Social Security is Not a Ponzi Scheme, Mr. Perry

[Full-Auto]

THE MONEY IS GONE.

Really? So they stopped paying Social Security benefits? My grandfather still gets his.

The fact, checks could not be guaranteed should have been sufficient cause for alarm.

The fact that checks can't be guaranteed when Tea Baggers decide to not pay for them? How is that alarming? No check can be paid when the paying party decides to not put enough money int he account to pay it! That's OBVIOUS.

Instead youre telling us every things fine. If it was fine, why threaten the checks?

If everything is fine - how come we can't just default on our debts and not worry about it? Is that a serious question? Are you stupid? Everything's fine with my finances, too, but if I decide to stop paying the house note - that might cause a problem.

You are off the deep end. But I guess semantics is your only defense.

How much should this figure be?

Government - Interest Expense on the Debt Outstanding

 

[saveliberty]

Glad you brought up the interest factor NYCarbineer. If the Treasury keeps printing more and more money,

The Treasury doesn't create money. It prints currency, but it isn't money until the Fed places it into circulation.

inflation will come into play and that will increase interest rates.

When? barely over 3% on a 30 year treasury - don't think any time soon!

The Fed is worried about inflation, why aren't you?

 

[flacaltenn]

What the fuck are you talking about?

Social Security took in 677 billion last year and paid out 584 billion. that's not a deficit.

The Trust Fund's purpose is to produce interest income, which when added to the payroll tax revenue for any given year, pays the current recipients. Adjustments to income vs. outflow are all that are needed to keep from any unmangeable drawdown of the principal in the Trust fund.

See now NYC -- you didn't read the prospectus closely like they tell you to on TV... You've asserted this several times and I didn't respond because those numbers add the phoney "interest from the Trust Fund" to the receipts. Which I just showed you -- comes from NEW debt and NEW taxes not the Trust Fund..

To wit..
Social Security Is in Far Worse Shape Than You Think - DailyFinance

The annual report of the Social Security Trustees, published in August 2010, forecast that the primary Social Security program, the Old Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund (OASI), would not exceed its tax receipts until 2018. Unfortunately, it happened in fiscal 2010, which ended in October. That year's outlays for the OASI fund were about $580 billion, while receipts came to only $540 billion -- a whopping $40 billion shortfall.

I can't STOP you from claiming those transfers of "interest" mean something of value to taxpayers. But you sure can continue to call me a fucker and stamp your feet and declare that Soc Soc books are balancing if you want to...

I'm right you're wrong. I have no need to stamp my feet.

Right about WHAT NYC?? That Soc Sec took in more than they paid out in 2010? Only if you count the phoney interest payments. THat DID NOT COME from the Trust Fund.. In fact the only ACTUAL transfers from Treasury in 2010 was the $41Bill (in NEW debt) to cover the shortfall. All the other "interest" was an accounting entry to cover the fiction..

 

[NYcarbineer]

See now NYC -- you didn't read the prospectus closely like they tell you to on TV... You've asserted this several times and I didn't respond because those numbers add the phoney "interest from the Trust Fund" to the receipts. Which I just showed you -- comes from NEW debt and NEW taxes not the Trust Fund..

To wit..
Social Security Is in Far Worse Shape Than You Think - DailyFinance



I can't STOP you from claiming those transfers of "interest" mean something of value to taxpayers. But you sure can continue to call me a fucker and stamp your feet and declare that Soc Soc books are balancing if you want to...

I'm right you're wrong. I have no need to stamp my feet.

Right about WHAT NYC?? That Soc Sec took in more than they paid out in 2010? Only if you count the phoney interest payments. THat DID NOT COME from the Trust Fund..

You are getting too retarded to talk to. Did Social Security make all its recipient payments last year or not?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Glad you brought up the interest factor NYCarbineer. If the Treasury keeps printing more and more money, inflation will come into play and that will increase interest rates. Most likely we would have trouble paying interest on that large a sum with rates doubling or tripling. Very easy to see rates like that occurring.

We'll cut defense and raise taxes on the rich. Problem solved.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

THE MONEY IS GONE.

Really? So they stopped paying Social Security benefits? My grandfather still gets his.


The fact that checks can't be guaranteed when Tea Baggers decide to not pay for them? How is that alarming? No check can be paid when the paying party decides to not put enough money int he account to pay it! That's OBVIOUS.

