Ovid (publius_ovidius) wrote,

Three Cheers for ... Republicans?

So the Supreme Court has issued a 5-4 ruling stating that local governments can take your property, against your will, to help private businesses. Which Supremes voted against it? O'Connor, Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas. I didn't expect I'd find myself agreeing with the latter three any time soon. Is that a pig flying outside my window?

In other news, Congressional Republicans offered a Social Security bill which would, amongst other things, end a practice (started in the Reagan era) of borrowing our surplus Social Security funds to pay down the deficit. These funds were replaced with Treasury Notes. You and I would call them I.O.U.s. In effect, we have a pile of I.O.U.s sitting in our retirement account and that is the real reason for the Social Security system's failures. This is what Bush Jr., Clinton, and Bush Sr. were too cowardly to deal with: the Reagan administration's rape of Social Security in their spending orgy.1 W's "private accounts" were a damned joke that ignored the real problem. Now a handful of Republicans are trying to restore some sanity to the system. And the Dems are blocking it just because there is such an "us versus them" mentality that they can't let the Republicans get credit for anything.

Hey Congress! Could you please think about the American people for a change? It'd be awfully swell, guys.

1. What's terribly ironic about this is that the Reagan administration also saved Social Security under a plan that Greenspan put together. They saved it so well that the losses turned into a surplus and their greed got the best of them.
Tags: economics
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded