i don't raise the debt ceiling the social security checks may not go out is that in order to get the money to pay those checks the social security department has to take those treasury bills and to the treasury department redeem them say here give me the cash and this and that and the and the treasury department has no cash so it wouldn't be able to pay the so security fund it so those security fund couldn't be passing out the money the real reason that social security is on the table though and this is the really important issue the real reason why social security is on the table is because of lobbying from wall street bankers two point seven trillion dollars two billion seven hundred. it's so it's like two points out of i came to do the math it's a million times and millions you know it's a trillion dollars a trillion dollars a thousand billion a billion is a thousand million two point seven trillion dollars the wall street bankers are looking at that money going up we had this money and we could be churning this money and we could just skim a little off the top and so they're trying to do a pinochet did in chile like forty years ago or

department. social security, medicare, there needs to be reforms.self have the ability to have those benefits in the future. look at some of the agencies, tons of waste. something needs to be done. >> what are the chances of that happening? s&p says is no long term plan to get the spending under control. >> the real problem is you have democrats and republicans in washington who stopped working to the. i would put that blame squarely on the shoulders of the tea party caucus in the house and lack of leadership coming out of speaker boehner. who thinks what he is doing is political leadership. it is partisan foolishness. we have economic terrorists threatening the economy so they can make a political point that is irresponsible. everybody throughout america knows that. >> economic terrorist, you think that is fair to say that? >> i would say they threw a bomb at our economy with this political argument over the debt ceiling debate and held on and held a gun to our heads saying we to threaten this downgrade if you don't give us everything we want. they

social security now under review. >> a special group of tourists gets a fun day in san francisco. how the police department had a hand in their special day. >> juvenile offenders sentenced to life may get a break . >> and one republican presidential candidate says his campaign is getting more aggressive and taking aim at a rival over religious beliefs. okay, kids, we can record one more show. who should get it? i really love jennifer. yeah, she's great. yeah. yeah. kyle's got that thick head of hair. and that should be rewarded. okay, moment of truth. on "three," say which kid you love the most. ooh, fun, yeah. one, two, three. jennifer. jennifer. whoa. wow. she's so pretty. yeah. or we give it to kyle. it's really all he's got. [ male announcer ] switch to at&t u-verse and record four shows all at the same time. just $29 a month for 6 months. at&t. . >>> a special group of tourists had a chance to see the police department put on a real life dog and pony show. the kids of courage group includes 150 ill children, their doctors, care take hes and counselors. they spent part of the looking at dog and horse u

social security. if we have a commitment to you and i believe with all my heart in making and keeping commitments. there are a lot of things that we could have cut. the department of energy has been reducing our dependence on foreign energy gamma and every year of its existence, we become more and more dependent. cut the department of energy. there are a number are things we could have entered we do not have to pay people in other countries to hate us. they will do it for free. i have a bill that would say anyone who votes against the u.s. in the un more than half of the time is no financial assistance. why should we pay people to hate us when we have people like you, gloria, who have been promised their social security? we have made our commitment and we need to keep it. there was $2.6 trillion in the social security trust fund in treasury notes. that money would have come to you. there have been two other times, 1989 and 1986, when did -- when we did not have enough cash on hand to write all the checks. on both of those occasions, they made sure that we kept our commitment to social security and all they had to do a sell- off some of the treasury notes, and b

department. >> as you know, if you are the republican nominee, you'll face a democratic firestorm on the issue of social security and any titlement cuts. >> i understand that. we got to talk truth. we got to recognize the facts for what they are and we have to proceed by doing business differently than we have in the past. we have no choice. the people of this country understand that. they understand the implications of where we are going and the disservice we're doing to the next generation of americans. in the history of the greatest nation that ever was, we're not passing our standards upward. we're passing downward. that's the first time that we have done. it is less productive. it is less competitive. it is saddled with debt like never before. we should do better than that we should do better than that for the next generation. they deserve better. we have to take some pretty bold measures and speak the truth to the american people about where we are and what needs to be done. it isn't a pleasant message, i understand that we're not in a good place right now as a country. >> you are john huntsman jr. who is

department. >> if you are the republican nominee, you'll face a democratic firestorm on the issue of social security and entitlement cuts. >> kindest and that. but we have to talk truth and recognize the facts or what they are. we have to proceed by doing business differently than we have in the past. -- i am understand that. the people of this country understand where we are going. the disservice we are doing to the next generation of americans, or for the first time in this nation, we are not moving our standards of board, we are moving them down. that is the first time we have done that. it is less

