Social Security surplus dwarfed by future deficit

[Nova78]

Social Security surplus dwarfed by future deficit | US National Headlines | Comcast

As millions of baby boomers flood Social Security with applications for benefits, the program's $2.7 trillion surplus is starting to look small.

For nearly three decades Social Security produced big surpluses, collecting more in taxes from workers than it paid in benefits to retirees, disabled workers, spouses and children. The surpluses also helped mask the size of the budget deficit being generated by the rest of the federal government.

Those days are over.

Since 2010, Social Security has been paying out more in benefits than it collects in taxes, adding to the urgency for Congress to address the program's long-term finances.

"To me, urgent doesn't begin to describe it," said Chuck Blahous, one of the public trustees who oversee Social Security. "I would say we're somewhere between critical and too late to deal with it."The Social Security trustees project the surplus will be gone in 2033. Unless Congress acts, Social Security would only collect enough tax revenue each year to pay about 75 percent of benefits, triggering an automatic reduction.

Lawmakers from both political parties say they want to avoid such a dramatic benefit cut for people who have retired and might not have the means to make up the lost income. Still, that scenario is more than two decades away, which is why many in Congress are willing to put off changes.

Why not just put off until it becomes a crisis ? Thats what congress does best......

 

[tjvh]

I always believed that baby boomers entering into retirement would be offset by low unemployment numbers... Boy, was I mistaken.

 

[Ariux]

Considering that SS disability is essentially just welfare, pay for it out of income taxes. Leave SS revenues for retirees.

 

[Nova78]

Considering that SS disability is essentially just welfare, pay for it out of income taxes. Leave SS revenues for retirees.

AMEN......

 

[Care4all]

BUSH masked 2 trillion in deficits by using 2 trillion in SS surplus funds in his 8 years.

IN 4 years Obama has only used $380 billion in SS surplus funds to mask deficit.

WHERE WERE YOU when Bush used the $2 trillion?

 

[Nova78]

BUSH masked 2 trillion in deficits by using 2 trillion in SS surplus funds in his 8 years.

IN 4 years Obama has only used $380 billion in SS surplus funds to mask deficit.

WHERE WERE YOU when Bush used the $2 trillion?

Where were you, chopping fire wood and shoveling snow, ah ?

 

[uscitizen]

If Mitt is elected this will be no problem as most of the oldsters will die off.

 

[uscitizen]

BUSH masked 2 trillion in deficits by using 2 trillion in SS surplus funds in his 8 years.

IN 4 years Obama has only used $380 billion in SS surplus funds to mask deficit.

WHERE WERE YOU when Bush used the $2 trillion?

Where were you, chopping fire wood and shoveling snow, ah ?

Nope I was on boards with her and unlike the right wingers we were complaining about the massive overspending under Bush.

Overspending is only a problem for right wingers when demoncrats do it.

 

[freedombecki]

BUSH masked 2 trillion in deficits by using 2 trillion in SS surplus funds in his 8 years.

IN 4 years Obama has only used $380 billion in SS surplus funds to mask deficit.

WHERE WERE YOU when Bush used the $2 trillion?

He did? Will you please provide a link?

 

[freedombecki]

I always believed that baby boomers entering into retirement would be offset by low unemployment numbers... Boy, was I mistaken.

Nobody would have guessed Obama would go on an energy job-killing binge, eliminating American drilling and thousands of high-paying jobs in the Gulf of Mexico.

The resultant raise in gas prices caused by obama's edict against drilling also resulted in the total decimation of America's tourist industry by killing half of the jobs of resort areas, who naturally have lost traffic due to a combination of terrorist threats worldwide plus who have lost tourism due to the high price of gas.

That's two industries gutted by Obama because he brought in malice and prejudice against energy companies when he took office.

The forced funding of green energy businesses by tapping taxpayers to 100% fund green businesses on the verge of collapse and have too much foreign competition using American technology when they are able to produce a few high-priced offerings, they're swamped and the American jobs that go along with them just like the 1100 Solyndra jobs lost in one day last year, and several others falling like dominoes around the nation.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

BUSH masked 2 trillion in deficits by using 2 trillion in SS surplus funds in his 8 years.

IN 4 years Obama has only used $380 billion in SS surplus funds to mask deficit.

WHERE WERE YOU when Bush used the $2 trillion?

The Democrats combined Social Security with the rest of the budget, decades ago.
Bush spent way too much.
I miss his responsible, compared to Obama, budgets.
Time to cut spending, a lot. Now.
Obama won't do it. Time for the adults to take over.

 

[freedombecki]

There are some descriptions of Social Security online, here, very in-depth, but here's the bottom line summarizing Congressional uses of Social Security in the budget:

Summary-
So, to sum up:
1- Social Security was off-budget from 1935-1968;
2- On-budget from 1969-1985;
3- Off-budget from 1986-1990, for all purposes except computing the deficit;
4- Off-budget for all purposes since 1990.
Finally, just note once again that the financing procedures involving the Social Security program have not changed in any fundamental way since they were established in the original Social Security Act of 1935 and amended in 1939. These changes in federal budgeting rules govern how the Social Security program is accounted for in the federal budget, not how it is financed.

