Stop, Drop, And Roll

[flacaltenn]

Forget Cut, Cap, and Balance.. Remember what we were originally taught to do..

Stop, Drop, and Roll...

# Stop the spending.

# Drop the size of the Federal Govt.

# Roll thru Washington and remove any politician who doesn't understand the problem or claims that Soc Sec is not broken.

Hope we've saved some lives today..


This has been a public service message from the National Fire Sale Safety Council..

 

[Flopper]

Forget Cut, Cap, and Balance.. Remember what we were originally taught to do..

Stop, Drop, and Roll...

# Stop the spending.

# Drop the size of the Federal Govt.

# Roll thru Washington and remove any politician who doesn't understand the problem or claims that Soc Sec is not broken.

Hope we've saved some lives today..


This has been a public service message from the National Fire Sale Safety Council..

Social Security isn't broken, however our politicians certainly are. The S.S. administration has been warning every president and congress for 50 years that the baby boomers are going to retire and there will not be sufficient assets in the trust fund to meet benefit payments. Congress responded by increasing benefits without matching increases in payroll taxes. And guess what? The baby boomers are retiring and the fund will be exhausted in in about 15 or 20 years and congress continues to do nothing about the problem.

If congress does nothing, the balance in the fund will be depleted in 15 or 20 years and payments will be reduced to equal the payroll taxes being collected. The result will be a benefit reduction of about 25%, possibly more. The solution to the problem is incredibly simply. Just increase the retirement age about 2 years.

 

[flacaltenn]

Social Security isn't broken, however our politicians certainly are. The S.S. administration has been warning every president and congress for 50 years that the baby boomers are going to retire and there will not be sufficient assets in the trust fund to meet benefit payments. Congress responded by increasing benefits without matching increases in payroll taxes. And guess what? The baby boomers are retiring and the fund will be exhausted in in about 15 or 20 years and congress continues to do nothing about the problem.

If congress does nothing, the balance in the fund will be depleted in 15 or 20 years and payments will be reduced to equal the payroll taxes being collected. The result will be a benefit reduction of about 25%, possibly more. The solution to the problem is incredibly simply. Just increase the retirement age about 2 years.

I'm SOOO relieved Flopper..

Except that everything you said about Soc Sec is wrong..

Congress responded by increasing benefits without matching increases in payroll taxes.

Nope.. Social Security is "pay as you go".. And for the past 20 years it has been
OVERCHARGING the public with excess payroll tax collection. This is tantamount to ROBBING and obtaining a PROFIT off the backs of the working poor and middle class. To the tune of over $2Trill. The largest theft of profit that I can think of in my lifetime.. Nothing was placed in the "Trust Fund" except SPECIAL ISSUE, NON-transferable interagency bonds.. Essentially the robbers left IOUs...

And guess what? The baby boomers are retiring and the fund will be exhausted in in about 15 or 20 years and congress continues to do nothing about the problem.

Nope #2... In 2010, the tax reciepts for Soc Sec were $40B less than actual payment out.

It is NOW -- officially insolvent. Could return to a surplus if the economy picks up -- but the problem 15 to 20 years down the road -- is right now passing under the bumper...

The result will be a benefit reduction of about 25%, possibly more. The solution to the problem is incredibly simply. Just increase the retirement age about 2 years

Nope #3... Benefit reductions will never globally happen. and the solution is NOT simple since it causes a shift in the budget IMMEDIATELY from being able to STEAL $120Bill to having to cough up $100Bill or so.. And YOU are paying TWICE for this. It does NOT come out of a magic fairytale trust fund. It comes from NEW DEBT being issued to cover the shortages.

Where do you HEAR these lies? That's why we need to choke-up on any pundits and politicians who are INSISTING on lying to the American people about SocSec financing. and thus the "ROLL" them out of Washington. Stop, Drop & Roll.....

Just as back-up to Soc Sec insolvency problem TODAY....

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.

Add in the deficit from the second Social Security fund, Disability Insurance (DI), and the gap between total SSA outlays ($707 billion in 2010, according to the Treasury) and tax receipts ($631 billion) grows to $76 billion -- more than 10% of the program's expenses.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Forget Cut, Cap, and Balance.. Remember what we were originally taught to do..