in the insolvency date, but not a qualitative change in the direction for the health department of the social security and the so-called low cost and high cost scenarios are outside the bounds of that 95% scenario intervals. there's not much basis when you look at the trustee's analysis. under all of these even reasonablebly plausible scenarios, we would be much, much better ave to correct the program finances today than if we waited to a future date. the last thing i would say before turning it over is the trustees always have an issue of deciding what to imp size. few people read them all the way through, and i sufferedded from this as a congressional staffer, by the way, but there's a lot in there and policymakers don't have the time to wade through them. we have to choose what to emphasize and highlight, and that's a very important role of the trustees. it is expressed in various different ways. when we go to testify before coping -- congress with a five minute statement, we have to choose what to put in the statement. when we talk to the press, at events like this, we have to talk about what is i

department. >> as you know, if you are the republican nominee, you'll face a democratic firestorm on the issue of social security and any titlement cuts. >> i understand that. we got to talk truth. we got to recognize the facts for what they are and we ve to proceed by doing business differently than we have in the past. we have no choice. the people of this country understand that. they understand the implications of where we are going and the disservice we're doing to the next generation of americans. in the history of the greatest nation that ever was, we're not passing our standards upward. we're passing downward. that's the first time that we have done. it is less productive. it is less competitive. it is saddled with debt like never before. we should do better than that we should do better than that for the next generation. they deserve better. we have to take some pretty bold measures and speak the truth to the americapeople about where we are and what needs to be done. it isn't a pleasant message, i understand that we're not in a good place right now as a country. >> you are john huntsman jr. who is john

department every month bring this out. look, you're paying interest on your debt, paying national defense, paying other nondefense, social securityest chunk of all of the total outgoing money. so there you go. that's the treasury department's checkbook for the month and where it stands. and that credit card that we have, it's right up against the limit. as you know. they raised the debt limit. all of that borrowing raises the amount america borrows. who's america's biggest foreign banker? china? so is that country on the verge of becoming the country's next biggest super power or did it already happen? it's true. you never forget your first subaru. you've been stuck in the garage, while my sneezing and my itchy eyes took refuge from the dust in here and the pollen outside. but with 24-hour zyrtec®, i get prescription strength relief from my worst allergy symptoms. it's the brand allergists recommend most. ♪ lily and i are back on the road again. where we belong. with zyrtec®, i can love the air®. >>> china's second largest train maker is recalling 54 bullet trains. the decision comes three weeks after a stalled bullet train was h

security or the defense department, we would still go broke. this is not a growing part of discretionary spending. how could you add up all the social welfare programs, they are bigger than the defense department. and the homeland security area is around off area in the defensdepartment. looking at security spending is the problem is simply wrong in terms of economic vitality. what this report addresses, there are clearly areas where fiscal responsibility and homeland security could be better dressed. i would not argue for more homeland security spending for for less, but i will argue for efficiency. in tenure as we learn what works and at does not. there are things that we're doing that is literally stupid and is wasting money. a good example is we spend -- every person who applies for a visa has to have an interview, a requirement by federal l. that is not. wereate all these resources to interview all of these people. what you wind up doing is spending a lot of time -- ry little time talking to a lot of people and not learning much, rather than focusing on interviews subclasses and individuals that truly represents concerns for im

social security and medicaid they will redo the entire budget. so even if we spent not a nickel on homeland security, don't spend a nickel on the defense department we would still go broke. this is not for growing part of what is called discretionary spending either. if you actually add up all the means tested welfare programs that we have today it is actually bigger than the defense department budget and homeland security is a round area in the defense department area, so looking at the security spending is the problem i think is simply wrong in terms of economics or vitality. having said that, what this report addresses, you think there are clearly areas where fiscal responsibility and homeland security could be better addressed. i mean i don't argue necessarily for more homeland security. i wouldn't necessarily argue for less but i would argue for inefficiency and this is what we go back to before, the 10 years of experience where we have learned what works and what doesn't. there some things we have been doing that are literally stupid and literally wasting money, and a good example is we spend every personal place for visas seven interview.

