Third Party & Independents Archives

Congress and the President Run for Re-election - The Administrative State Runs the Country

Once again, we have a case study of Trump versus the bureaucracy. This time it has to do with the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998, and basically how the chain of succession should happen in a federal agency or department when someone gets fired or retires or leaves their post at the top of the agency.

The Federal Vacancies Reform Act (FVRA) sets up a process for nominating an interim head of an agency without going through the confirmation process in Congress. Presumably this is until a permanent replacement is found, and they can then undergo the required review process to be confirmed or not, by Congress.

For the last while - and maybe a lot longer - that review process by Congress has become about partisan policy conflicts and not about competence. This was put into sharp relief by the Clarence Thomas hearings almost 30 years ago now, and almost any potential head of any agency can expect a hostile, gotcha inquisition rather than a review to determine if they're qualified for the job. That works both ways from both sides of the aisle of course.

So it's understood that the slanderous, scandal-seeking that goes on is because one party disagrees with both who the nominee is and what they believe in. There's no daylight left between those two things in today's culture wars.

President Trump appears to have decided a year or so ago on a way to do an end-run around this partisan theatre in Congress and place people he trusts and agrees with in key positions. And that would be the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of course.

So now we have an apparent procedural conflict at DHS where President Trump fired Kirstjen Nielsen and replaced her with Kevin McAleenan, the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection.

University of Texas law professor Steve Vladeck wrote in a blog on Lawfare,

"Presumably, President Trump was relying upon the FVRA in naming McAleenan as acting secretary. That statute authorizes the president to name as acting secretary any Senate-confirmed government officer and any other senior DHS employee who has been with the department for at least 90 of the previous 365 days. McAleenan qualifies under either of those provisos; he has served in the department since Jan. 20, 2017, and the Senate confirmed him to his current post as CBP Commissioner on March 19, 2018. And President Trump relied upon the same statute to name Mick Mulvaney as acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Matthew Whitaker as acting attorney general. So far, so good.

But the homeland security succession statute is much more specific than either its CFPB or Justice Department analog. As Section 113(g)(1) specifies, 'Notwithstanding chapter 33 of title 5, the Under Secretary for Management shall serve as the Acting Secretary if by reason of absence, disability, or vacancy in office, neither the Secretary nor Deputy Secretary is available to exercise the duties of the Office of the Secretary.'"

So the DHS has set up, like an ornery old financier who writes a nasty will that ensures his offspring are at each other's necks after he's gone, an in-house succession that severely limits the President in his or her power to decide who's at DHS. Unless of course the White House nominates a permanent head and sends them to Congress to be confirmed. In the current case at DHS, Claire Grady, an undersecretary, should have been next in line. She too, however, was fired by Trump (or to be precise resigned along with her boss Nielsen).

But it gets better. The Obama Administration issued an executive order that reportedly would have sent McAleenan to the back of the succession line.

"The current executive order on Homeland Security succession, promulgated by President Obama in December 2016, puts four other offices between Grady and McAleenan in the line of succession: the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) administrator, the undersecretary for national protection and programs, the undersecretary for science and technology, and the undersecretary for intelligence and analysis. Remarkably--or entirely unsurprisingly--only one of those senior positions is currently filled with a Senate-confirmed officeholder, Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis David Glawe. But the order also provides that, "Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, the President retains discretion, to the extent permitted by the Vacancies Act, to depart from this order in designating an acting Secretary." In other words, firing Grady removed the only formal obstacle to the president's original goal, which is to say ignoring the rest of the line of succession at Homeland Security and installing McAleenan as acting secretary." Vladeck wrote.

Notice the date of Obama's executive order? December 2016.

So Trump is playing a chess match with the rules left behind by Obama, executive orders that act like sandtraps on a golf course built in the middle of a swamp somewhere along the Potomac river. So that he can get someone at DHS who doesn't keep pushing back against the policy he wants. It just goes to show how hard it is to achieve real change in Washington.

That may be because nowadays Congress and the President run for re-election while the administrative state runs the country.

Posted by AllardK at April 11, 2019 6:59 PM
Comments
Comment #441646

Excuses excuses excuses.Poor Donald can’t clean the swamp because of laws and rules. Did he think this would be easy? Did he think that all he had to do was to go in and fire everyone and bring in the incompetent a** kissers that pledge fealty to his sorry a**?

