Koch Bros are trying to destroy social security through misinformation, Must watch video!

Senator Sanders: Koch bros. ‘want to destroy Social Security’

Seeing what he called “an enormous amount of disinformation about Social Security” in the media, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) joined with activist filmmaker Robert Greenwald to produce a video that attempts to explains why.

Sanders claims that campaign contributions and hundreds of millions in think tank funding from billionaire industrialist brothers David and Charles Koch help create an “echo chamber” for “misinformation” on the hugely popular federal safety net, like suggesting it is about to go broke or claiming the retirement age must be raised in order to prevent economic collapse.

“Social Security is not going broke,” Sanders insisted. “Social Security has a $2.2 trillion surplus… The Koch brothers want to invest your retirement funds on Wall Street, and you may lose all of your retirement savings when you get old.”

Eye opening video...please watch it!! Please share with others.


www.rawstory.com...

Senator Bernie Sanders is claiming the Koch brothers are trying to destroy Social Security as we know to get the money in the hands of Wall Street. Sanders has been a continually strong fighter for the middle class and poor against Wall Street and corporate billionaires. The amount they are funding right wing conservative think tanks is enormous to push their agenda. Millions and millions of dollars....including the HERITAGE FOUNDATION and the CATO INSTITUTE.

Great. So the same guys who brought us the union busting movement to lower our standard of living during our working years now want to strip away the security net that is supposed to help to catch us if we fall once our earning years are over.
I am so starting to believe the whole "corporate states of America". And I hate it.

There better be a MAJOR UPRISING in this country if there EVER comes a day that our seniors get SCREWED over from what is RIGHTFULLY theirs when they are in time of NEED for it.

When money is TAKEN every week from the working American's paychecks for a benefit that is meant to assist us when we cannot work any further due to old age, IT BETTER BE THERE WHEN IT IS NEEDED!!!!!!!!!!!

PERIOD!!!!!!!

reply to post by watcher3339


Oh, you can believe it.
Too many examples to prove it. And the Koch Bros. are just a part of it.

Have fun on ats!

And remember this one, David9176, from the not too distant past?
Part of America's economic downfall is the result of paying seniors too much.
Please read the sarcasm of that.

AARP slammed for not fighting Social Security cuts, page 1
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by watcher3339

Great. So the same guys who brought us the union busting movement to lower our standard of living during our working years now want to strip away the security net that is supposed to help to catch us if we fall once our earning years are over. I am so starting to believe the whole "corporate states of America". And I hate it.

I know, and I don't know how it can be stopped....especially when people are buying into the fact that we have to take all the pain and give tax breaks to the wealthiest americans at the same time.

I simply don't understand it.

reply to post by ItsEvolutionBaby


I heard about AARP. They claimed that they "caved" to get a seat at the table on possible changes. If they are willing to do that, it's not looking good.

The day Republicans touch Medicare or Social Security is the day you will see a total restructuring of the entire party after it loses more than half of its representation in government. Republicans are already having a very difficult time after supporting the Paul Ryan Budget Plan which technically privatizes Medicare. All it would take is a campaign led by Democrats attacking Republicans for ‘destroying Medicare’ to win the election.

Instead of raising the retirement age or privatizing the system how about make it law Congress can no longer raid the pension program for spending. That seems much more logical to me. The system is not insolvent and is probably the most successful government program ever created. A few reforms here and there, such as getting more people off of it who truly don’t need it, which is a considerable lot, and streamlining the application process to reduce cost and eliminate waste would also help.

Why are we making this battle ideological? We would be much more successful if we could go about reforms more pragmatically by targeting waste, bureaucracy, abuse, fraud, and the Congress raiding its funds. We do not need an ideological battle here, America does not want one. What America wants is answers and sound leadership, they have also made it clear they do not want Medicare/Medicaid or Social Security privatized, seriously cut back, or eliminated. Try any of that and we won’t see you in power for a generation.

I would not agree with Bernie Sanders however that Social Security is perfectly stable as I do believe it does need immediate reforms so as to make it perfectly stable but these reforms do not need to be very painful or transformative.

