Social Security Scuffle
Politics is a curious study and there are many ways of participation. For those of more than a cursory interest there have always been breakfast and lunch and evening get-togethers where friends discuss issues and people of interest. Today there is the internet with blogs, websites and email, which brings me to my tale. There is in Charlotte a group of self-described fiscal/social conservatives who meet weekly for lunch to discuss whatever moves them. There is no agenda that I am aware of and not being an attendee or even being welcome, although I have attended a few times, my direct knowledge is limited. However, occasionally I am included in emails discussions that include some of them. Last week the subject of the end of Social Security was broached.
As anyone should know, Social Security in its current state is not financially viable. Especially with the economy slow, those things which made it appear solvent have gone by the way side. In the near future one of three things must occur: benefits must be reduced, taxes must go up, or the age of eligibility must be raised (which is itself a reduction in benefits). The solutions are simple enough and being one who believes the young already pay too much in Social Security taxes, I made the following proposal to the email group: Raise the age of retirement almost immediately so that those who are 65 can’t collect until they are 67 and those 64 can’t collect until they are 68. Those 63 don’t become eligible until 69 and continue this until the retirement age reaches 75. This, by itself, would fix Social Security; but I went further and recommended making Social Security means tested. No numbers were attached, just the idea.
At that point an eruption occurred which, in retrospect, was somewhat amusing but, even more, sad. I was strongly attacked for being a socialist. I was told to join the Democrats where I belonged. My political philosophy was questioned, as if my fiscal conservatism was not established. It was humorous, except those opposing my idea were all lawyers. Those agreeing were not. There is a lesson here I’m sure.
THE LAWYERS, I shall call them, pointed out that Social Security is a trust fund with specific obligations made to those who pay in. THE LAWYERS also pointed out that they wanted ‘their’ money back. They made clear that means testing the Social Security payout is socialist in nature and they abhor socialism. They went on. I was astounded. Here we are, the United States of Overspending, much of it because of government transfer payments and THE LAWYERS, rich beyond the dreams of most, said they wanted their payment too. One even said he would rather the US collapse than the obligation not be fulfilled. And that is one of the reasons we are in the financial position we are in.
THE LAWYERS, tort lawyers of one sort or another, are typical of their class. I call it the political/lawyer/banker class (and by the way I was accused of class envy). They produce nothing and make their living taking from those who do. They are no different than the politicians to whom they are sure to donate in order to maintain their free ride in the court room. Yet they rationalize they are capitalists and freedom-lovers and hate socialism. Nothing could be further from the truth. They are not capitalists. They are leaches. They prey on capitalists. They don’t love freedom. They use the force of law to extract penalties from their opponents. They live on the transfer of hard-earned profits to their bank accounts.
Small wonder they see Social Security as another way to transfer from the many to the few, to THE LAWYERS. And they rationalize their immorality by saying ‘its legal’. If they actually cared about freedom and capitalism they would seek to reform tort law into a reasonable method to punish those who inflict harm and care for those who are harmed. They do not.
Their true colors come out when someone runs for office who actually stands for the things they profess. THE LAWYERS do nothing. Talk is their stock in trade. Action would require standing to be counted. No, Mammon is their god. Not freedom. Being tort lawyers, THE LAWYERS are practiced at manipulating words to suit themselves and make themselves believe they are what they are not. During the course of the email exchange, one of them asked me my politics. He stated he thought he knew me. I answered thus: I am a capitalist, populist and anarchist. My true beliefs come from Boy Scouts where I obtained the rank of Eagle. For those of you who know I register Libertarian, know that it is a political party, not a philosophy.
I am a capitalist because I know man does best when he works for himself. I am a populist because I know we are all in this together, no one man more important than another. I am an anarchist because I know government is more often a problem than a solution. Being an Eagle Scout I learned to work with and be kind to my fellow man.
The Scout Slogan: Do a Good Turn Daily
The Scout Law: A Scout is Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Obedient, Cheerful, Thrifty, Brace, Clean and Reverent.
The Scout Motto: Be Prepared
The Scout Oath: On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; TO HELP OTHER PEOPLE AT ALL TIMES; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and MORALLY straight.
Small wonder the questioner never wrote back: these are not traits of THE LAWYERS.
We need your help! If you like PunditHouse, please consider donating to us. Even $5 a month can make a difference!
Short URL: https://pundithouse.com/?p=2450