Larry DeWitt
SSA Historian's Office
March 4, 2005
Updated 6/18/07 ​

 

[freedombecki]

BUSH masked 2 trillion in deficits by using 2 trillion in SS surplus funds in his 8 years.

IN 4 years Obama has only used $380 billion in SS surplus funds to mask deficit.

WHERE WERE YOU when Bush used the $2 trillion?

The Democrats combined Social Security with the rest of the budget, decades ago.
Bush spent way too much.
I miss his responsible, compared to Obama, budgets.
Time to cut spending, a lot. Now.
Obama won't do it. Time for the adults to take over.

That's ever so true, Toddsterpatriot.

In my lifetime, I do not recollect any particular other case where a President did not make a budget Congress would pass by a certain deadline.

And I do see the failure to pass a budget would give some serious problems to fiscal issues of an administration that does not desire to account his expenditures to Congress to measure how well his agencies managed to get along within the parameters of taxes that aren't too burdensome to the working folks, to the business folks, to pay and still conduct orderly businesses for the good of all and prosperity of many.

In any other business this might be considered dereliction of duty, and it could cause some serious issues of fiduciary integrity.

 

[martybegan]

The true issue is that the so called trust fund only invested in a single, special type of government bond.

Using simple numbers it looks like this.

Say SS collected 100 million in a given year, and paid out 60 million in benefits, giving it a surplus of 40 million. That 40 million goes into the trust fund via SS buying the government bonds, payable on a certain date. That extra 40 million goes into the general fund, and the government uses it, just like any other borrowed money.

years go by, now SS is collecting 150 million, and paying out 100 million. Thats 50 million extra. 40 million goes into rebuying 40 million in expiring bonds, and 10 million extra goes to new bonds, so 50 million goes ino the general fund, and the "trust fund" goes up by 10 million more.

Whats happening now is that the trust fund is not being replenished as much. SS collects 200 million, but only makes 230 million. So now when those 40 million of bonds come due, the government has to pay out 10 million to pay for people's social security, and the trust fund goes down. Also no more "free" money into the general fund from SS.

Soon, SS will make 170 million, and have to pay out 250 million. At that point SS has to cash out even more bonds, and that money has to come from the general fund, as the government has to make good on its debts.

The negative cash flow from the general fund to SS is new to the equation, and a very serious problem.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The true issue is that the so called trust fund only invested in a single, special type of government bond.

Using simple numbers it looks like this.

Say SS collected 100 million in a given year, and paid out 60 million in benefits, giving it a surplus of 40 million. That 40 million goes into the trust fund via SS buying the government bonds, payable on a certain date. That extra 40 million goes into the general fund, and the government uses it, just like any other borrowed money.

years go by, now SS is collecting 150 million, and paying out 100 million. Thats 50 million extra. 40 million goes into rebuying 40 million in expiring bonds, and 10 million extra goes to new bonds, so 50 million goes ino the general fund, and the "trust fund" goes up by 10 million more.

Whats happening now is that the trust fund is not being replenished as much. SS collects 200 million, but only makes 230 million. So now when those 40 million of bonds come due, the government has to pay out 10 million to pay for people's social security, and the trust fund goes down. Also no more "free" money into the general fund from SS.

Soon, SS will make 170 million, and have to pay out 250 million. At that point SS has to cash out even more bonds, and that money has to come from the general fund, as the government has to make good on its debts.

The negative cash flow from the general fund to SS is new to the equation, and a very serious problem.

years go by, now SS is collecting 150 million, and paying out 100 million. Thats 50 million extra. 40 million goes into rebuying 40 million in expiring bonds, and 10 million extra goes to new bonds, so 50 million goes ino the general fund, and the "trust fund" goes up by 10 million more.

The "Trust Fund" doesn't rebuy expiring bonds. They might roll over maturing bonds. In your example, they buy $50 million in new bonds and the "Trust Fund" increases by $50 million.

 

[uscitizen]

BUSH masked 2 trillion in deficits by using 2 trillion in SS surplus funds in his 8 years.

IN 4 years Obama has only used $380 billion in SS surplus funds to mask deficit.

WHERE WERE YOU when Bush used the $2 trillion?

The Democrats combined Social Security with the rest of the budget, decades ago.
Bush spent way too much.
I miss his responsible, compared to Obama, budgets.
Time to cut spending, a lot. Now.
Obama won't do it. Time for the adults to take over.

Responsible budgets? Bush?
And funding 2 wars off the budgets...

 

[martybegan]

The true issue is that the so called trust fund only invested in a single, special type of government bond.

Using simple numbers it looks like this.

