The End of Liberalism....

[Mr. Shaman]

1. "…there has been a slow but steady decline of which liberals have been steadfastly oblivious. The heirs of the New Deal are down to around 20% of the electorate, according to recent Gallup polls. Conservatives account for 42% of the vote, and in the recent election the independents, the second most numerous group at 29% of the electorate, broke the conservatives' way. They were alarmed by the deficit.

2. Liberalism's decline might appear, at first glance, to have begun with the 1961 inauguration of President John F. Kennedy—when historians noted the first glimmerings of what was to become liberalism's distinctive trait, overreach. On the domestic side, the oratory set in motion President Lyndon Johnson's catastrophic War on Poverty.

a. JFK's stirring language represented a break with the Burkean understanding of President Dwight Eisenhower. Ike, whether he articulated it or not, wanted to put the Great Depression and the dangerous confrontations of the early Cold War period behind us. He wanted to return to normalcy.

3. Still, in tracing liberalism's decline, one cannot ignore an earlier event: the civil war that broke out in the aftermath of World War II. The conflict pitted what we might call the radicals led by Henry Wallace against the advocates of what Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. would call in his book, "The Vital Center," more practical liberals like Hubert Humphrey, Joseph L. Rauh and Walter Reuther. They were hard-headed and patriotic, and their desiderata were reasonable by comparison with the radicals' utopian ideas about the Soviet Union.

4. The practical liberals won in the late 1940s, but in 1972 civil war broke out anew. This time the radicals won. In the meantime, LBJ's Great Society caused even some liberals to warn against the "unintended consequences" of government programs. These were to be the first new recruits to modern conservatism. Jeane Kirkpatrick, Irving Kristol and, for a time, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, were in Kristol's words liberals "who were mugged by reality."

5. Conservatives have had Edmund Burke and the Founding Fathers as their cynosures. Sometimes they have provided discipline; sometimes conservatives have followed their own star. The problem for liberals is they have been denied a cynosure. Some had looked to the British Fabian Socialists and some to Karl Marx, but since the late 1940s liberals became coy about their intellectual mentors.

6. Conservatism has steadily spread through the country since its larval days in the 1950s, and the reason is that the vast majority of Americans favor free enterprise and personal liberty. Note the tea party movement. The Republicans just took the House of Representatives by over 60 seats and gained six seats in the Senate. The social democrat in the White House has been routed.

7. Over the past two years the Democrats showed their true colors. Faced with an entitlement crisis, they rang up trillion dollar deficits. We now face an entitlement crisis and a budget crisis—and liberals have no answer for it beyond tax and spend. They still have support in the media, but even here they are faced with opposition from Fox News, talk radio and the Internet.

a. As a political movement liberalism is dead. They do not have the numbers. They do not have the policies. They have 23 seats in the Senate to defend in 2012 (against the Republicans' 10) and Republican control of state houses and legislatures will give them even more seats in the future. Liberalism R.I.P. "

R. Emmett Tyrell Jr.: Liberalism—An Autopsy - WSJ.com
(emphasis mine)

gays are out and about everywhere!

they even have their own shows on tv

they are in the military, in business, in politics

they have spousal benefits all over the country and in some places they are allowed to marry....

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

women and blacks are on a more equal footing with white men in just about every arena in America; business, politics, religion, the military...


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

blacks and whites marry and nobody cares anymore

everyone has sex outside of marriage

lots of successful women have children sans husbands BY CHOICE

divorce is EASY to get

millions of couples live together without bothering to marry

most people are waiting LONGER before getting married

people are re-thinking outrageous and draconian pot laws

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


these are ALL issues that riled conservatives 10-20 years ago...

yet
today
cons have become SO LIBERAL that they don't care about most of those issues


the measure of how liberal or conservative a nation is is best judged by how people actually live...

and MOST people are a lot more LIBERAL in their social beliefs today than they were 20-30 years ago

Sex...Sex....Sex....the basis for most liberal "great" social beliefs.....

....And, the best sex "conservatives" ever had.

​

 

[midcan5]

If Liberalism were dead why do republicans spend so much time talking about it and writing about it. It would seem to any sensible person a movement that has passed would cease to be the only thing on the minds of conservatives. When people are certain of something there is no need to repeat it. Uncertainty is the reason conservatives argue against something they cannot understand nor stop. Yes, the Sun will rise tomorrow, no need to debate, and yes. Liberalism is still the core political philosophy of America. We are still free people last I checked.

