Initiative 1098, raising a billion dollars for schools and healthcare while lowering taxes for homeowners and small businesses, will find a place on the November ballot.
Supporters rolled up an impressive 360,000 signatures in an intensive six-week campaign. Campaign activists were preparing to deliver the signed petitions to the secretary of state at our deadline.
The Puget Sound Alliance for Retired Americans had set a goal of 1,000 signatures, but topped 4,000, an achievement recognized by campaign leaders as remarkable for an organization of our size.
I-1098 will face lavishly-funded opposition from the Business Roundtable, a collection of wealthy CEOs and venture capitalists who shudder at the thought of equity in our tax system.
Back to Home
Sunday, July 4, 2010
Tea bags: Idiocy and armed militias
By Alfredo Peppard
Pauline and I have been in Seattle for six weeks now and we have been dumbfounded by what we see on television. The tea bag movement is all over the internet but you have to see it on a big screen TV to fully appreciate the head-on idiocy of the thing. I have suspected for some time that a good many of my countrymen were at least a half a bubble off, but this gang of baboons utterly flabbergasts me. One thing that this is all about is that they are all mad as hell about something, whatever the hell it is. Just what is the tea party, tea bag movement, tea baggers, whatever you call them?
First, it is a television phenomenon which originates on Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News. The news crew didn’t go out and cover this movement; they created it. Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck called it into being. Then every time more than ten tea baggers showed up in public Fox News gave them lavish coverage, with reporters and anchor persons expressing sympathy and understanding of these poor folk, burdened as they are by a crushing government. And so the cluster of slightly demented folks, some armed, become in the imagination of a definable group of Americans, the vanguard of a social justice movement. They want to take back America. They want to return to a more just past. But their idea of a “just past” is not one influenced by Thoreau and Emerson, certainly not the New England intellectual tradition that brought about Garrison, Sumner, and ultimately John Brown. No, their historical roots can be traced through George Wallace, Orval Faubas and Lester Maddox to that Society of English- speaking slave owners that spread from the Southern Caribbean to the Mason-Dixon Line. The bagger left wing wants to return to Jim Crow; its right wing wants to return to the slavery-ridden political and social status of 1850.
Their prominent spokespersons, candidates, and would-be candidates are typically young, good-looking, and utterly vacuous -- made for television. The leading Tea Party TV personality is the inimitable Sarah Palin. Palin is a marvel. With gestures, head tosses, flashing smiles, always with good eye contact, she can spout utter nonsense to crowds of enthusiastic yahoos and have them loving it. PT Barnum was right. But unlike the feather-headed Palin, the real heavy hitters have “News Shows” on Fox, with Glen Beck, the present favorite of the Baggers, playing the part of a patriot of 1776.
All Murdoch’s creatures are adept at manufacturing facts as they go along but what distinguishes Beck, Limbaugh, and Hannity is their ability carry out rants that begin with a whopper and go from there to the utterly preposterous. These tribunes of the couch potato constituency spew forth on a daily basis accusations of a dark conspiracy to enslave the American people -- a vile conspiracy being carried out as they speak by Nazis, Liberals, and Commies, the sworn enemies of all Real Americans; and at the head of this cabal sits a black President who is not an American citizen -- and on and on from there.
This style of irrational politics was prominent in the secessionist press in the 1850s. This style of rhetoric entered the politics of the modern world when Charles Maurras, who founded the Paris newspaper Action Française during the Dreyfus Affair, heaped pure vitriol and abuse upon any and all supporters of liberal thought in France. Anti-Semitism was his consistent core issue, and by 1930 Action Française brought into being a violent force of fascist street brawlers. In the 1940s they supported Petain. Both Mussolini and Hitler copied Maurras’ methods. It is not likely that many if any Tea Baggers ever heard of Action Française, much less Maurras. They are just reacting like reactionary yahoos always do.