Stop, Drop, and Roll...

# Stop the spending.

# Drop the size of the Federal Govt.

# Roll thru Washington and remove any politician who doesn't understand the problem or claims that Soc Sec is not broken.

Hope we've saved some lives today..


This has been a public service message from the National Fire Sale Safety Council..

Social Security isn't broken, however our politicians certainly are. The S.S. administration has been warning every president and congress for 50 years that the baby boomers are going to retire and there will not be sufficient assets in the trust fund to meet benefit payments. Congress responded by increasing benefits without matching increases in payroll taxes. And guess what? The baby boomers are retiring and the fund will be exhausted in in about 15 or 20 years and congress continues to do nothing about the problem.

If congress does nothing, the balance in the fund will be depleted in 15 or 20 years and payments will be reduced to equal the payroll taxes being collected. The result will be a benefit reduction of about 25%, possibly more. The solution to the problem is incredibly simply. Just increase the retirement age about 2 years.

SS is a broke program.

There is no SS fund...

All that money has been borrowed or eaten up in interest.

When the truth finally comes out it will be 15 years too late...

 

[flacaltenn]

Mr. Nick:

I don't get how this myth is perpetrated? Why are there STILL folk out there DENYING the problem?

Can't we just crush all this Trust Fund mythology?

New problem... SSA is showing "the interest payments" going into the Soc Sec to keep the fund solvent. However -- they are putting MORE interest into the SS fund than is required to simply balance out the yearly liability. Is this just part of the fraud? Or have they discovered that now that the fund can't be robbed yearly -- they can use it to HIDE some of the "on-budget" debt? I think the robbery is STILL in progress...

 

[Flopper]

Social Security isn't broken, however our politicians certainly are. The S.S. administration has been warning every president and congress for 50 years that the baby boomers are going to retire and there will not be sufficient assets in the trust fund to meet benefit payments. Congress responded by increasing benefits without matching increases in payroll taxes. And guess what? The baby boomers are retiring and the fund will be exhausted in in about 15 or 20 years and congress continues to do nothing about the problem.

If congress does nothing, the balance in the fund will be depleted in 15 or 20 years and payments will be reduced to equal the payroll taxes being collected. The result will be a benefit reduction of about 25%, possibly more. The solution to the problem is incredibly simply. Just increase the retirement age about 2 years.

I'm SOOO relieved Flopper..

Except that everything you said about Soc Sec is wrong..

Congress responded by increasing benefits without matching increases in payroll taxes.

Nope.. Social Security is "pay as you go".. And for the past 20 years it has been
OVERCHARGING the public with excess payroll tax collection. This is tantamount to ROBBING and obtaining a PROFIT off the backs of the working poor and middle class. To the tune of over $2Trill. The largest theft of profit that I can think of in my lifetime.. Nothing was placed in the "Trust Fund" except SPECIAL ISSUE, NON-transferable interagency bonds.. Essentially the robbers left IOUs...



Nope #2... In 2010, the tax reciepts for Soc Sec were $40B less than actual payment out.

It is NOW -- officially insolvent. Could return to a surplus if the economy picks up -- but the problem 15 to 20 years down the road -- is right now passing under the bumper...

The result will be a benefit reduction of about 25%, possibly more. The solution to the problem is incredibly simply. Just increase the retirement age about 2 years

Nope #3... Benefit reductions will never globally happen. and the solution is NOT simple since it causes a shift in the budget IMMEDIATELY from being able to STEAL $120Bill to having to cough up $100Bill or so.. And YOU are paying TWICE for this. It does NOT come out of a magic fairytale trust fund. It comes from NEW DEBT being issued to cover the shortages.

Where do you HEAR these lies? That's why we need to choke-up on any pundits and politicians who are INSISTING on lying to the American people about SocSec financing. and thus the "ROLL" them out of Washington. Stop, Drop & Roll.....

Just as back-up to Soc Sec insolvency problem TODAY....

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.

Add in the deficit from the second Social Security fund, Disability Insurance (DI), and the gap between total SSA outlays ($707 billion in 2010, according to the Treasury) and tax receipts ($631 billion) grows to $76 billion -- more than 10% of the program's expenses.