One more thing I would like to note. It seems like an oxymoron to have the Republican Party as-is today. An alliance of Evangelical Southerners and Wealthy country club types does not seem like a very sound organization. We all know that most of the Reagan Democrats became full member of the GOP over time but it seems like many of them left the Democrats not because they opposed their economic program but rather their cultural and foreign policies.

If that should be the case then perhaps that is why the Republicans became the party of Social Conservatives which then chased away the Rockefeller Republicans who then became DLC Democrats. Meaning the Democrats became culturally liberal and chased away their Southern Democrats into the GOP where the Rockefeller Republicans then were chased into the Democratic Party because of the Reagan Conservative wing and the newcomer Social Conservatives. Thus Democrats lost their economic populism for Cultural liberalism and Neoliberalism and the GOP lost their Social Liberals and Economic Moderates.

Perhaps with the national politics turning away from the culture wars we can see realignment where Democrats become Democrats again with their messages of Economic Populism for the working class voter and the Republicans become Republicans again with their message of Fiscal discipline for the Middle Class voter. How many people would return to the GOP if they shed their Evangelical wing?

Sorry for drifting off topic.

reply to post by Misoir

Instead of raising the retirement age or privatizing the system how about make it law Congress can no longer raid the pension program for spending. That seems much more logical to me.

YES!!!!! Absolutely!!!!

I would not agree with Bernie Sanders however that Social Security is perfectly stable as I do believe it does not immediate reforms so as to make it perfectly stable but these reforms do not need to be very painful or transformative.

I agree, some tweeks need to be made, he most likely agrees to that as well....he is just fighting against the powers aligning against it.

How many people would return to the GOP if they shed their Evangelical wing?

I simply can't understand how Ayn Rand believers and Evangelicals can even be in the same party. They are nearly polar opposites. Christianity doesn't preach survival of the fittest or that much of society is a parasite. Going way off topic here so i'll stop now.

I absolutely agree though...Republicans will make an incredible political mistake by trying to privatize medicare and social security.

reply to post by David9176


I was not meaning let the Objectivists take over either. God no. They are just as bad as the Evangelicals. Ron Paul is definitely not an Objectivist he is Libertarian Conservative and I support him but if he was Ayn Rand type of Libertarian he would not be my candidate of choice.

Actually what I was saying is that if the GOP did not have the Evangelicals or the Neocons, which were brought on board by the Evangelicals, but rather politicians dedicated to balancing the budget without being ideologues, non-interventionists, social moderates, and accepting of environmentalism, basically the GOP pre-1980, how many people do you think would move over to the GOP?

In reality it is my opinion the Southern Baptists are actually quite fiscally liberal and I foresee the return of many Blue Dogs in the 2012 House election. While the Northern Independents are quite fiscally conservative. Pretty much I am of the opinion that those who truly belong to the the Democratic or Republican Parties have been displaced due to the cultural faction of each. Many Northerners are quite fiscally conservative but could not tolerate being part of the same party as the Evangelicals espousing anti-gay, anti-climate change, anti-evolution ideas just as many Southerners are quite fiscally liberal but could not tolerate being part of the same party as the Seculars.

The work of Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg is a classic study of Reagan Democrats. Greenberg analyzed white ethnic voters (largely unionized auto workers) in Macomb County, Michigan, just north of Detroit. The county voted 63 percent for John F. Kennedy in 1960, but 66 percent for Reagan in 1980. He concluded that "Reagan Democrats" no longer saw Democrats as champions of their working class aspirations, but instead saw them as working primarily for the benefit of others: the very poor, feminists, the unemployed, African Americans, Latinos, and other groups. In addition, Reagan Democrats enjoyed gains during the period of economic prosperity that coincided with the Reagan administration following the "malaise" of the Carter administration. They also supported Reagan's strong stance on national security and opposed the 1980s Democratic Party on such issues as pornography, crime, and taxes.

Link

Personally I am a Republican and have dipped my toes in the ends of both sides of our political spectrum. Neither extreme side has seemed too reasonable. I am fiscally conservative but not an ideologue, am Socially moderate, and a non-Interventionist in foreign policy. Sometimes I feel that this is a more reasonable approach to politics;

"raise the required revenues by approving whatever levels of taxation may be necessary." - Prescott Bush said this to the US Congress.