Instead youre telling us every things fine. If it was fine, why threaten the checks?

If everything is fine - how come we can't just default on our debts and not worry about it? Is that a serious question? Are you stupid? Everything's fine with my finances, too, but if I decide to stop paying the house note - that might cause a problem.

You are off the deep end. But I guess semantics is your only defense.

How much should this figure be?

Government - Interest Expense on the Debt Outstanding

What does your question even mean?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Glad you brought up the interest factor NYCarbineer. If the Treasury keeps printing more and more money,

The Treasury doesn't create money. It prints currency, but it isn't money until the Fed places it into circulation.

inflation will come into play and that will increase interest rates.

When? barely over 3% on a 30 year treasury - don't think any time soon!

The Fed is worried about inflation, why aren't you?

LOL! With a 0.75% interest on fed funds? Yeah, I can tell, they're REALLY worried about inflation.

Worrying about inflation in the midst of a depression is like worrying about what kind of diseases might be at the bottom of a bottle of whiskey.

 

[flacaltenn]

I'm right you're wrong. I have no need to stamp my feet.

Right about WHAT NYC?? That Soc Sec took in more than they paid out in 2010? Only if you count the phoney interest payments. THat DID NOT COME from the Trust Fund..

You are getting too retarded to talk to. Did Social Security make all its recipient payments last year or not?

They were able to pay every dollar to beneficiaries. But the $40BIll that they were short because of revenue deficit had to be covered by NEW DEBT issued in 2010. It did not come out of the Trust Fund.. There are now TWO Debt instruments to cover $40Bill that was stolen in the past.

1) The phoney IOU in the trust fund when excess FICA was stolen with all it's elaborate accounting ruses.. AND
2) The NEW T-Bond issued in 2010 to cover an actual shortfall. Payable to Japan, China or maybe someone on USMB like me.

It was not because of "interest payments" on the IOUs.

You paid excess FICA for 30 yrs. And now when SS is actually running a deficit -- you will pay again. WITH interest. The Trust Fund is an accounting fiction.

If the Trust Fund had real investments with real value -- the Treasury wouldn't need to put today's taxpayers on the hook for $40Bill NEW dollars to pay back $40BILL that was stolen from them in the past..

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I'm right you're wrong. I have no need to stamp my feet.

Right about WHAT NYC?? That Soc Sec took in more than they paid out in 2010? Only if you count the phoney interest payments. THat DID NOT COME from the Trust Fund..

You are getting too retarded to talk to. Did Social Security make all its recipient payments last year or not?

Bernie Madoff used to say the exact same thing

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

If the Trust Fund had real investments with real value -- the Treasury wouldn't need to put today's taxpayers on the hook for $40Bill NEW dollars to pay back $40BILL that was stolen from them in the past..

LOL!!!! Investments in what? An object that the economy of the U.S. doesn't have to produce? Do you understand basic economics? The only way to take the burden off the American taxpayer by alternative investment would be to buy foreign debt and equity - is that what you want? If we had bought American corporate debt and equity instead - you do realize - the burden would still fall on the American economy - right? Either way, the productive members of the economy (workers) are still producing the goods and services the unproductive members need (non-workers).

 

[Neotrotsky]

Check out some interesting articles:

CBS
The Real Risk to Social Security

But where the system really turns murky is with the trillion-dollar Social Security trust fund, an accounting phantom that has launched a thousand half-cocked headlines like AP’s. Social Security experts like Eugene Steuerle of the Urban Institute regard it as a trillion-dollar distraction. “I try to avoid the trust fund debate,” he writes in an email. “Social Security is mainly a pay-as-you-go system.”

There is a massive trust fund — and this is one case where your definition of “is” really matters — only because FICA has pulled in much more than Social Security needed for the past 27 years. The government treated the FICA surplus the same way it treats all tax revenue: It spent it on aircraft carriers, interest on the debt, haircuts for Congressmen, and all the other purposes of government. The surplus, along with imputed interest, is recorded on the government’s ledgers. That ledger entry is the trust fund.

