All the media over President Trump's G7 Conference, this is GeeWhis!!!, there is a $210 Trillion Dollar Deficit of Unfounded Liabilities. So if President Trump wants to chat with me, I am all ears. And honey you can bet this is Top Stories at the Tea Party Command Center, and below in my Comment area is the truth, so what has changed. Hmmmm!!! ?
In the US, we have two national programs to care for the elderly. Social Security provides a small pension, and Medicare covers medical expenses. All workers pay taxes that supposedly fund the benefits we may someday receive.
Living on Social Security benefits alone is a pretty meager existence.
Medicare has deductibles and copayments that can add up quickly. Both programs assume people have their own savings and other resources. Despite this, the programs are crucial to millions of retirees, many of whom work well past 65 just to make ends meet.
Having turned 68 a few days ago, I guess I’m contributing a bit to the trend
Limited though Social Security and Medicare are, we attribute one huge benefit to them: They’re guaranteed. Uncle Sam will always pay them—he promised. And to his credit, Uncle Sam is trying hard to keep his end of the deal.
Federal debt as a percentage of GDP has almost doubled since the turn of the century. The big jump occurred during the 2007–2009 recession, but the debt has kept growing since then. That’s a consequence of both higher spending and lower GDP growth.
In theory, Social Security and Medicare don’t count here. Their funding goes into separate trust funds. But in reality, the Treasury borrows from the trust funds, so they simply hold more government debt.
Today it looks like this:
Debt held by the public: $14.4 trillion
Intragovernmental holdings (the trust funds): $5.4 trillion
Total public debt: $19.8 trillion
Total GDP is roughly $19.3 trillion, so the federal debt is about equal to one full year of the entire nation’s collective economic output. That total does not also count the $3 trillion-plus of state and local debt, which in almost every other country of the world is included in their national debt numbers.
Including state and local debt in US figures would take our debt-to-GDP above 115%... and rising.
Just wait. We’re only getting started.
$210 Trillion Worth of Unfunded Liabilities
An old statute requires the Treasury to issue an annual financial statement, similar to a corporation’s annual report. The FY 2016 edition is 274 enlightening pages that the government hopes none of us will read.
Among the many tidbits, it contains a table on page 63 that reveals the net present value of the US government’s 75-year future liability for Social Security and Medicare.
Where will this $46.7 trillion come from? We don’t know.
Future Congresses will have to find it somewhere. This is the fabled “unfunded liability” you hear about from deficit hawks. Similar promises exist to military and civil service retirees and assorted smaller groups, too.
Trying to add them up quickly becomes an exercise in absurdity. They are so huge that it’s hard to believe the government will pay them, promises or not.
Many Americans think of “their” Social Security like a contract, similar to insurance benefits or personal property. The money that comes out of our paychecks is labeled FICA, which stands for Federal Insurance Contributions Act. We paid in all those years, so it’s just our own money coming back to us.
That’s a perfectly understandable viewpoint. It’s also wrong.
A 1960 Supreme Court case, Flemming vs. Nestor, ruled that Social Security is not insurance or any other kind of property. The law obligates you to make FICA “contributions.”
It does not obligate the government to give you anything back. FICA is simply a tax, like income tax or any other. The amount you pay in does figure into your benefit amount, but Congress can change that benefit any time it wishes.
Again, to make this clear: Your Social Security benefits are guaranteed under current law, but Congress reserves the right to change the law. They can give you more, or less, or nothing at all, and your only recourse is the ballot box.
Medicare didn’t yet exist in 1960, but I think Flemming vs. Nestor would apply to it, too. None of us have a “right” to healthcare benefits just because we have paid Medicare taxes all our lives. We are at Washington’s mercy.
I’m not suggesting Congress is about to change anything. My point is about promises. As a moral or political matter, it’s true that Washington promised us all these things. As a legal matter, however, no such promise exists. You can’t sue the government to get what you’re owed because it doesn’t “owe” you anything.
This distinction doesn’t matter right now, but I bet it will someday. If we Baby Boomers figure out ways to stay alive longer, and younger generations don’t accelerate the production of new taxpayers, something will have to give.
Former president Barack Obama has been caught on video at the shadowy Bilderberg Conference saying that “ordinary Americans” must “surrender to the New World Order” because they are “too small-minded to govern their own affairs.“
During his top-secret speech at the Bilderberg Conference held in Turin, Italy this week, Obama described the New World Order as an “international order we have worked for generations to build,” before concluding that “progress can only come when individuals surrender their rights to an all-powerful sovereign [the New World Order.]“
This is Obama as most have never seen him before, speaking candidly before his elite globalist peers, completely unaware that his words may one day be disseminated to a wider audience of “ordinary Americans.”
The secretive annual Bilderberg Conference, attended by the world’s liberal elite, is always protected by anti-terror police, military and a no-fly zone. All media is strictly banned and reporting on what goes on inside the tightly controlled venue has proven impossible during the 64-year history of the world’s most elite secret society.
However this year, one brave Bilderberg attendee, who wishes to remain anonymous for the sake of their safety, managed to covertly record segments of Barack Obama’s highly disturbing behind-closed-doors speech, and the resulting footage has the potential to open everybody’s eyes to what is really happening behind the scenes.
If you mention things like the New World Order or suggest Barack Obama is actively driving us towards a one-world government, you generally get treated to a roll of the eyes, a deep sigh, and an offhand comment about being a tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist.
