Social Security disability on verge of insolvency!

[BlindBoo]

Why Social Security Cannot Go Bankrupt - Forbes

 

[flacaltenn]

Well it was sold to the American People, and passed as a pay as you go Retirement plan. That's the Problem with these Programs. They never turn out to be what we are told they will be, and they always cost far more than Projected.

It's been working flawlessly for seventy-five years and is (credibly) projected to continue working without revision until 2037. To extend that projection will require some tweaking, such as increasing the retirement age, removing the contributions cap and imposing a means test, all of which are reasonable revisions.

Which of "these programs" are you referring to that didn't turn out as we were told it would? I'm not aware of anything comparable to Social Security, which has very successfully achieved its intended purpose? The only problem with Social Security I'm aware of is the lack of appropriate increase in retirement age and the Congress being able to replace actual funds with IOUs.

There's our problem in a nutty shell.. It's PERFECT!! Congress hasn't been OVERCHARGING the working class for payroll taxes and then simply STEALING the surplus for 25 years now.. And it was a full 75 years ( a man's single lifetime) before the fund faced a huge demographic problem because of it's pay as you go intent. Geezh, whatyouwant PLANNING and FIDUCIARY management from Congress?

And when FDR said he'd eat the legislation if it ever exceeded 4% of a worker's payroll in total --- he was just lucky he died when he did. So all of the UNIVERSAL nature is now on the table and FDR is rolling in his grave screaming epithets at progressive morons trying to dismantle his noble work by making SS LESS Universal.. More like simple-minded socialist redistribution. Bump the cap, means test, only SOME benefit.. That's NOT the definition of UNIVERSAL IS IT MIKEY??????

You think after that SPECTACULAR success with Universal retirement -- with the massive THEFTS and MISMANAGEMENT that the American people want MORE of your UNIVERSAL crap??? And you still believe in the tooth fairy Soc Sec Trust Fund MIKEY? That mysterious pile of worthless paper that supposed to save this fund until 2037? You're not credible and neither are "the Trust Fund" reports. They are same worthless shit as the Indian Lands Trust Fund reports that have also been raided by Congress.



Tell me Mikey -- how is it that YOU are not furious with the THEFT of SS "profits" by the govt??? It all came out of the pockets of the working poor and middle class and yet -- you are blindly TOUTING the success of this? How "unfeeling" of you....

 

[flacaltenn]

Joshua Holland's Blog: The Associated Press Packs a Bunch of Lies About Social Security into a News Report



Is it "sick"? Social Security has $2.5 trillion in T-Bills sitting in a trust fund, is financed through 2037 and if nothing were to change it would still be able to pay out higher benefits than it does today, indefinitely.

Is it getting sicker? Well, the 2000 Social Security Trustees's report (PDF) projected that the trust fund would run out in ... 2037. But the 1997 report (PDF) expected the trust fund to be depleted by 2029 -- 8 years earlier than currently projected. So in that sense, it's "healthier" today than it was 13 years ago.

CUT THE CRAP!!! THere are no T-BILLS in the SS trust fund. They are intra-governmental transfer notes. They are NOT transferable (like a T-Bill), are not able to generate cash and stand BEHIND all other US generated debt in terms of priority... They are a SIMPLE IOU left in the fund after Congress STOLE the surplus from America's working poor.

We have no way to correct the negative balance in SS for 2010 other than generating NEW REAL debt paper.

You need to wake up and hear the propaganda trying to cover up the thefts that have occurred.. This is a prime reason why leftists have lost the Liberal fear of big govt. Because they have no sense of self-preservation..

 

[flacaltenn]

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12039/01-26_FY2011Outlook.pdf

When a trust fund receives payroll taxes or other income
that is not needed immediately to pay benefits or cover
other expenses, the Treasury credits the fund and uses the
excess cash to reduce the amount of new federal borrowing
that is needed to finance the governmentwide deficit.
That is, if other tax and spending policies are unchanged,
the government borrows less from the public than it
would in the absence of those excess funds. The reverse is
the case when revenues for a trust fund program fall short
of expenses. The balances of trust funds at a given point
in time are not a measure of resources available to pay
future obligations for the respective programs; those
resources will need to come from federal revenues or
additional borrowing in the years those obligations are
due.