Tough to feel sorry for Trump, so stop with the excuses please. Trump was never going to drain the swamp. He didn’t have experience to drain the swamp. All he had was a failed ideology and a desire to enrich himself at the expense of the rest of the country.

Posted by: j2t2 at April 16, 2019 3:58 PM
Comment #441647

Hi, j2t2! Welcome back. Was your safe space getting boring?

Just kidding.

He knew it wouldn’t be easy. That’s why he continues to point out the obvious with claims like the one where he would ship all the illegals to sanctuary cities. Boy did that get things worked up! Cher is suddenly concerned about her precious city and homeless people!

Did you ever notice how Democratics complain about what Trump is doing, but never were concerned about Obama doing the same thing? Obama shipped illegals to conservative red states and no one complained, except for the people in the red states that had to support them. Now, Trump hasn’t even started doing what Obama did and the left is up in arms about it! Did the left suddenly have a change of heart?

That’s a rhetorical question. You wouldn’t answer it anyway.

Donald Trump is pointing out the obvious. I like Trump because he is finally saying things I’ve been thinking for years, decades actually. I think the simple fact that Trump didn’t get manhandled by Mueller and his henchmen proves he is making headway, not excuses. He’s never made an excuse about his actions yet. He just keeps charging ahead, doing what this country needs done.

Let’s make America great again, j2t2. Let’s keep America great. The sooner the lefts gets on board, the sooner everyone will benefit, including immigrants.

Posted by: Weary Willie at April 16, 2019 4:46 PM
Comment #441650

Congratulations to Bernie Sanders for having enough faith in the fairness of Fox News to agree to appear on their “Town Hall”. It appears that Democrats were fairly represented to the credit of Fox News.

Bernie is a good candidate and has good arguments to support his mostly socialist positions. That is why he is leading the pack of Democrats wanting to be president. He overtook VP Biden as first choice among those polled.

Bernie tells the folks that his “Medicare for All” plan will save the middle class taxpayers money despite admitting that their taxes will increase substantially. He believes that rich folks will pay most of the cost. Bernie forgets that “rich folks” find many ways to avoid paying taxes; just as many US corporations found ways to avoid taxes by leaving the country and taking American jobs with them.

Why is it that few Bernie supporters ever question the “quality” of care should the government be the sole provider? Are they so enamored by the word “free”, that they don’t care about quality?

As I have posted, and proved, in other posts; many people in Europe die waiting for their “free” care.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 16, 2019 5:08 PM
Comment #441654

If someone wanted to do something about a person’s health they would condition children from birth to promote lifestyles that keep them healthy. They would also provide first aid classes in K-12. They would also provide the education the individual needs to correct many of the ailments they usually seek from the health care industry.

My sister was threatened with insurance problems when she removed my mother from her doctor’s care. They called it Against Medical Advice. They made her afraid my mother’s insurance would no longer cover her care if she was discharged AMA.

I’m not against insurance. I’m against using insurance when a simple education could have solved the problem. An extensive education in the anatomy of the human body would go a long way in relieving the health care industry of the burden of treating colds and flus or simple lacerations and fractures.

I believe sleeping in a room with reduced temperatures can prevent some illnesses. Am I wrong because it isn’t proven to be correct? I love sleeping in a room with good ventilation. I also have not suffered a respiratory illness in many, many years.

How many people who go to the doctor for colds and flues continue to get colds and flues throughout their lives? How many people go to the doctor to get an expensive prescription for medicine, only to suffer with the ailment as long as a person who does not seek medical attention?

I haven’t seen any studies that compare the two scenarios. Why not?

Posted by: Weary Willie at April 16, 2019 6:29 PM
Comment #441656

I agree with Weary, in some cases we have too much unnecessary medical and prescription care in the US.

And, this type of “care” runs up the cost of health care. Medical testing prescribed by a doctor as insurance against being sued is costly also.

Americans seem to love excess, whether in health care, our transportation, clothing or our food.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 16, 2019 6:54 PM
Comment #441657
Hi, j2t2! Welcome back.

Weary, I didn’t go anywhere.