The whole thing would be hilarious were it not for the fact they are heavily financed by some of the most anti-democratic billionaires you will find anywhere. These billionaires, with Rupert Murdoch in the lead, just want to overturn the last election. That’s all. Failing that, they want to make it impossible for anyone else to govern. These are the same jackals whose multi-media noise machine described Clinton’s escapades in the Oval Office as being tantamount to blowing up the Washington Monument. I would be falling off my chair laughing if they didn’t have armed militias in their movement.
Back to Home
Pauline and I have been in Seattle for six weeks now and we have been dumbfounded by what we see on television. The tea bag movement is all over the internet but you have to see it on a big screen TV to fully appreciate the head-on idiocy of the thing. I have suspected for some time that a good many of my countrymen were at least a half a bubble off, but this gang of baboons utterly flabbergasts me. One thing that this is all about is that they are all mad as hell about something, whatever the hell it is. Just what is the tea party, tea bag movement, tea baggers, whatever you call them?
First, it is a television phenomenon which originates on Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News. The news crew didn’t go out and cover this movement; they created it. Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck called it into being. Then every time more than ten tea baggers showed up in public Fox News gave them lavish coverage, with reporters and anchor persons expressing sympathy and understanding of these poor folk, burdened as they are by a crushing government. And so the cluster of slightly demented folks, some armed, become in the imagination of a definable group of Americans, the vanguard of a social justice movement. They want to take back America. They want to return to a more just past. But their idea of a “just past” is not one influenced by Thoreau and Emerson, certainly not the New England intellectual tradition that brought about Garrison, Sumner, and ultimately John Brown. No, their historical roots can be traced through George Wallace, Orval Faubas and Lester Maddox to that Society of English- speaking slave owners that spread from the Southern Caribbean to the Mason-Dixon Line. The bagger left wing wants to return to Jim Crow; its right wing wants to return to the slavery-ridden political and social status of 1850.
Their prominent spokespersons, candidates, and would-be candidates are typically young, good-looking, and utterly vacuous -- made for television. The leading Tea Party TV personality is the inimitable Sarah Palin. Palin is a marvel. With gestures, head tosses, flashing smiles, always with good eye contact, she can spout utter nonsense to crowds of enthusiastic yahoos and have them loving it. PT Barnum was right. But unlike the feather-headed Palin, the real heavy hitters have “News Shows” on Fox, with Glen Beck, the present favorite of the Baggers, playing the part of a patriot of 1776.
All Murdoch’s creatures are adept at manufacturing facts as they go along but what distinguishes Beck, Limbaugh, and Hannity is their ability carry out rants that begin with a whopper and go from there to the utterly preposterous. These tribunes of the couch potato constituency spew forth on a daily basis accusations of a dark conspiracy to enslave the American people -- a vile conspiracy being carried out as they speak by Nazis, Liberals, and Commies, the sworn enemies of all Real Americans; and at the head of this cabal sits a black President who is not an American citizen -- and on and on from there.
This style of irrational politics was prominent in the secessionist press in the 1850s. This style of rhetoric entered the politics of the modern world when Charles Maurras, who founded the Paris newspaper Action Française during the Dreyfus Affair, heaped pure vitriol and abuse upon any and all supporters of liberal thought in France. Anti-Semitism was his consistent core issue, and by 1930 Action Française brought into being a violent force of fascist street brawlers. In the 1940s they supported Petain. Both Mussolini and Hitler copied Maurras’ methods. It is not likely that many if any Tea Baggers ever heard of Action Française, much less Maurras. They are just reacting like reactionary yahoos always do.
The whole thing would be hilarious were it not for the fact they are heavily financed by some of the most anti-democratic billionaires you will find anywhere. These billionaires, with Rupert Murdoch in the lead, just want to overturn the last election. That’s all. Failing that, they want to make it impossible for anyone else to govern. These are the same jackals whose multi-media noise machine described Clinton’s escapades in the Oval Office as being tantamount to blowing up the Washington Monument. I would be falling off my chair laughing if they didn’t have armed militias in their movement.