Tax the Rich to Repay Looted Social Security Money | Dissident Voice

In 1990, Reid, along with a few other senators, was trying to protect the future of Social Security by telling the truth about it. In a speech on the Senate floor, on October 9, 1990, Senator Reid made the following statement:

The discussion is are we as a country violating a trust by spending Social Security trust fund money’s for some purpose other than for which they were intended. The obvious answer is yes…On that chart in emblazoned red letters is what has been taking place here, embezzlement. During the period of growth we have had during the past 10 years, the growth has been from two sources. One, a large credit card with no limits on it, and, two, we have been stealing money from the Social Security recipients of this country.

Senator Reid was right in denouncing the raiding of the trust fund in 1990, but he didn’t follow through with his battle. Once he got into a leadership position, he abandoned his fight to end the looting and just ignored the illegal practice after that.

The Awful Truth About the Social Security Trust Fund is Beginning to Emerge | Dissident Voice

None of the Social Security surplus revenue has ever been saved and invested in Treasury bonds or anything else. All revenue, not needed to pay current benefits has been put into the general fund and used to pay for wars, tax cuts, and other government programs. Every dollar of the $2.5 trillion that is supposed to be in the trust fund has been “borrowed,” “embezzled,” or “stolen” by the government and spent for other purposes. The trust fund does not hold any real marketable government bonds or any other kind of real assets. It holds only IOUs in the form of ”special issues of the Treasury.” These are a gimmick, created by the government, to make the public think the trust fund holds “bonds” when it holds only IOUs. They are not marketable and could not be sold to anyone even for a penny on the dollar. They are nothing more than accounting devices.

 

[thereisnospoon]

...in 2017....

Sorry Charlie. Too many facts get in the way of your claim of conspiracy.

 

[DontBeStupid]

We have no way to correct the negative balance in SS for 2010 other than generating NEW REAL debt paper.

Technically this is not true. We could raise taxes.

 

[Truthmatters]

Yeap pay for what we took from SS.

And increase the amount of workers who are paying into it.

JOBS is what we need

 

[flacaltenn]

We have no way to correct the negative balance in SS for 2010 other than generating NEW REAL debt paper.

Technically this is not true. We could raise taxes.

Any fixes for Soc Sec should KEEP the program accounting INTACT --- so if you want to raise PAYROLL taxes to support the Universal insurance premiums to reflect real COSTS of the program -- go right ahead. But if you destroy the Universal nature of the program and turn it into simple redistribution -- FDR (your hero) will haunt you and the American people will never again trust the FEDS with UNIVERSAL anything..

 

[DontBeStupid]

We have no way to correct the negative balance in SS for 2010 other than generating NEW REAL debt paper.

Technically this is not true. We could raise taxes.

Any fixes for Soc Sec should KEEP the program accounting INTACT --- so if you want to raise PAYROLL taxes to support the Universal insurance premiums to reflect real COSTS of the program -- go right ahead. But if you destroy the Universal nature of the program and turn it into simple redistribution -- FDR (your hero) will haunt you and the American people will never again trust the FEDS with UNIVERSAL anything..

SS is now, and always has been, redistribution.

 

[MikeK]

Well it was sold to the American People, and passed as a pay as you go Retirement plan. That's the Problem with these Programs. They never turn out to be what we are told they will be, and they always cost far more than Projected.

It's been working flawlessly for seventy-five years and is (credibly) projected to continue working without revision until 2037. To extend that projection will require some tweaking, such as increasing the retirement age, removing the contributions cap and imposing a means test, all of which are reasonable revisions.

Which of "these programs" are you referring to that didn't turn out as we were told it would? I'm not aware of anything comparable to Social Security, which has very successfully achieved its intended purpose? The only problem with Social Security I'm aware of is the lack of appropriate increase in retirement age and the Congress being able to replace actual funds with IOUs.

There's our problem in a nutty shell.. It's PERFECT!! Congress hasn't been OVERCHARGING the working class for payroll taxes and then simply STEALING the surplus for 25 years now.. And it was a full 75 years ( a man's single lifetime) before the fund faced a huge demographic problem because of it's pay as you go intent. Geezh, whatyouwant PLANNING and FIDUCIARY management from Congress?

