After taking $10 Billion form Taxpayers, CEO of Goldman Sachs wants to CUT your Social Security

reply to post by iwilliam

FAR WORSE THAN DEMONS,imo.One Expects a demon to be evil,without any compassion,and to basically spend it's life f**cking people over.Its its entire raison d'etre.One expects a tad better from a person,born of human flesh and blood.The way the "Elite:-D :-D" of global finance is conducting business,leaves no doubt as to the fact that they care as little for regular people as demons do.Only being human,their actions are twice as disgusting,and without any slightest redeeming quality.A shotgun,a demon in human form and some one like Blankfein+the Bankers(sounds like a 50's group:-D)-guess who'd be leaving my yard with his head still attached to his body?

Ezio - where fore art thou???

reply to post by taws6


Oh Hell no, HELL NO! I've had enough of these damn elitist bastards trying to steer the freakin ship! What does he have to gain from cutting our social security anyway!? He's going to retire with 12 mansions, yachts, cars, so many grandchildren he won't know what to do with, and a massive conglomerate corporation to leave behind his twisted legacy of abusing the middle/lower class. Isn't that enough? Screw this guy!

reply to post by taws6


These guys just kill me.

They grab the cash, diss the victims and go for the leftovers too.

Originally posted by Putyournamehere

Then I see people going hog wild at the grocery store with their government food checks livin the good life and scratch my head to be honest.

reply to post by jaynkeel

 

Government food checks= good life?

Huh

Compared to how us non subsidized citizens eat, I'd say yes the good life. Go ahead hang around a grocery store sometime and see how well most people with food stamps eat especially in the lower income neighborhoods. Sorry if you're sheltered from the truth wherever you may happen to live, but it's out there just go and see for yourself, and I am not the only one to notice this rest assured.

Depending on the government to take care of you in old age is a mistake anyways. Thats what children are for really.

reply to post by taws6


What amazes me is how we are letting Washington and all the Wall Street crooks refer to Social Security as an entitlement program. My parents now retired are on Social Security. They both worked for more than 50 years. The have paid into the Social Security system since is the late 1930's (SS was created 1935). Anyway as an accountant I decided to see how much money they should have if they had invested that SS money taken out of their check into a simple savings account. Up until 7 years ago roughly a simple savings account paid about 6%. That is a FDIC insured bank account. Their SS payments would now be worth around $1.2 million for each of them or a total of $2.4 million. Also, they would still be earning enough interest on that money at 2% to cover over half there expenses at this time and most likely could live of the interest alone. That is not an entitlement. What we have is Washington once again mis-handling our money that has been put into the trust of the government. It is criminal and Washington DC Federal officials should be taken to court for this. If you did this with a large company the stock holders would put you in jail. It is a shame we are so passive and blindly allow these crooks to continue to rip up off.

How about we return the tax code to pre-regan status? America was booming before that fiasco.The only cuts that need to be made are to the military budget. Perpetual war is the reason amerika is broke. And I won't even start with the pentagons black budget. Remember those trillions of dollars that went missing? Mainstream media is quiet on that topic. Eisenhower warned us about the military-industial complex. Apparently we weren't listening.

reply to post by Oannes

How about we return the tax code to pre-regan status? America was booming before that fiasco.

Do you mean stagflation and the misery index? Ok, let's say we do. But that's only half the equation. Let's go back to pre-Reagan spending levels, too. Are you game?

The only cuts that need to be made are to the military budget. Perpetual war is the reason amerika is broke.

Well, what we need to borrow every year is much larger than the entire military budget, so it can't be the only reason, or the only cure.

Remember those trillions of dollars that went missing? Mainstream media is quiet on that topic.

Perhaps they're quiet about it because the money was found.

I think we're going to need a little more complex solution than the one you're proposing.

Originally posted by Merlin Lawndart
Isn't just lovely for people to have to pay an income tax on income that was already taxed to begin with? I say get rid of taxes, then government will follow. Problems solved.