Sanctuary cities has absolutely nothing to do with draining the swamp. I wish the blowhard would send some of the illegals to sanctuary cities. Making immigration a local instead of a national responsibility would be possible the stupidest thing any president has ever done. I would bet many of his followers would blow a gasket if he did follow though with it. Would you vote for him this next election knowing he let thousands of illegals into the country, as dangerous as he told us they were?

Posted by: j2t2 at April 16, 2019 7:20 PM
Comment #441658

j2t2, you don’t get it. They’re already coming in. Why not send them to Sanctuary cities? Sanctuary cities says, “Come Here!”.

Some of the illegals? Why not all of them? That’s what a sanctuary is, right? How can you say only “some” illegals are welcome?

Immigration should be a local issue. It should be a personal issue. It should rely on the person willing to vouch for and support the immigrant. If a person wishes his wife to immigrate to the U.S. he should submit the application to his local government. That government says yes or no. The federal government’s job is to accommodate that request, not dictate it. Immigration is not a federal issue. It is a local issue, a personal issue.


Posted by: Weary Willie at April 16, 2019 7:43 PM
Comment #441659
As I have posted, and proved, in other posts; many people in Europe die waiting for their “free” care.

You didn’t prove squat Royal. You damn sure didn’t prove more people die in European countries than here waiting for medical care.

Posted by: j2t2 at April 16, 2019 7:52 PM
Comment #441660

Consider the farm. How can the fourth tier of government dictate to the other three tiers of government how many immigrants the local farm must have?

Shouldn’t the immigration policy be formed around the request from the farm owner to import x amount of qualified (list qualifications) immigrants to work his farm for x amount of time?

Why is the federal government dictating to the states how many immigrants it must accept?

What happened to the 9th and 10th amendments?

Posted by: Weary Willie at April 16, 2019 8:01 PM
Comment #441664

I don’t think we, as a country, are looking at the immigration dilemma with clear eyes. We’ve adopted an emotional approach to immigration and abandoned the merit based approach.

That’s a fact.

Immigration should be regulated by the laws of supply and demand at the local level.

Think reasonably. Would a retail employer advertise for help on a global platform? Of course not. Any reasonable employer would start looking at the local workforce for their needs.

Does the federal government conform to that ideal? It can’t. It’s too big to consider local needs.

The federal government shouldn’t be dominating the discussion pertaining to immigration, or anything else that effects the individual.

Posted by: Weary Willie at April 16, 2019 9:19 PM
Comment #441683

Weary certainly the Trump border blockade is stopping illegals from entering the country! If calling in the military and installing more walls doesn’t stop them from entering illegally why would installing even more walls be considered? Anyway the illegals Trump was considering sending to sanctuary cities are those already detained not those already into the country without being detained.

Nice diversion trying to sell this bogus “individual should determine immigration not the federal government” line of BS! So many excuses so little logic. Corporate thinking IMHO.

Anyway despite all the diversions you still didn’t answer the basic question- “Would you vote for him this next election knowing he let thousands of illegals into the country, as dangerous as he told us they were?”.

The authoritarian small government logic used here is mind boggling. What next weary passports to go from state to state? The city council dictates to the feds how many illegals they need to meet production quota’s!

Posted by: j2t2 at April 17, 2019 12:07 PM
Comment #441684
Why is it that few Bernie supporters ever question the “quality” of care should the government be the sole provider? Are they so enamored by the word “free”, that they don’t care about quality?

Really Royal! This bogus argument has as much to do with private sector health insurance as it does with Medicare for all. We all know health insurance isn’t free, this sorry myth is garbage.

Perhaps you aren’t on Medicare so let me explain. I recently (2 years) switched from a private insurance plan to Medicare. I kept the same Doctor. Nothing changed except the insurance provider is now “the government”. Oh and when I went for surgery a few months back the approvals to go to specialist and such were faster than on the previous employer based insurance.

Medicare doesn’t mean you go to a “government doctor”. I still go to the same pharmacy for meds as I did previously. I had the same surgeon I wold have had under private health care. I just paid less than 2k for the whole thing, a considerable savings from what I would have paid under the employer program.

You see Royal, under our current system most people have the insurance their employer decides is best for their bottom line. Prior to Medicare I had 4 different plans in 4 years, which is typical as employers look for the least expensive plans for their employees. They don’t give a s**t about quality of care they look at the bottom line.