Back to Home
Dino Rossi: Wrong, wrong, wrong on the issues
Expect millions of corporate dollars to gush into the campaign war chest of Dino Rossi, recruited by the Republican National Committee to take on Democratic U. S. Senator Patty Murray in this year’s election.
The corporate folks know what they’re doing. During his six years in the State Senate, Rossi managed only five positive votes in 77 issues, the Washington State Labor Council reports. Delegates to the council’s Committee on Political Education (COPE) conference unanimously endorsed Murray for re-election.
Here in brief is Rossi’s record on issues of major concern to working people:
• Unemployed workers: Rossi voted for changes that cut benefits for workers who lose their jobs through no fault of their own; voted against providing benefits to victims of domestic violence who are forced to quit their jobs to flee their attackers; voted against a retraining bill to assist laid-off Boeing and other workers; and voted against providing benefits to workers locked out of their jobs.
• Injured workers: Rossi voted to cut benefits for victims of job-related hearing loss; voted to repeal the workplace ergonomic safety rule; voted against empowering health care workers to prevent needle-stick injuries; voted to lower state standards protecting workers from second-hand smoke; voted for partial privatization of the worker’ comp system; and voted to grant legal immunity to job site contractors who negligently injure workers who are not their employees.
• Low-income workers: Rossi voted to freeze the state minimum wage; and voted against increasing home-care workers’ wages to an average of $8.50 an hour.
• Collective bargaining and union rights: Rossi voted against granting collective bargaining rights to state employees, four-year college faculty, and U.W. academic student employees; voted against allowing dues deduction for home-care workers who unionize; and voted against prohibiting public employers from firing or misclassifying employees to avoid providing benefits.
• Other telltale votes: Rossi voted against allowing use of sick leave or other paid leave to care for sick family members; voted for the privatization of certain ferry runs; voted against a “pay gap” measure to grant bigger raises to state employees whose pay lags behind that of private sector counterparts; voted against promoting apprenticeship on public workers projects; and voted against a bill to create a “buying pool” to negotiate lower drug prices.
Voting right on labor issues only 6% of the time, Rossi’s record “ranks among the worst and most partisan of any legislator during his 1997-2003 tenure in the State Senate,” the State Labor Council said.
Back to Home
The corporate folks know what they’re doing. During his six years in the State Senate, Rossi managed only five positive votes in 77 issues, the Washington State Labor Council reports. Delegates to the council’s Committee on Political Education (COPE) conference unanimously endorsed Murray for re-election.
Here in brief is Rossi’s record on issues of major concern to working people:
• Unemployed workers: Rossi voted for changes that cut benefits for workers who lose their jobs through no fault of their own; voted against providing benefits to victims of domestic violence who are forced to quit their jobs to flee their attackers; voted against a retraining bill to assist laid-off Boeing and other workers; and voted against providing benefits to workers locked out of their jobs.
• Injured workers: Rossi voted to cut benefits for victims of job-related hearing loss; voted to repeal the workplace ergonomic safety rule; voted against empowering health care workers to prevent needle-stick injuries; voted to lower state standards protecting workers from second-hand smoke; voted for partial privatization of the worker’ comp system; and voted to grant legal immunity to job site contractors who negligently injure workers who are not their employees.
• Low-income workers: Rossi voted to freeze the state minimum wage; and voted against increasing home-care workers’ wages to an average of $8.50 an hour.
• Collective bargaining and union rights: Rossi voted against granting collective bargaining rights to state employees, four-year college faculty, and U.W. academic student employees; voted against allowing dues deduction for home-care workers who unionize; and voted against prohibiting public employers from firing or misclassifying employees to avoid providing benefits.
• Other telltale votes: Rossi voted against allowing use of sick leave or other paid leave to care for sick family members; voted for the privatization of certain ferry runs; voted against a “pay gap” measure to grant bigger raises to state employees whose pay lags behind that of private sector counterparts; voted against promoting apprenticeship on public workers projects; and voted against a bill to create a “buying pool” to negotiate lower drug prices.