In the meantime, forget about when the Social Security trust fund will be “drained.” Indeed, forget about the trust fund altogether. It’s irrelevant. As with all the fiscal challenges we face, Social Security’s biggest risk is failure of political will. There’s no trust fund for that.​

Robert Samuelson

A relatively small elderly population sustained these fictions. Now, this is no longer possible. Contrary to the Obama administration's posture, Social Security does affect our larger budget problem. Annual benefits already exceed payroll taxes. The gap will grow. The trust fund holds Treasury bonds; when these are redeemed, the needed cash can be raised only by borrowing, taxing or cutting other programs. The connection between Social Security and the rest of the budget is brutally direct. The arcane accounting of the trust fund obscures what's happening. Just as important, how we treat Social Security will affect how we treat Medicare and, to a lesser extent, Medicaid.
​

--------------

It really comes down to the question of ....
Do we trust the gov't's ability to pay these back and
keep the buying power of our money stable?

If one feels their "money" is safe in the gov't's hand
then there should be no problem


One will collect benefits only if future tax revenues materialize as hoped;
the money you paid into the system is long gone.

Social Security is just a tax.
When it comes to Social Security, it is not an old age pension, an “insurance” program,
or even a forced savings program. It is just an enormous transfer payment from the younger workers to the old.
The confusion on some of this was from the gov't in creating the idea that SS was "more" than
just a tax and transfer payment, to promote the gov't's status quo and power. Which is why seniors have a strong
feeling of entitlement to their payments; they have been made to believe that SS is more like a "savings" program and
some type of "contract" is being broken if benefits were to decrease,when it is not.

But the SCOTUS ruled a long time ago, that SS is just a tax program and the gov't can modified the program anyway
it wants based on the 1935 Social Security Act: "The right to alter, amend, or repeal any provision of this Act is hereby reserved to Congress."


Just as a side note

It is interesting how hard the far Left will go in defending such a regressive tax
like the payroll tax

 

[NYcarbineer]

Right about WHAT NYC?? That Soc Sec took in more than they paid out in 2010? Only if you count the phoney interest payments. THat DID NOT COME from the Trust Fund..

You are getting too retarded to talk to. Did Social Security make all its recipient payments last year or not?

They were able to pay every dollar to beneficiaries. But the $40BIll that they were short because of revenue deficit had to be covered by NEW DEBT issued in 2010. It did not come out of the Trust Fund.. There are now TWO Debt instruments to cover $40Bill that was stolen in the past.

1) The phoney IOU in the trust fund when excess FICA was stolen with all it's elaborate accounting ruses.. AND
2) The NEW T-Bond issued in 2010 to cover an actual shortfall. Payable to Japan, China or maybe someone on USMB like me.

It was not because of "interest payments" on the IOUs.

You paid excess FICA for 30 yrs. And now when SS is actually running a deficit -- you will pay again. WITH interest. The Trust Fund is an accounting fiction.

If the Trust Fund had real investments with real value -- the Treasury wouldn't need to put today's taxpayers on the hook for $40Bill NEW dollars to pay back $40BILL that was stolen from them in the past..

'We' pay the interest on the Trust Fund because the Trust Fund invests in US treasuries. If the Trust Fund didn't invest in US treasuries 'we' would have borrowed the money elsewhere and still have paid the interest.

If the Trust Fund invested in marketable securities we STILL would have to pay the interest on them, and,

as to the marketability of them? If the US was in default, where would the Trust Fund sell them?

Use your head.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Really? Does this make you sleep better at night?

Or maybe what things look like for those younger Americans.

The accounting might be correct, but the money is gone...................................

The money is gone if you believe the full faith and credit of the US government is gone.

Can the US no longer afford to pay the annual interest on the Trust Fund?

THE MONEY IS GONE.

The fact, checks could not be guaranteed should have been sufficient cause for alarm.

Instead youre telling us every things fine. If it was fine, why threaten the checks?


What should this figure be?

Government - Interest Expense on the Debt Outstanding

The checks were only threatened because the Republicans, assuming they weren't bluffing, were insisting they were prepared to destroy this country financially if they didn't get their way.

OF COURSE this country's full faith and credit can't be guaranteed under that scenario.

 

[editec]

If the first to be paid debtors of the USA's debts are NOT the US citizens who trusted their government, one ought to be asking oneseelf why they are NOT the first in line.

But NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, that appearently never occcurs to our right wing neighbors.

They fully understand and insist that the FED pay its debts to everybody EXCEPT the workers of this nation.

Why?

Because they basically hate those workers and their first loyalty is to CAPITAL, that's why.

 

[Full-Auto]

The money is gone if you believe the full faith and credit of the US government is gone.

Can the US no longer afford to pay the annual interest on the Trust Fund?