Posted by: j2t2 at April 17, 2019 12:22 PM
Comment #441685

As far as your bogus Europeans dying waiting on medical care here are some facts.

Posted by: j2t2 at April 17, 2019 12:30 PM
Comment #441690

You didn’t prove squat Royal. You damn sure didn’t prove more people die in European countries than here waiting for medical care.
Posted by: j2t2 at April 16, 2019 7:52 PM

Sorry you missed it Pal. Perhaps you were in your “man-cave” pouting over this great economy and revival of jobs under President Trump.

I used quotes from the director of Britains National Health Service to prove I am correct. Perhaps you prefer to believe “Bernie”.

Our logic challenged Pal j2t2 wonders why a limited number of miles of walls did not keep out illegals where there were no walls. DOES ANYONE CARE TO ADDRESS THIS AND HAVE SOME FUN WITH J2T2?

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 17, 2019 3:02 PM
Comment #441691

It is simply incredible to believe that j2t2 thinks the Medicare he and I enjoy would be the same if it were available to everyone.

I ask this fact-challenged Liberal a simple question. Would he trade his Medicare for coverage under Britain’s NHS?

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 17, 2019 3:07 PM
Comment #441692

j2t2 uses an article from 2014 in the NYT to prove many don’t die waiting for health services in Britain. He prefers this over a current pronouncement from the director of the British NHS.

That’s OK. Some folks can’t stand the truth. Poor j2t2, over the past two years nearly every sacred Liberal/Progressive/Socialist belief he holds has been shattered.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 17, 2019 3:13 PM
Comment #441694

I have paid Medicare payroll taxes every single year since its inception in 1966. I could not get benefits under Medicare until I reached age 65.

We already have Medicare-for-all. Simply reach age 65 and apply.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 17, 2019 3:25 PM
Comment #441769
Sorry you missed it Pal. Perhaps you were in your “man-cave” pouting over this great economy and revival of jobs under President Trump.

Gotta give you credit Royal, doubling down on the myths misinformation half truths and outright lies instead of showing us the proof of all these Europeans dying while waiting for health care. I guess it is better to change the subject instead of dealing with the lie. Fortunately for you truth and integrity are not required to convince conservatives.

Posted by: j2t2 at April 18, 2019 9:57 AM
Comment #441779

We wonder how j2t2 and phx8 will function now that the Mueller report has cleared President Trump of anything illegal concerning his election and the Russians.

It must be a huge disappointment to have put faith in the FAKE media and then learn it was all a bunch of lies. We all remember being regaled by them both with expectations of the presidents impending doom. Nearly every day these easily mislead Liberals expected the “smoking gun”.

j2t2 still denies facts about folks dying in Great Britain while waiting for medical procedures. A closed mind is an ugly thing Pal. The remedy is simple; and free.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 18, 2019 3:40 PM
Comment #441780

Royal what facts! Show us the facts. Show us where Europeans are dying while waiting for healthcare. Put up or shut up. Tell you what, for every European dying because they were denied healthcare I will show you two Americans that dies because they didn’t have access to healthcare. And I don’t mean those waiting for transplants that died because the organ wasn’t available.


Posted by: j2t2 at April 18, 2019 3:51 PM
Comment #441781

Good Grief Man…don’t you read. I presented the quotes and source of the Director of the British NHS saying exactly what I have said. People with NHS are dying waiting for procedures to be done.

If you are too lazy to find my comment; that’s on you Pal.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 18, 2019 3:57 PM
Comment #441783

Here is just one page of articles on the Web revealing long waits for treatment under the NHS. I don’t expect our “grave-digging” pal j2t2 to believe any of them.