Voting right on labor issues only 6% of the time, Rossi’s record “ranks among the worst and most partisan of any legislator during his 1997-2003 tenure in the State Senate,” the State Labor Council said.
Back to Home
An Open Letter To the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform
The Fiscal Commission now starting its work needs to begin on the right footing. If this effort is based on incorrect assumptions to start with it cannot achieve success. Erroneous ideas and facts about the deficit and debt are all too often found in current political rhetoric and in shallow and uninformed media coverage. This can only cause confusion, anxiety, and anger among Americans.
The most important and significant of these erroneous ideas is that the so-called "entitlements" have something to do with the increasing deficits. Social Security is separately funded through the payroll tax, which is covering all expenses of paying benefits and currently producing a surplus.
Medicare is also separately funded through payroll taxes, premiums, co-payments, etc. Of course, the escalating costs of medical care need to be addressed but this should not be within the purview of a fiscal policy commission. The excessive costs of administration of medical care including excess profits, executive compensation, research and development incurred by medical device companies, hospitals, clinics, laboratories, insurance companies, etc need to be studied and reformed. This should be done by a commission consisting of medical professionals, management consultants, etc. Your commission is not qualified to do this. Therefore a decision should be taken at the outset to set aside the entitlements and to adopt a plan that will focus on tax and revenue reform, and discretionary spending on such items as defense, military spending, foreign aid, earmarks, corporate subsidies, the war on drugs, etc.
If the Commission insists on placing primary attention on the "entitlements" it will endanger the whole project and disappoint the President's hope for real progress in reducing deficit spending. Attacks on Social Security and Medicare can only produce an outpouring of angry citizen protest which will make the so-called anti-government Tea Party passion look puny.
"Messing around" with Social Security and Medicare is playing with people’s lives, health and well being. Changes in these programs mean less food on the table for many, no doctor to help when sick, no hospital to perform life saving surgery.
Therefore, the most important decision the Commission can make at this crucial starting point is to clearly disassociate itself from those influential figures and groups in the anti-government business and investment communities who are motivated ideologically by a desire to dismantle the New Deal and Great Society originated programs. These programs have become so integrated into the lives of ordinary Americans that adverse changes would in effect tear the heart out of American civilization. We have seen the violent citizen reactions in certain European countries to reductions in life sustaining benefit programs. To activate this kind of political and social disorder in America will not provide any solution to the deficit problem
Sincerely,
Lawrence D. Greene, Vice Chair,
South King County Chapter,
Alliance for Retired Americans
Editor’s note: We urge our readers to write their own letters. Tell the commission to keep its hands off Social Security and Medicare. Address the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, 1650 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20504.
Back to Home
The most important and significant of these erroneous ideas is that the so-called "entitlements" have something to do with the increasing deficits. Social Security is separately funded through the payroll tax, which is covering all expenses of paying benefits and currently producing a surplus.
Medicare is also separately funded through payroll taxes, premiums, co-payments, etc. Of course, the escalating costs of medical care need to be addressed but this should not be within the purview of a fiscal policy commission. The excessive costs of administration of medical care including excess profits, executive compensation, research and development incurred by medical device companies, hospitals, clinics, laboratories, insurance companies, etc need to be studied and reformed. This should be done by a commission consisting of medical professionals, management consultants, etc. Your commission is not qualified to do this. Therefore a decision should be taken at the outset to set aside the entitlements and to adopt a plan that will focus on tax and revenue reform, and discretionary spending on such items as defense, military spending, foreign aid, earmarks, corporate subsidies, the war on drugs, etc.
If the Commission insists on placing primary attention on the "entitlements" it will endanger the whole project and disappoint the President's hope for real progress in reducing deficit spending. Attacks on Social Security and Medicare can only produce an outpouring of angry citizen protest which will make the so-called anti-government Tea Party passion look puny.