Had the government not been “overcharging”, Social Security would not have had sufficient funds to cover benefits paid in the years 1959,1961,1963,1965,1975,1976,1977,1978,1980, and 1981. Also, there would be no assets in the fund to pay benefits to baby boomers today.

You’re correct in 2010 and also 2011 tax receipts were not enough to pay benefits so funds from the trust were used to pay benefits as has been done 10 times in the last 60 years. However in 2010 and 2011, the fund still grew because interests earned exceed payouts. The fund grew by 68 million in 2010 in spite of the 40 billion withdrawal.

Benefits will decrease 25% only if Congress does not take action. The fund will reach a zero balance, then all benefits will be paid from current payroll tax collection.

The Social Security Trust Fund is a fairy tale if its assets are worthless; that is the special issue treasury bonds are worthless. Unlike regular treasury bonds, the administration cannot refuse to pay principal or interest on special interest bonds without the approval of congress, making special interest bonds safer than regular treasury bonds.

I don’t know where you get your information, but mine comes from CBO, Actuarial Publications, and the Social Security Act as amended in 1939 and 1965.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/96xx/doc9649/08-20-SocialSecurityUpdate.pdf
Social Security Trust Funds
Social Security Act of 1965 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[flacaltenn]

Flopper:

Had the government not been “overcharging”, Social Security would not have had sufficient funds to cover benefits paid in the years 1959,1961,1963,1965,1975,1976,1977,1978,1980, and 1981. Also, there would be no assets in the fund to pay benefits to baby boomers today.

You’re correct in 2010 and also 2011 tax receipts were not enough to pay benefits so funds from the trust were used to pay benefits as has been done 10 times in the last 60 years. However in 2010 and 2011, the fund still grew because interests earned exceed payouts. The fund grew by 68 million in 2010 in spite of the 40 billion withdrawal.

Benefits will decrease 25% only if Congress does not take action. The fund will reach a zero balance, then all benefits will be paid from current payroll tax collection.

The Social Security Trust Fund is a fairy tale if its assets are worthless; that is the special issue treasury bonds are worthless. Unlike regular treasury bonds, the administration cannot refuse to pay principal or interest on special interest bonds without the approval of congress, making special interest bonds safer than regular treasury bonds.

You've been ROBBED, you've been LIED TO, and you refuse to acknowledge that the "trust fund" IS a fiction. There is NOTHING of value in the trust fund with which to pay current or future liabilities. Those can ONLY be covered by new DEBT issuance (payable by current and future taxpayers). If this was NOT the case -- Obama and Congress couldn't threaten that the SS checks "might not go out" because the tax-cheat Treas Sec could just open the trust fund lockbox and pull out all that valuable stuff and write checks.

I have NO IDEA why you're talking about 1961. The SS Fund last went negative in the 80's. They RAISED the payroll tax withholding so high to keep it solvent back then -- that they were able to plunder over $2Trill from the pockets of the working poor over the next 30 years. That money is GONE... Nothing of value remains except IOUs.

And this is an ABSOLUTE gem...

However in 2010 and 2011, the fund still grew because interests earned exceed payouts. The fund grew by 68 million in 2010 in spite of the 40 billion withdrawal.

Why ON EARTH would interest payments EXCEED the current year liabilities for payout? You think any of the EXCESS is in the LOCKBOX for next year? It's an accounting fiction that they are using to hide some of NEW "on-book" debt that they are generating by the dumpster full. That way they can CLAIM that the excess went to Soc Sec instead of to 3 or 4 wars and ethanol subsidies. It's the NEW theft that being perpetrated on the public by having SS convieniently "off budget"..

Until we smash this myth that SS "is financially secure" -- we can't even BEGIN to prioritize the process of fixing this economic mess. And here is the ONLY CBO statement required so that you can STOP fantasizing and get with reality..

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.

 

[flacaltenn]

Is there ANYONE left out there who still wants to contend that Social Security is just Fine???

We need to nail this one and get on with the solutions...

 

[kyzr]

Is there ANYONE left out there who still wants to contend that Social Security is just Fine???