social security. this isry dick allow interest to raise the retirement age. 2 1/2 years with the justice department andoing after financial services institution, we're going to give them a breather and hit the drug companies. why does l irk ipitor cost 50% now than it did eight years ago. that's added to the cost. he never did. >> read from my column. >> saturday, i loved. i loved saturday's piece. we talk about the republicans using the threat of default to assist on cuts. you know, they're digging in their heels on any types of revenues. >> i'm sorry. >> i'm going to read the piece. he wants you to read the piece. >> but look how sick the economy is. standard & poor's downgraded u.s. debt for the first time in history despite the better than expected jobs numbers, unemployment remains stubbornly and unexpectedly high. companies have cash, but they're not hiring, blah, blah, blah. choking off spending can only make matters worse. mark sandy, the well-known economist at moody's analytics acknowledged to me that if major spending cuts take place in 2013 as is currently envisioned, they will cost the cou

department of innovation. right? it was inspired by president obama's so-called social security pu -- sputnick moment.can't possibly move in any direction. they are just stuck. it is a sign eric bolling of gridlock. >> eric: it is. it's actually a perfect sign, appropriately so. all right. just as you heard last segment, everyone in washington is passing the buck when it comes to the credit downgrade. yesterday here is president obama blaming politics for the decision by the s & p to downgrade the u.s. credit rating. >> the united states received a downgrade by one of the credit rating agencies. not so much because they doubt our ability to pay our debt if we make good decisions, but because after witnessing a month of wrangling over raising the debt ceiling, they doubted our political system's ability to act. >> eric: get this, our next guest says he's taking credit for the downgrade himself. why? rick ferry is a financial advisor and author of the book "the power of passive investing" with us from san antonio to explain. your fault? the downgrade is your fault? >> it is my fault and it is your fault

social security. i do not see it infringing on our basic constitutional liberties. host: you mentioned that the defense department. do you represent them? guest: yes. host: contractors will obviously have a stake in these negotiations as well. the fact that this could leave -- lead to some strange bedfellows? you may be with someone that you normally does agree with? guest: we need jobs. -- normally disagree with? guest: we need jobs. i will not say to cut this job to give this guy a federal job. that is of american. there will be played between contractors and employees. usually, we fight pretty hard. note doing better and cheaper. -- doing better and cheaper. we must be a little bit more generous with our contractor friends, to take an american worker position as needing more jobs. host: this story about contract and in the washington, d.c. area, outside the center, calling the new washington a global business hub. "olympi guest: if you could have a whole show on contract in. contract and has doubled. ting.ntrac contractors have doubled. the ones that do just a part of that job make up to $770,000. you might sc

department. there are corporate employers knowingly hiring illegal employees. we need legislation to have all employers when they hire somebody verify that social security number and name and date of birth through a system called e-verify. host: jeffrey is a republican in washington. caller: that was a good comment. i think there is a tier system in america. i was born in california and have been on the bottom of the my entire life. i watched employers hire people. they were not worried about documentation. they were worried about making a larger profit. that's what we do with children of our middleclass. we send them to walmart. those jobs were taken during the good times. those are not the jobs that will bring you wealth and stability and a college education. those jobs were being taken by people that did want them. the children of our country don't want those jobs. they want the better jobs and the better future. we would rather have that job than none. but they were taken. guest: there is frustration with the unemployment crisis. that is very real and we cannot dismiss that. people are unemployed and that is hurting peoples' household. the day laborer and

social security, medicare, and medicaid. if we do not, we will not solve the problem. it is that simple. >> you mentioned diplomacy and the other things that you worked on. these include accounts for the state department, security assistance. the bush administration and to some extent the clinton administration and the obama administration have succeeded in rectifying some of the shortfalls that a lot of people have identified in our diplomacy and the strength of our state department. and of course in some of the international assistance budgets. are you concerned about those being at risk? that maybe we can apply some financial discipline in a few cutbacks. do you have a sense on how far that process can go? are you worried it would target the state department and foreign aid? >> there are some risks there. everything is a two-edged sword. they have grouped a lot of the accounts into a national security account. they have put in a grouping defense homeland security, intelligence, diplomacy, and foreign aid and assistance. on the one hand, i think that is good. foreign aid is critical in achieving our national security objectives. this is a good idea as a planning tool. if you're under budgetary press

department. there are corporate employers knowingly hiring illegal employees. we need legislation to have all employers when they hire somebody verify that social security number name and date of birth through a system called e-verify. host: jeffrey is a republican in washington. caller: that was a good comment. i think there is a tier system in america. i was born in california and have been on the bottom of the my entire life. i watched employers hire people. they were not worried about documentation. they were worried about making a larger profit. that's what we do with children of our middleclass. we send them to walmart. those jobs were taken during the good times. those are not the jobs that will bring you wealth and stability and a college education. those jobs were being taken by people that did want them. the children of our country don't want those jobs. they want the better jobs and the better future. we would rather have that job than none. but they were taken. guest: there is frustration with the unemployment crisis. that is very real and we cannot dismiss that. people are unemployed and that is hurting peoples' household. the day laborer and the