Web results:
NHS director dies after operation is cancelled four times …

A&E departments are meant to treat and then admit, discharge or transfer 95% of patients within four hours. The new data reveals that 2,978,010 people were not dealt with in the target time last year.
Tens of thousands of cancer patients left waiting months …
www.independent.co.uk/news/health/cancer-treatment-nhs-gp…

Tens of thousands of cancer patients were left waiting months to start treatment last year, despite being urgently referred by their GP, NHS data reveals. Cancer waiting …
Record numbers dying while waiting for hospital …
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/record-numbers-dying-while…

Record numbers dying while waiting for hospital appointments. Regional differences are also exposed. In some parts of the country, including Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Grampian, and Ayrshire and Arran, the number of patients dying while waiting for a hospital consultation has more than doubled. Charities have called the situation “tragic”…
Reducing waiting times for hospital treatment: Lessons …
www.researchgate.net/publication/26306648_Reducing_waiting…

In recent years, the English NHS has achieved substantial reductions in waiting times for hospital treatment. This paper considers first whether the data used by the Government provide an accurate …
Cancer patients waiting up to 18 months for NHS treatment
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/17/cancer-patients…

Cancer patients are waiting up to 18 months for treatment amid soaring NHS delays, new figures show. The statistics released following Freedom of Information (FOI) requests show one patient waited …
NHS staff shortages could more than TRIPLE by 2030 …
www.thesun.co.uk/news/7743257/nhs-staff-shortage-triple-2030

NHS staff shortages could more than triple by 2030, a damning report reveals. Currently the health service has around 100,000 jobs vacant – around one in twelve.
BBC News | HEALTH | Patients ‘die waiting for treatment’
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/1841275.stm

Some cancer patients are dying because the NHS cannot treat them soon enough, a BBC investigation has revealed. Although many waiting list targets are being met, the Ten O’Clock News found that a range of patients face long waits for treatment - sometimes with fatal consequences.
Waiting times - Health rights | NHS inform
www.nhsinform.scot/…/health-rights/access/waiting-times

Under the Charter of Patients Rights and Responsibilities, you have certain rights and responsibilities when accessing the NHS in Scotland.. For the waiting times service, your rights and responsibilities apply to 3 key areas: Availability. Availability refers to how able and willing a patient is to have treatment.
3,000 NHS patients waiting more than a year for treatment
www.healthinsurancedaily.com/health-insurance/product-area/…

Orthopaedics and general surgery are some of the worst-affected areas. Almost 3,000 NHS patients have been waiting a year or more for operations and treatment, the highest figure since 2012, a report shows. The number of patients who have been waiting at least 12 months has increased 75% since this time last year.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 18, 2019 4:56 PM
Comment #441822

Like I said it may be bad in the UK but it is better than in the USA”.

Now before you try to tell us “j2t2 uses an article from 2014 in the NYT to prove many don’t die waiting for health services in Britain. He prefers this over a current pronouncement from the director of the British NHS.” look up the date of your first bit of “proof”, the former director who dies waiting for an operation. It was in 2011.

So it seems trying to use the wait times as reason to avoid some type of universal healthcare system is just not valid. The US has the same problem with wait times. What appears to be in common with the two systems, the UK and the US, is the problems are exacerbated by privatization of the system. Hard to believe but the UK has been privatizing their system as well as sabotaging it for several years now.

Posted by: j2t2 at April 19, 2019 10:47 AM
Comment #441823
Hard to believe but the UK has been privatizing their system as well as sabotaging it for several years now.

So has the U.S., j2t2. You call it Medicare, Medicaid, the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), the Department of Defense TRICARE and TRICARE for Life programs (DOD TRICARE), the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) program, and the Indian Health Service (IHS).

They provide services to about one-third of Americans.

One-third. What about the rest of the population? Do you think separating groups and singling them out for care helps or hurts those who are not considered?

Let’s do a study. Let’s take all the budgets of these programs and the budgets of the ancillary programs and administration costs that stem from these programs and add them up. Let’s get a balance sheet going to see what the costs and incomes are for these programs. Let’s see if eliminating these programs and substituting an inclusive program you’re in favor of that includes everyone who is a citizen and see what the difference would be.

I don’t think we have a health care crisis. I think we have an identity politics crisis.

Posted by: Weary Willie at April 19, 2019 11:53 AM
Comment #441825

Like I said it may be bad in the UK but it is better than in the USA”. You bet j2t2. I will believe the lay person you link who has no meaningful credentials named O’hara, over thousands of articles written by reporters with millions of quotes by the British NHS itself.

“look up the date of your first bit of “proof”, the former director who dies waiting for an operation. It was in 2011.”

And, it has not improved. Keep digging the “grave” Pal.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 19, 2019 3:22 PM
Comment #441877

What j2t2 refuses to admit is that government-meddling is what has driven health care cost through the roof.