We need to nail this one and get on with the solutions...

Totally agree. Its time to kick-off the ones who didn't pay in, and put Medicare lifetime limits on benefits, just like real insurers.

Trustees Report Summary

Medicare will be bankrupt in 2017 & SS in 2037
Trustees Report Summary

That means that SS folks get at least 70% of promised benefits. The Medicare folks are fucked-over because no money means no healthcare.

 

[flacaltenn]

Is there ANYONE left out there who still wants to contend that Social Security is just Fine???

We need to nail this one and get on with the solutions...

Totally agree. Its time to kick-off the ones who didn't pay in, and put Medicare lifetime limits on benefits, just like real insurers.

Trustees Report Summary

Medicare will be bankrupt in 2017 & SS in 2037
Trustees Report Summary

That means that SS folks get at least 70% of promised benefits. The Medicare folks are fucked-over because no money means no healthcare.

""Medicare will be bankrupt in 2017 & SS in 2037""

Soc Sec is bankrupt TODAY.. That's the point. It is officially paying out MORE than it took in as of 2010... This occurred at least 6 years prior to any Federal predictions..

You are correct about treating these like REAL insurance programs. But Congress has raped and pillaged these programs and are asking us to pay for them AGAIN...

That will certainly put us in the mood to do more UNIVERSAL stuff -- won't it?

 

[kyzr]

Can hospitals survive w/o Medicare? The ones around here can't. Hospital care will only be available for the ones who can pay for it. Does the Coburn Plan look any better to anyone?

 

[flacaltenn]

Is there an active thread with a link to Coburn plan??

 

[kyzr]

Is there an active thread with a link to Coburn plan??

Coburn Ups Ante in Debt Ceiling Standoff, Pushes Plan to Save $9 Trillion - FoxNews.com

 

[percysunshine]

If we tax just 20% of social security outlays, we will have enough money to pay social security outlays.

 

[Flopper]

Flopper:

Had the government not been “overcharging”, Social Security would not have had sufficient funds to cover benefits paid in the years 1959,1961,1963,1965,1975,1976,1977,1978,1980, and 1981. Also, there would be no assets in the fund to pay benefits to baby boomers today.

You’re correct in 2010 and also 2011 tax receipts were not enough to pay benefits so funds from the trust were used to pay benefits as has been done 10 times in the last 60 years. However in 2010 and 2011, the fund still grew because interests earned exceed payouts. The fund grew by 68 million in 2010 in spite of the 40 billion withdrawal.

Benefits will decrease 25% only if Congress does not take action. The fund will reach a zero balance, then all benefits will be paid from current payroll tax collection.

The Social Security Trust Fund is a fairy tale if its assets are worthless; that is the special issue treasury bonds are worthless. Unlike regular treasury bonds, the administration cannot refuse to pay principal or interest on special interest bonds without the approval of congress, making special interest bonds safer than regular treasury bonds.

You've been ROBBED, you've been LIED TO, and you refuse to acknowledge that the "trust fund" IS a fiction. There is NOTHING of value in the trust fund with which to pay current or future liabilities. Those can ONLY be covered by new DEBT issuance (payable by current and future taxpayers). If this was NOT the case -- Obama and Congress couldn't threaten that the SS checks "might not go out" because the tax-cheat Treas Sec could just open the trust fund lockbox and pull out all that valuable stuff and write checks.

I have NO IDEA why you're talking about 1961. The SS Fund last went negative in the 80's. They RAISED the payroll tax withholding so high to keep it solvent back then -- that they were able to plunder over $2Trill from the pockets of the working poor over the next 30 years. That money is GONE... Nothing of value remains except IOUs.

And this is an ABSOLUTE gem...

However in 2010 and 2011, the fund still grew because interests earned exceed payouts. The fund grew by 68 million in 2010 in spite of the 40 billion withdrawal.

Why ON EARTH would interest payments EXCEED the current year liabilities for payout? You think any of the EXCESS is in the LOCKBOX for next year? It's an accounting fiction that they are using to hide some of NEW "on-book" debt that they are generating by the dumpster full. That way they can CLAIM that the excess went to Soc Sec instead of to 3 or 4 wars and ethanol subsidies. It's the NEW theft that being perpetrated on the public by having SS convieniently "off budget"..