"Messing around" with Social Security and Medicare is playing with people’s lives, health and well being. Changes in these programs mean less food on the table for many, no doctor to help when sick, no hospital to perform life saving surgery.
Therefore, the most important decision the Commission can make at this crucial starting point is to clearly disassociate itself from those influential figures and groups in the anti-government business and investment communities who are motivated ideologically by a desire to dismantle the New Deal and Great Society originated programs. These programs have become so integrated into the lives of ordinary Americans that adverse changes would in effect tear the heart out of American civilization. We have seen the violent citizen reactions in certain European countries to reductions in life sustaining benefit programs. To activate this kind of political and social disorder in America will not provide any solution to the deficit problem
Sincerely,
Lawrence D. Greene, Vice Chair,
South King County Chapter,
Alliance for Retired Americans
Editor’s note: We urge our readers to write their own letters. Tell the commission to keep its hands off Social Security and Medicare. Address the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, 1650 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20504.
Back to Home
Alliance ‘up and running’ in Tacoma, Pierce County
By Bill Johnston
The Tacoma-Pierce County ARA chapter is up and running. The group meets monthly at 11:30 a.m. on the third Thursday at Joeseppi’s in Tacoma’s West End Neighborhood – by the Narrows Bridge, for those unfamiliar with the City of Destiny.
The chapter has elected officers for the year, including Ron Richardson, the retired National Executive Vice President of UNITE-HERE, as chapter president.
The group has organized along a very social agenda. Meetings start with a time to reconnect socially, followed by a buffet lunch, a speaker and then a short business meeting. Committees have been formed. The group will spend the slow summer months working out committee goals and planning to involve the membership in achieving them.
ARA National President Barbara Easterly is expected to visit in the fall. The chapter plans to organize a meeting for her, possibly with a fund raising aspect.
Tacoma and Pierce County retirees are invited to call Membership Chair Bill Johnston at (253) 627-6860 – or simply show up at Joeseppi’s, at North Pearl and North 21st at 11:30 a.m. on the third Thursday. Not only will new members meet interesting union, progressive and involved retirees, but they’ll have a great time doing it!
Back to Home
The Tacoma-Pierce County ARA chapter is up and running. The group meets monthly at 11:30 a.m. on the third Thursday at Joeseppi’s in Tacoma’s West End Neighborhood – by the Narrows Bridge, for those unfamiliar with the City of Destiny.
The chapter has elected officers for the year, including Ron Richardson, the retired National Executive Vice President of UNITE-HERE, as chapter president.
The group has organized along a very social agenda. Meetings start with a time to reconnect socially, followed by a buffet lunch, a speaker and then a short business meeting. Committees have been formed. The group will spend the slow summer months working out committee goals and planning to involve the membership in achieving them.
ARA National President Barbara Easterly is expected to visit in the fall. The chapter plans to organize a meeting for her, possibly with a fund raising aspect.
Tacoma and Pierce County retirees are invited to call Membership Chair Bill Johnston at (253) 627-6860 – or simply show up at Joeseppi’s, at North Pearl and North 21st at 11:30 a.m. on the third Thursday. Not only will new members meet interesting union, progressive and involved retirees, but they’ll have a great time doing it!
Back to Home
Krugman: Spend now, save later
By Steve Dzielak
Paul Krugman, the column-writing, Nobel Prize winning college professor, said it best back in May: We could use more fiscal stimulus — but Congress is balking even at extending aid for the ever-growing ranks of the long-term unemployed. Fiscal responsibility, you see — hey, and let’s make sure estate taxes stay low!
Krugman’s big worry? That policymakers would just sit there for years congratulating themselves on the soundness of their policies. In June, Senate Republicans just said Hell No! to everything in sight, including an extension of unemployment benefits for said long-term unemployed. Never mind that America is facing the highest rate of long-term joblessness since the 1930s.
Krugman focused on what many leading economists see as a huge mistake: a return to austerity. He cited 1937, when FDR’s premature attempt to balance the budget helped plunge a recovering economy back into severe recession. Then, as now, creating jobs was suddenly out, inflicting pain was in.