buffett, there is a program with the treasury department that is the u.s.fts to if he wants to give several billion, he is free to do so. in terms of the social security. if you remove that limit, you're raising the top income tax rate from 35% to two about 50%. that would be a huge drain on the economy. very destructive of capital creation. there are so positive things that can be done in social security, particularly for younger people by allowing their payroll taxes or part of them to go to their own personal accounts. that way the money belongs to them, not to washington politicians. if you don't put a penny in the stock markets, over time, you will get far more benefits than you can possibly get from the current social security system. and you control it. if you die prematurely, the money goes to your heirs or to a charity. it will be good for the economy because the money is being put to work. the so-called social security trust funds have on paper $2.6 trillion. there is not a penny in that trust fund. and so it is empty. you do that on the private sector and would rightly go into the slammer. during these debt ceiling negotiations, they were t

buffett, there is a program with the treasury department that is the u.s.fts to if he wants to give several billion, he is free to do so. in terms of the social security. if you remove that limit, you're raising the top income tax rate from 35% to two about 50%. that would be a huge drain on the economy. very destructive of capital creation. there are so positive things that can be done in social security, particularly for younger people by allowing their payroll taxes or part of them to go to their own personal accounts. that way the money belongs to them, not to washington politicians. if you don't put a penny in the stock markets, over time, you will get far more benefits than you can possibly get from the current social security system. and you control it. if you die prematurely, the money goes to your heirs or to a charity. it will be good for the economy because the money is being put to work. the so-called social security trust funds have on paper $2.6 trillion. there is not a penny in that trust fund. and so it is empty. you do that on the private sector and would rightly go into the slammer. during these debt ceiling negotiations, they were t

department of economics. serves on the board of the tax foundation the floor is yours, douglas. [applause] >> thanks jim. happy birthday to social securityit to 76. i have three parts to my remarks. i want to talk about the five crucial decisions that one has to make regarding social security. once you make the list, you have an idea regarding the reforms. let me start with the problems. the financial condition of so security is what we hear about. there are many different numbers and metrics. it is easy to get completely baffled about what is going on. the simplest way to think about it is revenues about 5% gdp benefits that have to come out, usually 4.5%. they are gone. they will rise to about 6.5% gdp. the revenues are here as far as the eye can see. you can add it up or do infinity and beyond and get different numbers. we have benefits that exceed what we can provide, and it has to be addressed. problems get lost inside of that that are important. there are different problems. the disability part about 17%. it often gets lost in this discussion. anyone talking about social security must remember that reforms have to be done in conjun

social security and medicare. live coverage at noon eastern on c-span. in his comments at the navy yard, the president mentioned it on and limit figure. it dipped slightly in july to 9.1%. the labor departmentthat employers added 117,000 jobs last month. the joint economic committee meets to look at the details of those numbers. we will have that live on c- span. >> every weekend, american history tv on c-span3 highlights the 150th anniversary of the civil war. one of the most important documents of our nation's history, the emancipation proclamation. albany law school professor on abraham lincoln and the proclamation's constitutionality. >> this weekend on a booktv on c-span2, the life and times of clarence darrow. "after words," the british citizens who fought for the union and the confederates. live, sunday at noon eastern, three hours of your calls and questions. "in depth" with ann coulter. look for the complete book tv schedule at booktv.org, and sign up for the booktv alert. and from this morning's "washington journal," a discussion of the attack o-- impact of the debt ceiling agreement on defense cuts and a national security. specialist on defense spending. we're going to talk about

i will say the department of homeland security has also developed a communities of practice web site for public safety to go into and actually see a number of examples of socialedia from other places and also on the social media working group, which also provides information as far as general guidelines about social media and how public safety can take advantage of using social media. the thank you for the question. any other panelists have observations? >> i would say one of the key things is to decide which information you could derive from social media or on the other hand volunteered geographic information. in the gis community we have standards. we have opened spatial consortium so that is the type of thing that makes gis data definable, usable or at least its capacity to be put in that category. the other thing that is introduced in the mentioned earlier passion and emotions. how do you quantify or standardized that? there needs to be a policy on how does that influence the decision-makers? that is going to influence people who have a public responsibility, governor or a fire chief or somebody like that so the policy would be how do you deal with this t