Until we smash this myth that SS "is financially secure" -- we can't even BEGIN to prioritize the process of fixing this economic mess. And here is the ONLY CBO statement required so that you can STOP fantasizing and get with reality..

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.

If the trust fund is worthless, then so are the savings bonds tucked away in safe deposit boxes and for that matter all US debt. All US debt is an IOU, no collateral, just a promise from the government. As long as the government pays the interest and principal through revenue or debt the fund is solid.

You don’t seem to understand that the government’s financial problems have nothing to do with S.S. If S.S. never existed, the 2 trillion plus dollars the government borrowed from the trust fund would have been borrowed from investors in treasury bonds. In fact, debt would have been a lot higher because without S.S, millions of seniors would have been on welfare, driving the debt even higher.

The reason both Obama and Congress are saying Social Security payments are in endanger is to put pressure on the oppositions. The administration cannot fail to pay the trust interest and principal without Congressional approval, which is not going to happen. 94% of the retirement benefit payments in 2011 will come from payroll tax revenues. They only need to raise 45 billion for the year or 3.75 billion for August. I think they said on Aug 2, they would have 70 billion in cash. You can bet 3.75 billion will be pulled out to pay seniors.

Interest does not exceed liabilities. It exceeds the $45 billion shortage. For 2010, interest was 117 billion. That’s a yield of about 4.5%.

There is no lockbox for S.S. I don’t think there has been one in the past, nor should there be one. Since 1958, the trust has earned in excess of 1.4 trillion dollars, which is most of the funds assets. Putting the money in non-interest bearing federal reserve account makes no sense.

If Social Security is not secure, then neither is all other US debt. In that case the only thing that will have valued will be a gold and hard assets.

 

[Flopper]

Can hospitals survive w/o Medicare? The ones around here can't. Hospital care will only be available for the ones who can pay for it. Does the Coburn Plan look any better to anyone?

We spend about a trillion a year on Medicare. Over 400 billion goes to hospitals. Total hospital revenues in the US are 800 billion. You be the judge.


http://www.hoovers.com/industry/hospitals/1380-1.html

 

[flacaltenn]

Flopper:

Had the government not been “overcharging”, Social Security would not have had sufficient funds to cover benefits paid in the years 1959,1961,1963,1965,1975,1976,1977,1978,1980, and 1981. Also, there would be no assets in the fund to pay benefits to baby boomers today.

You’re correct in 2010 and also 2011 tax receipts were not enough to pay benefits so funds from the trust were used to pay benefits as has been done 10 times in the last 60 years. However in 2010 and 2011, the fund still grew because interests earned exceed payouts. The fund grew by 68 million in 2010 in spite of the 40 billion withdrawal.

Benefits will decrease 25% only if Congress does not take action. The fund will reach a zero balance, then all benefits will be paid from current payroll tax collection.

The Social Security Trust Fund is a fairy tale if its assets are worthless; that is the special issue treasury bonds are worthless. Unlike regular treasury bonds, the administration cannot refuse to pay principal or interest on special interest bonds without the approval of congress, making special interest bonds safer than regular treasury bonds.

You've been ROBBED, you've been LIED TO, and you refuse to acknowledge that the "trust fund" IS a fiction. There is NOTHING of value in the trust fund with which to pay current or future liabilities. Those can ONLY be covered by new DEBT issuance (payable by current and future taxpayers). If this was NOT the case -- Obama and Congress couldn't threaten that the SS checks "might not go out" because the tax-cheat Treas Sec could just open the trust fund lockbox and pull out all that valuable stuff and write checks.

I have NO IDEA why you're talking about 1961. The SS Fund last went negative in the 80's. They RAISED the payroll tax withholding so high to keep it solvent back then -- that they were able to plunder over $2Trill from the pockets of the working poor over the next 30 years. That money is GONE... Nothing of value remains except IOUs.

And this is an ABSOLUTE gem...