In an imaginary conversation with a German Deficit Hawk, Krugman counters the Hawk’s frenzy to cut deficits immediately (“because Germany must deal with the fiscal burden of an aging population”). Cutting doesn’t make sense, Krugman says, because even if you manage to save 80 billion euros — which you won’t, because the budget cuts will hurt your economy and reduce revenues — the interest payments on that much debt would be less than a tenth of a percent of your gross domestic product (GDP).
When Krugman points out that austerity will threaten economic recovery while doing next to nothing to the long-run budget position, the Hawk takes cover behind fear of the Market reaction. When Krugman wonders aloud why the Market should be moved by policies with almost no long-run fiscal impact, he is cut dead with an all-time classic: You just don’t understand our situation.
Krugman sees hypocrisy in this obsession with the deficit. Lawmakers eager to slash benefits for those in need are equally quick to stump for tax breaks for the wealthy. Senator Ben Nelson, who sanctimoniously declared that we can’t afford $77 billion for the unemployed, supported the first Bush tax cut, which cost a cool $1.3 trillion.
The Ben Nelsons of the world seem stumped by the truism, spend now, while the economy remains depressed; save later, once it has recovered. Here’s how Krugman sees it: Much of the deficit is the result of the ongoing crisis, which depressed revenues and required extraordinary expenditures to stabilize the financial system. As the crisis abates, things will improve---just not fast enough. After bottoming out in 2014, he believes, the deficit will start rising again, largely because of rising health care costs.
The answer is clear: First bring health costs under control, then find additional revenues and/or spending cuts. Right now, our severely depressed economy is inflicting long-run damage. This is not the time for austerity. The deficit should become a priority only when the Federal Reserve has regained some traction over the economy, so that it can offset the negative effects of tax increases and spending cuts by reducing interest rates.
Currently, the Fed can’t do that, because the interest rates it can control are near zero, and can’t go any lower. Eventually, as unemployment falls — probably below 7 percent— the Fed will want to raise rates to head off possible inflation. At that point we make a deal: The government starts cutting back, and the Fed holds off on rate hikes so that cutbacks don’t tip the economy back into a slump. But the time for such a deal is at least two years off. The responsible thing, then, is to spend now, while planning to save later.
As Krugman emphasizes, every year that goes by with extremely high unemployment forces many long-term unemployed into a permanent underclass, even as many new graduates are denied a start on their working lives.
Penny-pinching now isn’t just cruel; it endangers the nation’s future while failing to lighten future debt burden. Krugman implores the hawks: Please get your timing right. Yes, we need to fix our long-run budget problems — but not by refusing to help our economy in its hour of need.
Back to Home
Paul Krugman, the column-writing, Nobel Prize winning college professor, said it best back in May: We could use more fiscal stimulus — but Congress is balking even at extending aid for the ever-growing ranks of the long-term unemployed. Fiscal responsibility, you see — hey, and let’s make sure estate taxes stay low!
Krugman’s big worry? That policymakers would just sit there for years congratulating themselves on the soundness of their policies. In June, Senate Republicans just said Hell No! to everything in sight, including an extension of unemployment benefits for said long-term unemployed. Never mind that America is facing the highest rate of long-term joblessness since the 1930s.
Krugman focused on what many leading economists see as a huge mistake: a return to austerity. He cited 1937, when FDR’s premature attempt to balance the budget helped plunge a recovering economy back into severe recession. Then, as now, creating jobs was suddenly out, inflicting pain was in.
In an imaginary conversation with a German Deficit Hawk, Krugman counters the Hawk’s frenzy to cut deficits immediately (“because Germany must deal with the fiscal burden of an aging population”). Cutting doesn’t make sense, Krugman says, because even if you manage to save 80 billion euros — which you won’t, because the budget cuts will hurt your economy and reduce revenues — the interest payments on that much debt would be less than a tenth of a percent of your gross domestic product (GDP).