Almost 50% of every U.S. dollar spent on healthcare is already spent by the government.
As a result, costs started increasing as government-meddling increased (as explained here, and as shown here also).

  • Normalized Price Index versus (C)onsumer Price Index and (M)edical-care Price Index:
  • 40.0 |==========================================
  • 37.5 |=========================================M
  • 35.0 |========================================M=
  • 32.5 |=======================================M==
  • 30.0 |======================================M===
  • 27.5 |=====================================M====
  • 25.0 |====================================M=====
  • 22.5 |===================================M======
  • 20.0 |==================================M=======
  • 17.5 |================================M=========
  • 15.0 |==============================M==========C
  • 12.5 |============================M=========C===
  • 10.0 |===========================M====C=========
  • 07.5 |========================M===C=============
  • 05.0 |=====================M==C=================
  • 02.5 |CM==CM==CM==CM==CM=C=C=====================
  • 00.0 |==========================================
  • ==== 1930 _ 1940 _ 1950 _ 1960 _ 1970 _ 1980 _ 1990 _ 2000 _ 2010
  • Source: mises.org/wire/how-government-regulations-made-healthcare-so-expensive
The majority of people that want government-run healthcare are most likely the people that believe that they are going to get free stuff, and push the notion that healthcare is a human right.
They are not happy with Medicare, welfare, and Medicare. They want more, and they know that someone else is going to pay for it. They want to disguise their envy and jealousy as demands for healthcare that they claim to be a human right. The difference is that true human rights are things that you are allowed to do, that burden no one else, but the notion that healthcare is a human right requires others to pay for it (despite the fact that we already have Medicaid, weflare, and Medicare).

Many middle-to-high income earners understand that they will be paying more, because they will be paying for the people that paying nothing.
Besides, we already have Medicaid and welfare, so why try to turn the whole healthcare system into a welfare system?
And why should private healthcare and health insurance be banned (as Kamal Harris proposed)?
But it gets worse, because anything that is government-run is going to be far more expensive, corrupt, inefficient, bloated, and wasteful beyond nightmare proportions.

j2t2 can show us all the Democrat funded articles and Democrat funded charts he wants, and I will never believe that the government is capable of delivering a better healthcare system than a private-regulated healthcare system. In fact, what better proof do you need, than to look at one of the charts that j2t2 provided, which shows that healthcare costs have risen as government-meddling started, and increased over the past 50+ years, until almost 50% of every U.S. dollar spent on healthcare is already spent by the government.

Posted by: d.a.n at April 20, 2019 11:20 PM
Comment #441878

Not to mention up to $70 Billion per year in Medicare fraud.

Posted by: d.a.n at April 20, 2019 11:24 PM
Comment #441897

“The difference is that true human rights are things that you are allowed to do, that burden no one else, but the notion that healthcare is a human right requires others to pay for it.”

Many thanks to d.a.n. for making a clear distinction on “human rights”. Why indeed, does someone else obtain their “human right” from my billfold?

I like Medicare and wish there was sufficient political will to rid it of waste and abuse. Despite having Medicare, I still have a Medicare Supplement. I suppose the Left will want free Medicare Supplement as well.

Posted by: Royal Flush at April 21, 2019 3:10 PM
Comment #441929
Royal Flush wrote: I like Medicare and wish there was sufficient political will to rid it of waste and abuse.
Yes, me too.
I am years away from being eligible (at age 65) for Medicare.
Many U.S. citizens have already paid into Social Security and Medicare all of their lives (including their employers’ matching for a total of 15.3%=2* [1.45% Medicare + 6.2% S.S.]).
Therefore, it isn’t fair to cancel those programs now, and the government (with a $21.2 Trillion national debt of nightmare proportions) cannot afford to refund the nominal amount of money, much less the amount adjusted for inflation, or including any interest.
However, IF the government doesn’t get spending, debt, fraud, waste, and corruption under control, many systems are going to fail, including Social Security and Medicare.
It may already be too late, and collapse may only be a matter of time.
Observe what is happening now in Venezuela to see what will happen next in the U.S.A. (which could possibly degenerate into something worse, such as another civil war).
Posted by: d.a.n at April 21, 2019 11:24 PM
Post a comment