But other times I feel that higher taxes really would damage the economy so it is one of those tug-of-wars inside my head.

Nasty pair these Koch Brothers...



www.abovetopsecret.com...

These guys boggle the mind, I mean come on there billionares allready. When is enough enough how much money do they need before they are satisfied. It makes no sense to me why they can't just live like kings with all there money and not bother trying to tear down the social safety net.

I'm just curious, for those who are always talking about George Soros, what do they think about this? These are they guys behind much of the Republican party platform, pouring insane amounts of money to promote their agendas.

Any concern????

I THINK IT HAS BEEN BROKE FOR A LONG TIME.MAYBE 4 WORKERS FOR EVERY ONE DRAWER. DO THE MATH
THEY ARE NOT LIEING ABOUT MOVING RETIREMENT AGE MINE HAS MOVED TO 67.IN THE BEGINNING SS HAD MAYBE 11 FOR EVERY 1 DRAWER.THIS REALLY IS A SERIOUS ISSUE,BUT,WHO CARES?,OUR GUYS IN WASHINGTON TAKE CARE OF US.

reply to post by David9176




Bernie Sanders is an unabashed socialist. He is full of crap. If you believe that SS has a $2.2 trillion surplus then I have some swamp land for you to buy.

Why is Sanders against privatization? Because SS is a huge slush fund that has been raided over the years by pigs such as him. He doesn't want you to cut off his supply of graft money.

You all are so very misinformed as to the privatization plan. But that is to be expected here on ATS, I have realized. You react hysterically to half-facts and sensational headlines and scream out loud without knowing what it is you are screaming about. Real mob mentality, pitchforks and burning torches running up the hill.:shk:

What is privatization?

First of all, it is VOLUNTARY. Nobody is forcing anybody to join.

Second, it is only PARTIAL. You cannot put your entire contribution into the fund; only up to a certain percent.

And, your decision is reversible, if you decide to.

Now, what is wrong with people being given the choice on what to do with their own money? Why? Because you would be taking your own money out of the politician's hands, and controlling it yourself.

So for the very meek among you, feel free to let the gov control your money and your lives. You are incapable of knowing what is best for you....you better leave that up to the gov.

But for the fighter, the patriot, the aware, here is a chance for you to get back some control of your own lives. Don't be fooled by the scare tactics the Sander's and the David's use on you. Make your *own* mind up.

way to go making a mountain out of a mole hill

social security has already been destroyed long ago and the sheeple think that its going to be there for them,.

when a politican tells you theres nothing wrong THEN theres something really wrong.

just like when senator frank said no no theres no probelms with fanny and freddy.

please just another hate the koch bros thread.

reply to post by mishigas


t he reason people are agianst privatization of social security is they think the government knows how to spend their money better than they do.



if the left the democrats truly care about people tell them to give up control over social security and NOT one will ever relenquish their power over it.

that says something.

reply to post by neo96

please just another hate the koch bros thread.

As opposed to all the George Soros hate threads? You won't see me posting in defense of soros.

The Koch bros seem to be a big slice of the pie that supports the Republican party. That doesn't bother you Neo???

Don't you think their pockets may influence their agenda??? Or it is Soros who can only have one??

reply to post by David9176


when you start hating on soros then i will start hating on the kochs.

calling both sides out and none at all

but consider the social security element in this thread someone is lying and it aint the kochs.

reply to post by neo96

but consider the social security element in this thread someone is lying and it aint the kochs.

What is the lie about Social Security that you are having issues with? And i have absolutely criticized Soros in the past. He has no more right to buy off politicians than any other scumbag....he has money...as do the Kochs...and money is power....both of which they have far too much of.

Basically you have 2 (well 3 really) powerful, incredibly wealthy people, not only only influencing our government, but also controlling what is coming out of the corporate media...and in turn shaping the policies of the future that we will have to live by.

You should be just as concerned with the Koch bros as you are Soros.