And when FDR said he'd eat the legislation if it ever exceeded 4% of a worker's payroll in total --- he was just lucky he died when he did. So all of the UNIVERSAL nature is now on the table and FDR is rolling in his grave screaming epithets at progressive morons trying to dismantle his noble work by making SS LESS Universal.. More like simple-minded socialist redistribution. Bump the cap, means test, only SOME benefit.. That's NOT the definition of UNIVERSAL IS IT MIKEY??????

You think after that SPECTACULAR success with Universal retirement -- with the massive THEFTS and MISMANAGEMENT that the American people want MORE of your UNIVERSAL crap??? And you still believe in the tooth fairy Soc Sec Trust Fund MIKEY? That mysterious pile of worthless paper that supposed to save this fund until 2037? You're not credible and neither are "the Trust Fund" reports. They are same worthless shit as the Indian Lands Trust Fund reports that have also been raided by Congress.



Tell me Mikey -- how is it that YOU are not furious with the THEFT of SS "profits" by the govt??? It all came out of the pockets of the working poor and middle class and yet -- you are blindly TOUTING the success of this? How "unfeeling" of you....

I've been listening to this kind of pessimistic wailing for so long I can't remember -- at least twenty years. And for a dozen of those years my Social Security direct deposit has been unfailing. One of the doomsayers is a former neighbor who liked to boast about the superiority of his 401k, which took a nose-dive in 2008 and left him moaning.

It's true that Social Security is just a promise, but what investment or insurance program isn't? If the company that insures your house against loss from fire goes broke and your house burns where does that leave you? If Social Security goes under that means the Government has gone under, in which case we'll have a lot more to worry about than Social Security. Right?

So get back to work on your bomb shelter and stop worrying about Social Security. The Congress knows very well that failure to send out those monthly checks will piss off the most powerful voting block of all -- us old farts. They will be out on their asses and they know it.

 

[StevenC]

Well it was sold to the American People, and passed as a pay as you go Retirement plan. That's the Problem with these Programs. They never turn out to be what we are told they will be, and they always cost far more than Projected.

It's been working flawlessly for seventy-five years and is (credibly) projected to continue working without revision until 2037. To extend that projection will require some tweaking, such as increasing the retirement age, removing the contributions cap and imposing a means test, all of which are reasonable revisions.

Which of "these programs" are you referring to that didn't turn out as we were told it would? I'm not aware of anything comparable to Social Security, which has very successfully achieved its intended purpose? The only problem with Social Security I'm aware of is the lack of appropriate increase in retirement age and the Congress being able to replace actual funds with IOUs.

But means testing proves that SS is not as lebs claim. They claim it is our money and we deserve to get it all back. Of course forget the fact that most get far more than what they paid into it.

 

[flacaltenn]

Technically this is not true. We could raise taxes.

Any fixes for Soc Sec should KEEP the program accounting INTACT --- so if you want to raise PAYROLL taxes to support the Universal insurance premiums to reflect real COSTS of the program -- go right ahead. But if you destroy the Universal nature of the program and turn it into simple redistribution -- FDR (your hero) will haunt you and the American people will never again trust the FEDS with UNIVERSAL anything..

SS is now, and always has been, redistribution.

No -- you're wrong. It was CONCEIVED as a UNIVERSAL retirement insurance program. Where EVERY worker would contribute and recieve benefits. The percent of wages and the caps were moved over the years to keep it solvent -- but it has NEVER been contemplated to turn it SOLELY into welfare for poorer workers. My in-laws are upper middle class and are STAUNCH defenders of FDR's vision and intent. They would revolt rather than turning it into sheer redistribution.

YOU -- and your progressive friends want to redefine the original intent. And like I said -- go ahead and try -- but you will poison the concept of UNIVERSAL anything for several generations if you succeed in doing that.

It's the left's RADICAL element that is the biggest threat to Soc Sec as it was conceived..

 

[flacaltenn]

It's been working flawlessly for seventy-five years and is (credibly) projected to continue working without revision until 2037. To extend that projection will require some tweaking, such as increasing the retirement age, removing the contributions cap and imposing a means test, all of which are reasonable revisions.