THE MONEY IS GONE.

The fact, checks could not be guaranteed should have been sufficient cause for alarm.

Instead youre telling us every things fine. If it was fine, why threaten the checks?


What should this figure be?

Government - Interest Expense on the Debt Outstanding

The checks were only threatened because the Republicans, assuming they weren't bluffing, were insisting they were prepared to destroy this country financially if they didn't get their way.

OF COURSE this country's full faith and credit can't be guaranteed under that scenario.

Nonsense they were threatened for the reason mentioned.

NO MONEY!!!

 

[editec]

THE MONEY IS GONE.

The fact, checks could not be guaranteed should have been sufficient cause for alarm.

Instead youre telling us every things fine. If it was fine, why threaten the checks?


What should this figure be?

Government - Interest Expense on the Debt Outstanding

The checks were only threatened because the Republicans, assuming they weren't bluffing, were insisting they were prepared to destroy this country financially if they didn't get their way.

OF COURSE this country's full faith and credit can't be guaranteed under that scenario.

Nonsense they were threatened for the reason mentioned.

NO MONEY!!!

If social security's loans owed by the FEDERAL government are worthless, then so too are ALL debts owed by the FEDS.

And if that is the case then we have one hell of a bigger problem than JUST social security.

Because the other 3/4s of all US debts is mostly owned by our banks, our insurance companies, our 401Ks, and our corporations who THINK they have T bills in their vaults that are worth something.

 

[Full-Auto]

The checks were only threatened because the Republicans, assuming they weren't bluffing, were insisting they were prepared to destroy this country financially if they didn't get their way.

OF COURSE this country's full faith and credit can't be guaranteed under that scenario.

Nonsense they were threatened for the reason mentioned.

NO MONEY!!!

If social security's loans owed by the FEDERAL government are worthless, then so too are ALL debts owed by the FEDS.

And if that is the case then we have one hell of a bigger problem than JUST social security.

Because the other 3/4s of all US debts is mostly owned by our banks, our insurance companies, our 401Ks, and our corporations who THINK they have T bills in their vaults that are worth something.

The issue with the loans is they can not be redeemed on demand for cash without borrowing.

You can assume what ever you wish.

 

[Intense]

You are getting too retarded to talk to. Did Social Security make all its recipient payments last year or not?

They were able to pay every dollar to beneficiaries. But the $40BIll that they were short because of revenue deficit had to be covered by NEW DEBT issued in 2010. It did not come out of the Trust Fund.. There are now TWO Debt instruments to cover $40Bill that was stolen in the past.

1) The phoney IOU in the trust fund when excess FICA was stolen with all it's elaborate accounting ruses.. AND
2) The NEW T-Bond issued in 2010 to cover an actual shortfall. Payable to Japan, China or maybe someone on USMB like me.

It was not because of "interest payments" on the IOUs.

You paid excess FICA for 30 yrs. And now when SS is actually running a deficit -- you will pay again. WITH interest. The Trust Fund is an accounting fiction.

If the Trust Fund had real investments with real value -- the Treasury wouldn't need to put today's taxpayers on the hook for $40Bill NEW dollars to pay back $40BILL that was stolen from them in the past..

'We' pay the interest on the Trust Fund because the Trust Fund invests in US treasuries. If the Trust Fund didn't invest in US treasuries 'we' would have borrowed the money elsewhere and still have paid the interest.

If the Trust Fund invested in marketable securities we STILL would have to pay the interest on them, and,

as to the marketability of them? If the US was in default, where would the Trust Fund sell them?

Use your head.

I still vote for an audit of the Federal Reserve.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

That ledger entry is the trust fund.

Almost all bank accounts are just ledger entries.

 

[editec]

Nonsense they were threatened for the reason mentioned.

NO MONEY!!!

If social security's loans owed by the FEDERAL government are worthless, then so too are ALL debts owed by the FEDS.

And if that is the case then we have one hell of a bigger problem than JUST social security.

Because the other 3/4s of all US debts is mostly owned by our banks, our insurance companies, our 401Ks, and our corporations who THINK they have T bills in their vaults that are worth something.

The issue with the loans is they can not be redeemed on demand for cash without borrowing/

What loans cannot be redeemed on demand without borrowing?

You can assume what ever you wish.

Thanks, You too.

Now if you'd explain your response a little more clearly, I'd appreciate it.

What "loans" are you talking about?