But times are changing, and more and more mainstream folk are starting to wake up and smell the coffee being brewed by Obama and the global elites. Rolling Stone magazine, discussing the New World Order, has even issued an apology to “conspiracy theorists,” admitting that “you were right all along.”
“Conspiracy theorists of the world, believers in the hidden hands of the Rothschilds and the Masons and the Illuminati, we skeptics owe you an apology. You were right. The players may be a little different, but your basic premise is correct: The world is a rigged game.”
And it’s no wonder more and more people are waking up, considering the outrageous abuses of power that occurred under Obama’s rule, and the staggering amount of “conspiracy theories,” once held up to ridicule, that were proven to be as true as the day is long.
NSA surveillance, the marriage of banking and government, mainstream media as the propaganda arm of the liberal political elite, cannabis as medicine, rigged commodity markets, the petrodollar, 9/11, election fraud… The list of “wild conspiracy theories” proven true goes on and on. Mentioning any of these issues would have earnt you a roll of the eyes, a deep sigh, and an offhand tin foil hat comment in the past. But now they are mainstream facts.
And now our freedom-hating, promised-a-seat-at-the-grown-up-table former president, is giving speeches openly declaring that we need to give up some of our personal liberties in order to pave the way for the New World Order “conspiracy theory” to come to life.
And it’s far from the first time Obama has been caught promoting the ideology of the New World Order totalitarian regime.
Addressing the United Nations in NYC in 2016, Obama said:
“…But I am convinced that in the long run, giving up some freedom of action — not giving up our ability to protect ourselves or pursue our core interests, but binding ourselves to international rules over the long term — enhances our security. And I think that’s not just true for us…”
Giving up some of our freedoms? Binding Americans to international rules? Sorry, Obama. That doesn’t work for me at all.
No wonder he saves these New World Order speeches for his appearances at globalist events like UN General Assemblies and secretive Bilderberg meetings attended by the international elite.
But, if you’ve been paying attention, this is going to seem like deja vu, because the year before, on September 28th 2015, Obama said nearly the same thing:
“…The increasing skepticism of our international order can also be found in the most advanced democracies. We see greater polarization, more frequent gridlock; movements on the far right, and sometimes the left, that insist on stopping the trade that binds our fates to other nations, calling for the building of walls to keep out immigrants.”
Judge Orders Mueller To Prove Russia Meddled In Election
Judge Dabney L. Friedrich
A Washington federal judge on Thursday ordered special counsel Robert Mueller’s team to clarify election meddling claims lodged against a Russian company operated by Yevgeny Prigozhin, an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to Bloomberg.
Concord Management and Consulting, LLC. – one of three businesses indicted by Mueller in February along with 13 individuals for election meddling, surprised the special counsel in April when they actually showed up in court to fight the charges. Mueller’s team tried to delay Concord from entering the case, arguing that thee Russian company not been properly served, however Judge Dabney Friedrich denied the request – effectively telling prosecutors ‘well, they’re here.’
Concord was accused in the indictment of supporting the Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian ‘troll farm’ accused of trying to influence the 2016 US election.
On Thursday, Judge Freidrich asked Mueller’s prosecutors if she should assume they aren’t accusing Concord of violating US laws applicable to election expenditures and failure to register as a foreign agent.
Concord has asked Dabney to throw out the charges – claiming that Mueller’s office fabricated a crime, and that there is no law against interfering in elections.
According to the judge’s request for clarification, the Justice Department has argued that it doesn’t have to show that Concord had a legal duty to report its expenditures to the Federal Election Commission. Rather, the allegation is that the company knowingly engaged in deceptive acts that precluded the FEC, or the Justice Department, from ascertaining whether they had broken the law. -Bloomberg
On Monday, Friedrich raised questions over whether the special counsel’s office could prove a key element of their case – saying that it was “hard to see” how allegations of Russian influence were intended to interfere with US government operations vs. simply “confusing voters,” reports law.com.
During a 90-minute hearing, Friedrich questioned prosecutor Jonathan Kravis about how the government would be able to show the Russian defendants were aware of the Justice Department and FEC’s functions and then deliberately sought to skirt them.
“You still have to show knowledge of the agencies and what they do. How do you do that?” Friedrich asked.
Kravis, a prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, argued that the government needed only to show that Concord Management and the other defendants were generally aware that the U.S. government “regulates and monitors” foreign participation in American politics. That awareness, Kravis said, could be inferred from the Russians’ alleged creation of fake social media accounts that appeared to be run by U.S. citizens and “computer infrastructure” intended to mask the Russian origin of the influence operation.
“That is deception that is directed at a higher level,” Kravis said. Kravis appeared in court with Michael Dreeben, a top Justice Department appellate lawyer on detail to the special counsel’s office. -law.com
Concord pleaded not guilty in May. Their attorney, Eric Dubelier – a partner at Reed Smith, has described the election meddling charges as “make believe,” arguing on Monday that Mueller’s indictment against Concord “doesn’t charge a crime.”
“There is no statute of interfering with an election. There just isn’t,” said Dubelier, who added that Mueller’s office alleged a “made-up crime to fit the facts they have.”
Dubelier added that the case against Concord Management is the first in US history “where anyone has ever been charged with defrauding the Justice Department” through their failure to register under FARA.