Which of "these programs" are you referring to that didn't turn out as we were told it would? I'm not aware of anything comparable to Social Security, which has very successfully achieved its intended purpose? The only problem with Social Security I'm aware of is the lack of appropriate increase in retirement age and the Congress being able to replace actual funds with IOUs.

There's our problem in a nutty shell.. It's PERFECT!! Congress hasn't been OVERCHARGING the working class for payroll taxes and then simply STEALING the surplus for 25 years now.. And it was a full 75 years ( a man's single lifetime) before the fund faced a huge demographic problem because of it's pay as you go intent. Geezh, whatyouwant PLANNING and FIDUCIARY management from Congress?

And when FDR said he'd eat the legislation if it ever exceeded 4% of a worker's payroll in total --- he was just lucky he died when he did. So all of the UNIVERSAL nature is now on the table and FDR is rolling in his grave screaming epithets at progressive morons trying to dismantle his noble work by making SS LESS Universal.. More like simple-minded socialist redistribution. Bump the cap, means test, only SOME benefit.. That's NOT the definition of UNIVERSAL IS IT MIKEY??????

You think after that SPECTACULAR success with Universal retirement -- with the massive THEFTS and MISMANAGEMENT that the American people want MORE of your UNIVERSAL crap??? And you still believe in the tooth fairy Soc Sec Trust Fund MIKEY? That mysterious pile of worthless paper that supposed to save this fund until 2037? You're not credible and neither are "the Trust Fund" reports. They are same worthless shit as the Indian Lands Trust Fund reports that have also been raided by Congress.



Tell me Mikey -- how is it that YOU are not furious with the THEFT of SS "profits" by the govt??? It all came out of the pockets of the working poor and middle class and yet -- you are blindly TOUTING the success of this? How "unfeeling" of you....

I've been listening to this kind of pessimistic wailing for so long I can't remember -- at least twenty years. And for a dozen of those years my Social Security direct deposit has been unfailing. One of the doomsayers is a former neighbor who liked to boast about the superiority of his 401k, which took a nose-dive in 2008 and left him moaning.

It's true that Social Security is just a promise, but what investment or insurance program isn't? If the company that insures your house against loss from fire goes broke and your house burns where does that leave you? If Social Security goes under that means the Government has gone under, in which case we'll have a lot more to worry about than Social Security. Right?

So get back to work on your bomb shelter and stop worrying about Social Security. The Congress knows very well that failure to send out those monthly checks will piss off the most powerful voting block of all -- us old farts. They will be out on their asses and they know it.

So you won't acknowledge the massive theft and incompetence that has occured Mikey? You just hope to die before the debt comes due?? Good plan....

 

[DontBeStupid]

Any fixes for Soc Sec should KEEP the program accounting INTACT --- so if you want to raise PAYROLL taxes to support the Universal insurance premiums to reflect real COSTS of the program -- go right ahead. But if you destroy the Universal nature of the program and turn it into simple redistribution -- FDR (your hero) will haunt you and the American people will never again trust the FEDS with UNIVERSAL anything..

SS is now, and always has been, redistribution.

No -- you're wrong. It was CONCEIVED as a UNIVERSAL retirement insurance program. Where EVERY worker would contribute and recieve benefits. The percent of wages and the caps were moved over the years to keep it solvent -- but it has NEVER been contemplated to turn it SOLELY into welfare for poorer workers. My in-laws are upper middle class and are STAUNCH defenders of FDR's vision and intent. They would revolt rather than turning it into sheer redistribution.

YOU -- and your progressive friends want to redefine the original intent. And like I said -- go ahead and try -- but you will poison the concept of UNIVERSAL anything for several generations if you succeed in doing that.

It's the left's RADICAL element that is the biggest threat to Soc Sec as it was conceived..

I can't comment on how it was originally conceived, because I wasn't there for the conception. Maybe you were. Congrats.

Regardless, what you think SS should be or what you think it was, what it IS now is redistribution, pure and simple. We tax working people and give that money to retirees. How you can NOT call that redistribution is beyond me. This is also why SS can not go bankrupt. It can't. It will reach a point where the money coming in from taxes is lower than what people thought they would get, and retirees will simply get less. Or, we will raise taxes and give them the original pay out.

