsed a while ago, sparking major aliya to this countries by middle class Jews who suddenly found that they were poor.
16 - Arch Conservative
Dave, at the rate this site is going you might as well be attempting reasonable and rational discourse with the regulars on the daily kos.
Half of the people that support Obama are sociliasts like him and the other half are weak minded idiots that he has fooled.
I just hope that the pendulum doesn't swing so far to left this time that it gets stuck over there for good.
17 - zingzing
dave: "Obama's Marxist background and openly socialist rhetoric have raised fears despite the moderate positions and conciliatory statements which have characterized his campaign."
he's not a marxist. he's not socialist. i'm surprised that you, who should be able to recognize the two when they are truly there, would really be confused about it at this point. he's no more socialist than you are.
"Based on the extraordinary level of hate-filled rhetoric coming from leftist partisans it's hard not to believe that they will be out for political revenge once they come to power."
what's so 'extraordinary' about it? is it on the level with some of the right's "kill him!" and "n*gger!" fun we've all heard at mccain rallies? political revenge... sheesh. you're running scared at this point.
"There is no question that Obama will need money for further bailouts..."
are they on the level with mccain's "i'll buy your fucking mortgage!" proposal? now that's some fucking stupid shit right there.
"There is a marked tendency among those who have been too long in government and especially those who subscribe to the share-the-wealth philosophy of socialism, to believe that all money essentially belongs to government and that it is only in the hands of private citizens because government chooses to let them keep it, at least temporarily. For them, the needs of government are greater than the rights of the citizens..."
who actually believes this shit? the same kind of people who like to get beaten during sex? the shit-eaters? there's got to be some sort of sickness going on... or it doesn't really exist in any real sort of way. no one really thinks like this.
"This attitude is fundamentally wrong."
it's fundamentally stupid. but don't let that stop you from thinking "maybe i'm making it all up."
18 - Dr Dreadful
@ #15: Ruvy, if you're interested in tango, check out some of Terence Clarke's articles for Blogcritics. He's an excellent writer who sadly, because of his somewhat specialized subject matter, doesn't get the readership he deserves.
19 - Dr Dreadful
And just so we're clear about all this 'spread the wealth' nonsense which has gotten the He'saSocialistHe'saSocialistHe'saSocialist! brigade even more inflamed than they already were, here's what Obama actually said to Joe the Plumber:
Source: Politifact
20 - Ruvy
DD,
While not casting any mud on a fellow writer, like Mr. Clarke, Dave could look at the real problems America faces on the way to being like Argentina - that banking collapse is just one sample of what is coming y(our) way, amigo.
Frankly, at the moment, I'm editing quarterly reports of firms who are trying hard to stretch terms to cover the disaster this last quarter was.
21 - Dr Dreadful
Not to take issue with your doomsaying, Ruvy, but I will say that I visited Argentina a couple of years after the collapse of the peso and it was doing just fine.
22 - bliffle
I'll second that recommendation to read Terence Clarkes articles: they are excellent.
23 - Dave Nalle
Medicaid? Anybody know a doctor who'll take a Medicaid patient? Or even a Medicare patient?
Yes, actually. In my volunteer work for our rural community center I regularly have contact with doctors and dentists who work almost exclusively for Medicaid patients and in many cases will not take patients who are not on medicaid. One of them does well enough with his practice that every time I try to find him instead of one of his junior partners he seems to have flown down to Rio for a week or two.
Dave
24 - Dave Nalle
Bennett, Zing - you're so far gone into partisanship I'm not going to waste my time on you anymore.
Heloise - gibberish and/or gibbering.
Ruvy - my daughter is studying tango. seems like fun.
Argentina - yes, it's the worst case scenario for all economic mistakes. Its economy crashes and burns once a decade. The one thing you can be sure of is that if Argentina does something it's a bad idea.
Archie, Cannon - get ready to put up with at least 2 more years of this ridiculous, delusional bullshit.
Dave
25 - Clavos
And I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
Except, of course, for those from whom it's being spread.
Not wishing to have my rather modest wealth spread around, I'll not be voting for Mr. Obama.