Say SS collected 100 million in a given year, and paid out 60 million in benefits, giving it a surplus of 40 million. That 40 million goes into the trust fund via SS buying the government bonds, payable on a certain date. That extra 40 million goes into the general fund, and the government uses it, just like any other borrowed money.

years go by, now SS is collecting 150 million, and paying out 100 million. Thats 50 million extra. 40 million goes into rebuying 40 million in expiring bonds, and 10 million extra goes to new bonds, so 50 million goes ino the general fund, and the "trust fund" goes up by 10 million more.

Whats happening now is that the trust fund is not being replenished as much. SS collects 200 million, but only makes 230 million. So now when those 40 million of bonds come due, the government has to pay out 10 million to pay for people's social security, and the trust fund goes down. Also no more "free" money into the general fund from SS.

Soon, SS will make 170 million, and have to pay out 250 million. At that point SS has to cash out even more bonds, and that money has to come from the general fund, as the government has to make good on its debts.

The negative cash flow from the general fund to SS is new to the equation, and a very serious problem.

years go by, now SS is collecting 150 million, and paying out 100 million. Thats 50 million extra. 40 million goes into rebuying 40 million in expiring bonds, and 10 million extra goes to new bonds, so 50 million goes ino the general fund, and the "trust fund" goes up by 10 million more.

The "Trust Fund" doesn't rebuy expiring bonds. They might roll over maturing bonds. In your example, they buy $50 million in new bonds and the "Trust Fund" increases by $50 million.

Thanks for the correction, but I assume the rest of what I posted is how it actually works.

If your version is correct, then the problem is actually worse.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

BUSH masked 2 trillion in deficits by using 2 trillion in SS surplus funds in his 8 years.

IN 4 years Obama has only used $380 billion in SS surplus funds to mask deficit.

WHERE WERE YOU when Bush used the $2 trillion?

The Democrats combined Social Security with the rest of the budget, decades ago.
Bush spent way too much.
I miss his responsible, compared to Obama, budgets.
Time to cut spending, a lot. Now.
Obama won't do it. Time for the adults to take over.

Responsible budgets? Bush?
And funding 2 wars off the budgets...

Responsible, compared to Obama, budgets.

And funding 2 wars off the budgets..

Every dollar Obama has spent in the last nearly 3 years has been off-budget.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The true issue is that the so called trust fund only invested in a single, special type of government bond.

Using simple numbers it looks like this.

Say SS collected 100 million in a given year, and paid out 60 million in benefits, giving it a surplus of 40 million. That 40 million goes into the trust fund via SS buying the government bonds, payable on a certain date. That extra 40 million goes into the general fund, and the government uses it, just like any other borrowed money.

years go by, now SS is collecting 150 million, and paying out 100 million. Thats 50 million extra. 40 million goes into rebuying 40 million in expiring bonds, and 10 million extra goes to new bonds, so 50 million goes ino the general fund, and the "trust fund" goes up by 10 million more.

Whats happening now is that the trust fund is not being replenished as much. SS collects 200 million, but only makes 230 million. So now when those 40 million of bonds come due, the government has to pay out 10 million to pay for people's social security, and the trust fund goes down. Also no more "free" money into the general fund from SS.

Soon, SS will make 170 million, and have to pay out 250 million. At that point SS has to cash out even more bonds, and that money has to come from the general fund, as the government has to make good on its debts.

The negative cash flow from the general fund to SS is new to the equation, and a very serious problem.

years go by, now SS is collecting 150 million, and paying out 100 million. Thats 50 million extra. 40 million goes into rebuying 40 million in expiring bonds, and 10 million extra goes to new bonds, so 50 million goes ino the general fund, and the "trust fund" goes up by 10 million more.

The "Trust Fund" doesn't rebuy expiring bonds. They might roll over maturing bonds. In your example, they buy $50 million in new bonds and the "Trust Fund" increases by $50 million.

Thanks for the correction, but I assume the rest of what I posted is how it actually works.

If your version is correct, then the problem is actually worse.

Yes, future, well, current now, shortfalls in the "Trust Fund" will require higher taxes or more borrowing pressure on the rest of the budget.

 

[Care4all]

BUSH masked 2 trillion in deficits by using 2 trillion in SS surplus funds in his 8 years.

IN 4 years Obama has only used $380 billion in SS surplus funds to mask deficit.

WHERE WERE YOU when Bush used the $2 trillion?

He did? Will you please provide a link?

sure!

Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

just put in the fiscal year dates for president bush, 10/1/2001-10/1/2009, then look at the intergovernmental debt column and write the first number you find on it....i think the first recording of it was a month later, then look at the last number for intragovernmental debt on the chart and subtract the latter from the former number....that will give you the amount of debt added covering the SS surplus....then take the last number as obamas first number and put in today's date to get the last number in intragovermental debt and subtract the latter from the former for the ss surplus used under obama.

2.0 trillion for bush, 380 billion for Obama....so far.... his fiscal end for 4 years isn't completed yet, so some more will be added to his number but it is clearly trending at a much much lower number used of SS monies to mask the deficit than under president Bush.