Why ON EARTH would interest payments EXCEED the current year liabilities for payout? You think any of the EXCESS is in the LOCKBOX for next year? It's an accounting fiction that they are using to hide some of NEW "on-book" debt that they are generating by the dumpster full. That way they can CLAIM that the excess went to Soc Sec instead of to 3 or 4 wars and ethanol subsidies. It's the NEW theft that being perpetrated on the public by having SS convieniently "off budget"..

Until we smash this myth that SS "is financially secure" -- we can't even BEGIN to prioritize the process of fixing this economic mess. And here is the ONLY CBO statement required so that you can STOP fantasizing and get with reality..

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.

If the trust fund is worthless, then so are the savings bonds tucked away in safe deposit boxes and for that matter all US debt. All US debt is an IOU, no collateral, just a promise from the government. As long as the government pays the interest and principal through revenue or debt the fund is solid.

You don’t seem to understand that the government’s financial problems have nothing to do with S.S. If S.S. never existed, the 2 trillion plus dollars the government borrowed from the trust fund would have been borrowed from investors in treasury bonds. In fact, debt would have been a lot higher because without S.S, millions of seniors would have been on welfare, driving the debt even higher.

The reason both Obama and Congress are saying Social Security payments are in endanger is to put pressure on the oppositions. The administration cannot fail to pay the trust interest and principal without Congressional approval, which is not going to happen. 94% of the retirement benefit payments in 2011 will come from payroll tax revenues. They only need to raise 45 billion for the year or 3.75 billion for August. I think they said on Aug 2, they would have 70 billion in cash. You can bet 3.75 billion will be pulled out to pay seniors.

Interest does not exceed liabilities. It exceeds the $45 billion shortage. For 2010, interest was 117 billion. That’s a yield of about 4.5%.

There is no lockbox for S.S. I don’t think there has been one in the past, nor should there be one. Since 1958, the trust has earned in excess of 1.4 trillion dollars, which is most of the funds assets. Putting the money in non-interest bearing federal reserve account makes no sense.

If Social Security is not secure, then neither is all other US debt. In that case the only thing that will have valued will be a gold and hard assets.

"The governments financial problems have nothing to do with S.S?" Are you daft man? Every deficit dollar that S.S. runs doesn't come from "fictional interest", it comes from NEW DEBT instruments!!! And if you think there isn't a diff between negotiable publically traded US Bonds and the IOUs that sit in a drawer somewhere in the SSA -- you're just f'in deluded..

Charles Krauthammer: 'Special issue' bonds don't change the fact that the lockbox is empty

Krautheimer::::

Really? If these trust fund bonds represent anything real, why is it that in calculating national indebtedness they are not even included? We measure national solvency by debt/GDP ratio. As calculated by everyone from the OMB to the CIA, from the Simpson-Bowles to the Domenici-Rivlin commissions, the debt/GDP ratio counts only publicly held debt. This means bonds held by China, Saudi Arabia, you and me. The debt ratio completely ignores the kind of intragovernmental bonds that Mr. Lew insists are the equivalent of publicly held bonds.

Why? Because the intragovernmental bond is nothing more than a bookkeeping device that records how much one part of the U.S. government (Treasury) owes another part of the same government (the Social Security Administration). In judging the creditworthiness of the United States, the world doesn't care what the left hand owes the right. It's all one entity. It cares only what that one entity owes the world.

That's why publicly held bonds are so radically different from intragovernmental bonds. If we default on Chinese-held debt, decades of AAA creditworthiness is destroyed, the world stops lending to us, the dollar collapses, the economy goes into a spiral and we become Argentina. That's why such a default is inconceivable.

On the other hand, what would happen to financial markets if the Treasury stopped honoring the "special issue" bonds in the Social Security trust fund? A lot of angry grumbling at home for sure. But externally? Nothing.

This "default" would simply be the Treasury telling the Social Security Administration that henceforth it would have to fend for itself in covering its annual shortfall. How? By means-testing (cutting the benefits to the rich), changing the inflation formula, raising the retirement age and, if necessary, hiking the cap on income subject to the payroll tax

And your assertion that Treasury "needs" Congressional approval to not pay SS benefits is just wishful thinking. When the ceiling is hit -- the bills pile up.. And Congress is in NO POSITION to micromanage the payments that do get made until they authorize further spending..