SS can be fixed without means testing and without raising the retirement age. Simple apply a tax on the profits of companies and you're set.

 

[MikeK]

Well it was sold to the American People, and passed as a pay as you go Retirement plan. That's the Problem with these Programs. They never turn out to be what we are told they will be, and they always cost far more than Projected.

It's been working flawlessly for seventy-five years and is (credibly) projected to continue working without revision until 2037. To extend that projection will require some tweaking, such as increasing the retirement age, removing the contributions cap and imposing a means test, all of which are reasonable revisions.

Which of "these programs" are you referring to that didn't turn out as we were told it would? I'm not aware of anything comparable to Social Security, which has very successfully achieved its intended purpose? The only problem with Social Security I'm aware of is the lack of appropriate increase in retirement age and the Congress being able to replace actual funds with IOUs.

But means testing proves that SS is not as lebs claim. They claim it is our money and we deserve to get it all back. Of course forget the fact that most get far more than what they paid into it.

That's true. And some don't manage to live long enough to get any. Some are born tall and some are born short. Life just isn't fair.

 

[KissMy]

I've been listening to this kind of pessimistic wailing for so long I can't remember -- at least twenty years. And for a dozen of those years my Social Security direct deposit has been unfailing. One of the doomsayers is a former neighbor who liked to boast about the superiority of his 401k, which took a nose-dive in 2008 and left him moaning.

It's true that Social Security is just a promise, but what investment or insurance program isn't? If the company that insures your house against loss from fire goes broke and your house burns where does that leave you? If Social Security goes under that means the Government has gone under, in which case we'll have a lot more to worry about than Social Security. Right?

So get back to work on your bomb shelter and stop worrying about Social Security. The Congress knows very well that failure to send out those monthly checks will piss off the most powerful voting block of all -- us old farts. They will be out on their asses and they know it.

You & your old fart friends retired to early & got to much Social Security & Medicare. You robbed ours. If you had any decency you would pay us back.

 

[MikeK]

I can't comment on how it was originally conceived, because I wasn't there for the conception. Maybe you were. Congrats.

Regardless, what you think SS should be or what you think it was, what it IS now is redistribution, pure and simple. We tax working people and give that money to retirees. How you can NOT call that redistribution is beyond me.[...]

If you wish to assign a categorical name to it call it progressive distribution or cooperative distribution. But it is not redistribution in the accepted sense of the word.

Redistribution is what needs to be done with a good part of this Nation's wealth resources which have been acquired via irregular and exploitive maneuvering of the financial system and is hoarded by the upper five percent of the population.

The principle of Social Security is really very simple: I supplemented your grandfather's retirement, now you are supplementing mine, and one day my grandchildren will supplement yours.

 

[MikeK]

I've been listening to this kind of pessimistic wailing for so long I can't remember -- at least twenty years. And for a dozen of those years my Social Security direct deposit has been unfailing. One of the doomsayers is a former neighbor who liked to boast about the superiority of his 401k, which took a nose-dive in 2008 and left him moaning.

It's true that Social Security is just a promise, but what investment or insurance program isn't? If the company that insures your house against loss from fire goes broke and your house burns where does that leave you? If Social Security goes under that means the Government has gone under, in which case we'll have a lot more to worry about than Social Security. Right?

So get back to work on your bomb shelter and stop worrying about Social Security. The Congress knows very well that failure to send out those monthly checks will piss off the most powerful voting block of all -- us old farts. They will be out on their asses and they know it.

You & your old fart friends retired to early & got to much Social Security & Medicare. You robbed ours. If you had any decency you would pay us back.

Tell ya what; you get your grandfather to pay me back and we'll talk.

 

[DontBeStupid]

You & your old fart friends retired to early & got to much Social Security & Medicare. You robbed ours. If you had any decency you would pay us back.

Or ... maybe it was a president 10 years ago screaming about how we had too much of a budget surplus and we needed to give it back to people.

That money would have come in handy now, don't you think?

 

[MikeK]

So you won't acknowledge the massive theft and incompetence that has occured Mikey? You just hope to die before the debt comes due?? Good plan....

On the day when my bank statement doesn't reflect a direct deposit from Social Security I'll get back to you. 'Til then, leave me alone. I've had enough of you guys and your death wish.