I offered the beginnings of a solution to this problem on ATS at my Invoicing the Taxman thread. But it didn't get much airplay. If you want to stop all this you have to get pro-active and starve the beast or at least take chunks out of it. My suggestion has been to use the abolition of slavery laws against the central banks and their collection agencies like the CRA and the IRS. I'm not saying that taxes are not necessary, but the present situation involving rampant corruption, malfeasance, deriliction of fudiciary obligation and wanton greed in wall street, the central bankster system and government has to stop.

If we load these bitches up with millions upon millions of invoices, appeals, FOIA requests and formal complaints, they are going to be in a bit of trouble. They will have two choices, respond in a legitimate fashion, the costs of which will accelerate the oncoming financial destruction or they will instutute marshall law when the riots break out. One way or the other, we know where we all stand and they can't hide that from the masses for very long.

Cheers - Dave

I wish the Lloyd Blankfeins and Jamie Dimons of the world would just take a walk off a short pier. I would even buy them the chains and shackles...hell, I would even build the pier.

I think you are all reading something into his words that were not there.

Did he say cut SS or did he say cut the monthly checks of its reciepiants?
There is a big difference.
Many people get checks that shouldn't. We all know that but it doesn't get much air play.

My step daughters boy friend was married with a child (age 6). They were about to get divorced when she got cancer and died a few months later. Now his son gets a check and he gets a check. Even though he works at a bank 3 days a week. He refuses to work 5 days, even though they want him to because he would lose his check from SS.
My point is that too many people are happy taking the checks instead of changing their lives.
Someone loses their leg so they take SS disability. What about a call center job? Or some other job that doesn't require a great deal of mobility?

Just because you can't do your origional job doesn't mean you should get a check.
What about those who are jobs are disappearing due to the economy and computerization? Should we give them a check too?

Unemployment forces them to accept lesser jobs. Shouldn't SS also do the same?
Heck give them a 25% check if they do accept a lesser job. It will still be cheaper.

Just as awful as Hostess CEOs giving themselves multi million dollar raises immediately following their union workers agreeing to a paycut during their last bargaining agreement. Now Hostess blames the union.

Corporate greed and poop rolling downhill will always equate to the CEO getting his, and the common man getting pooped on.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

I've posted this before but I want to post it again in the hopes that as many people as possible see it. It's very possible that the 'bailout money' went to CHINA.

From an article last August, here, which is worth reading in its entirety:

occupycorporatism.com...

A source in the Deutsche Bank claims that in 2008 our financial and monetary system completely collapsed and since that time the banking cartels have been “propping up the system” to make it appear as if everything was fine. In reality our stock market and monetary systems are fake; meaning that there is nothing holding them in place except the illusion that they have stabilized since the Stock Market Crash nearly 5 years ago.

Since this time, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in conjunction with FEMA and other federal agencies have been quickly working to set in place their directives of control under a silent martial law. The Deutsche Bank informant says that the cause for the bailout of the banks was a large sum of cash needed quickly to repay China who had purchased large quantities of mortgage-backed securities that went belly-up when the global scam was realized. When China realized that they had been duped into buying worthless securitized loans which would never be repaid, they demanded the actual property instead. The Chinese were prepared to send their “people” to American shores to seize property as allocated to them through the securitized loan contracts.

To stave this off, the American taxpayers were coerced by former President Bush and former US Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson. During that incident, the US Senate was told emphatically that they had to approve a $700 billion bailout or else martial law would be implemented immediately. That money was funneled through the Federal Reserve Bank and wired to China, as well as other countries that were demanding repayment for the fraudulent securitizations. To further avert financial catastrophe, as well as more debt or property seizure threats by the Chinese, the Euro was imploded thereby plunging most of the European countries into an insurmountable free-fall for which they were never intended to recover.

reply to post by signalfire


Some of the 'facts' in what you C&P are flat out wrong.

You know Interchangeable Bank CEO #1 (That's what I'm calling them now, because they're basically just empty symbolic bodies that represent a larger finance machine that has grown well beyond any one individual or groups control), has a point. It is kind of foolish to believe that social security and other government benefits (no matter how morally virtuous their intent) would continue to operate in some financially stable vacuum, in spite of harsh demographic realities, forever. However, what ticks me off is that this guy seems to assume that he is going to be immune to the process of the nations financial scale-back. Its O.K. for him to ignore his own financial logic, as long as it serves his personal bank account. That kind of blatant inconsistency just ticks me off.