When Krugman points out that austerity will threaten economic recovery while doing next to nothing to the long-run budget position, the Hawk takes cover behind fear of the Market reaction. When Krugman wonders aloud why the Market should be moved by policies with almost no long-run fiscal impact, he is cut dead with an all-time classic: You just don’t understand our situation.
Krugman sees hypocrisy in this obsession with the deficit. Lawmakers eager to slash benefits for those in need are equally quick to stump for tax breaks for the wealthy. Senator Ben Nelson, who sanctimoniously declared that we can’t afford $77 billion for the unemployed, supported the first Bush tax cut, which cost a cool $1.3 trillion.
The Ben Nelsons of the world seem stumped by the truism, spend now, while the economy remains depressed; save later, once it has recovered. Here’s how Krugman sees it: Much of the deficit is the result of the ongoing crisis, which depressed revenues and required extraordinary expenditures to stabilize the financial system. As the crisis abates, things will improve---just not fast enough. After bottoming out in 2014, he believes, the deficit will start rising again, largely because of rising health care costs.
The answer is clear: First bring health costs under control, then find additional revenues and/or spending cuts. Right now, our severely depressed economy is inflicting long-run damage. This is not the time for austerity. The deficit should become a priority only when the Federal Reserve has regained some traction over the economy, so that it can offset the negative effects of tax increases and spending cuts by reducing interest rates.
Currently, the Fed can’t do that, because the interest rates it can control are near zero, and can’t go any lower. Eventually, as unemployment falls — probably below 7 percent— the Fed will want to raise rates to head off possible inflation. At that point we make a deal: The government starts cutting back, and the Fed holds off on rate hikes so that cutbacks don’t tip the economy back into a slump. But the time for such a deal is at least two years off. The responsible thing, then, is to spend now, while planning to save later.
As Krugman emphasizes, every year that goes by with extremely high unemployment forces many long-term unemployed into a permanent underclass, even as many new graduates are denied a start on their working lives.
Penny-pinching now isn’t just cruel; it endangers the nation’s future while failing to lighten future debt burden. Krugman implores the hawks: Please get your timing right. Yes, we need to fix our long-run budget problems — but not by refusing to help our economy in its hour of need.
Back to Home
Seventy-five candles at Social Security gala!
A gala celebration of the 75th Birthday of Social Security, with Senator Patty Murray as featured speaker, will be held at the Greenwood Senior Activity Center, 525 N. 85tth Street in Seattle on Monday, August 16, starting at 1:30 p.m.
The event – complete with ceremonial birthday cake – is being co-sponsored by the senior center and the Puget Sound Alliance for Retired Americans.
The Social Security Act was signed into law by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt on August 14, 1935. Throughout the 75 years of its existence, it has been the nation’s premier social insurance program, protecting millions of seniors, children and adults with disabilities from poverty.
The anniversary event will be a high point in the broadly-based campaign to expose and defeat efforts by the so-called “Fiscal Responsibility” commission to rob the Social Security trust funds to reduce the federal deficit.
The event will celebrate Social Security as a program for all generations, and will emphasize the need both to safeguard Social Security’s current benefits and to strengthen its protections for women, low-income workers and the oldest beneficiaries.
Back to Home
The event – complete with ceremonial birthday cake – is being co-sponsored by the senior center and the Puget Sound Alliance for Retired Americans.
The Social Security Act was signed into law by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt on August 14, 1935. Throughout the 75 years of its existence, it has been the nation’s premier social insurance program, protecting millions of seniors, children and adults with disabilities from poverty.
The anniversary event will be a high point in the broadly-based campaign to expose and defeat efforts by the so-called “Fiscal Responsibility” commission to rob the Social Security trust funds to reduce the federal deficit.
The event will celebrate Social Security as a program for all generations, and will emphasize the need both to safeguard Social Security’s current benefits and to strengthen its protections for women, low-income workers and the oldest beneficiaries.
Back to Home
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)