-Ghoster

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Wow WRabbit. Only one Republican in that list. This PROVES that the Democrats are, in fact, the evil party....

Unless, of course, your graphic was inadvertently incomplete? Somehow its creators simply overlooked:

Former Goldman Sachs Employees Hired by the Bush AdministrationJoshua Bolten: former Goldman Sachs executive, Chief of Staff to President Bush.

Henry Paulson: former Goldman Sachs CEO, appointed Treasury Secretary in 2006 on Bolten’s recommendation.

Neel T. Kashkari: former Goldman Sachs investment banker, hired as Interim Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Stability in 2006, headed the Office of Financial Stability during the financial crisis and given responsibility for TARP.

Reuben Jeffrey: previously Under Secretary of State for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs, Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, worked for 18 years at Goldman Sachs, hired by Kashkari in 2008 as interim chief investment officer for TARP.

Dan Jester: former Goldman Sachs strategic officer, hired on contract to advise Henry Paulson during the crisis, advised on AIG, GSEs, TARP and other bailouts.

Steve Shafran: former Goldman Sachs trader in Asian private equity, hired by Paulson to handle student loan and money market issues.

Kendrick R. Wilson III: former Goldman Sachs executive, enlisted as unpaid adviser to canvass banks on reaction to Treasury initiatives during crisis.

Edward C. Forst: former Goldman Sachs chief administrator, hired as advisor to Paulson during the crisis, became head of Goldman Sachs asset management division in 2010.

Robert K. Steel: former Goldman Sachs vice chairman, hired by Paulson Undersecretary of the Treasury for Domestic Finance in 2006.

Ed Liddy: former Goldman Sachs director, appointed by Paulson as CEO of AIG.

Or these people who were hired by GS after working for Republicans:

Kenneth Duberstein: Goldman Sachs lobbyist, Reagan White House chief of staff.

Eric Ueland: Goldman Sachs lobbyist, former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist’s (R-Tenn.) chief of staff.

Robert Zoellick: hired by Goldman Sachs as managing director in 2006, former US Trade Representative 2001 – 2005, Deputy of the US State State Department 2005 – 2006, ,became World Bank President in 2007.

Zoellick is fresh of the Mitt's campaign trail. Just an oversight I'm sure, denying ignorance and all.

It does not matter. I want to help each one of you. Stop worrying about the economy and pay attention to wealth cycles. We are in the gold and silver cycle right now for about another 2 or 3 years. If you want to become rich research the cycles. They have been doing the same thing for over 100 years.

reply to post by taws6


Considering Social Security pays back at a tiny fraction of the rate people could have made investing their own money (with employer match), unless you live deep into your 100's, and the population has grown significantly since the program was started, I don't understand how it could possibly not be running insane surpluses well into the 40th century. What a freaking joke. They essentially give us an ROI of about 0.5% on our money, and then act like it's a government handout.

Social Security is the absolute worst retirement investment available, yet we're forced to invest 13% of our gross income into it (our share plus employer match share)

Had that money so far gone into an average mutual fund, I would be ready to retire by age 50, instead of still tracking toward retirement at 65-70. To suggest cutting when payments should really be doubled as it is, is absolute madness.

What we should understand about these people is that they truly believe the world needs them. They are doing God's work and we would all be poorer without them, regardless of how much they skim. This isn't necessarily an ethics issue, as many of them are probably very decent people in person, it's a philosophy issue. They live according to a narrative they've developed or were raised with.

Having grown through many ignorant beliefs in my own life, it's easy to understand how we've come to this point. When you're raised with a certain narrative or your life is shaped by certain factors it's easy to wall off conflicting data as questioning this belief system is far too painful. At this point in Mr. Blankfein's life, accepting a different narrative would probably destroy the distorted image he has of himself and his value to society. It's too painful to even consider.

I won't say pity him as that's too condescending, but we should take the time to understand our enemies and the factors that went into making them who they are.