There was a time I thought a good well reasoned argument could convince people of something I thought important. But as you get older you realize that thought is not rational. Reality is a mental construct and as such you may be incapable of the level of thought, tolerance, flexibility to be a liberal. It is like being religious or being close minded or being what we used to call sick in the head. Not everyone can face life as change, as growth, as movement from here to there, not everyone can deal with something different than what they are used to.

But consider no nation was ever founded on conservative principles as they have none except to blame others as PC so often does. Conservatism has no accomplishments as I have asked for them too many times to mention.

This is by far the best book on conservatism for anyone in the audience interested in a bit of reality. [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Rhetoric-Reaction-Perversity-Futility-Jeopardy/dp/067476868X/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8]Amazon.com: The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy (9780674768680): Albert O. Hirschman: Books[/ame]


=========================================================

'What it means to be a liberal' By Geoffrey R. Stone

"For most of the past four decades, liberals have been in retreat. Since the election of Richard Nixon in 1968, Republicans have controlled the White House 70 percent of the time and Republican presidents have made 86 percent of the U.S. Supreme Court appointments. In many quarters, the word "liberal" has become a pejorative. Part of the problem is that liberals have failed to define themselves and to state clearly what they believe. As a liberal, I find that appalling.

In that light, I thought it might be interesting to try to articulate 10 propositions that seem to me to define "liberal" today. Undoubtedly, not all liberals embrace all of these propositions, and many conservatives embrace at least some of them.

Moreover, because 10 is a small number, the list is not exhaustive. And because these propositions will in some instances conflict, the "liberal" position on a specific issue may not always be predictable. My goal, however, is not to end discussion, but to invite debate.

1. Liberals believe individuals should doubt their own truths and consider fairly and open-mindedly the truths of others. This is at the very heart of liberalism. Liberals understand, as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once observed, that "time has upset many fighting faiths." Liberals are skeptical of censorship and celebrate free and open debate.

2. Liberals believe individuals should be tolerant and respectful of difference. It is liberals who have supported and continue to support the civil rights movement, affirmative action, the Equal Rights Amendment and the rights of gays and lesbians. (Note that a conflict between propositions 1 and 2 leads to divisions among liberals on issues like pornography and hate speech.)" What it means to be a liberal - Chicago Tribune



"I cannot help fearing that men may reach a point where they look on every new theory as a danger, every innovation as a toilsome trouble, every social advance as a first step toward revolution, and that they may absolutely refuse to move at all for fear of being carried off their feet. The prospect really does frighten me that they may finally become so engrossed in a cowardly love of immediate pleasures that their interest in their own future and in that of their descendants may vanish, and that they will prefer tamely to follow the course of their destiny rather than make a sudden energetic effort necessary to set things right." Alexis De Tocqueville

 

[sangha]

If Liberalism were dead why do republicans spend so much time talking about it and writing about it. It would seem to any sensible person a movement that has passed would cease to be the only thing on the minds of conservatives. When people are certain of something there is no need to repeat it. Uncertainty is the reason conservatives argue against something they cannot understand nor stop. Yes, the Sun will rise tomorrow, no need to debate, and yes. Liberalism is still the core political philosophy of America. We are still free people last I checked.

There was a time I thought a good well reasoned argument could convince people of something I thought important. But as you get older you realize that thought is not rational. Reality is a mental construct and as such you may be incapable of the level of thought, tolerance, flexibility to be a liberal. It is like being religious or being close minded or being what we used to call sick in the head. Not everyone can face life as change, as growth, as movement from here to there, not everyone can deal with something different than what they are used to.

But consider no nation was ever founded on conservative principles as they have none except to blame others as PC so often does. Conservatism has no accomplishments as I have asked for them too many times to mention.

This is by far the best book on conservatism for anyone in the audience interested in a bit of reality. Amazon.com: The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy (9780674768680): Albert O. Hirschman: Books


=========================================================

'What it means to be a liberal' By Geoffrey R. Stone

"For most of the past four decades, liberals have been in retreat. Since the election of Richard Nixon in 1968, Republicans have controlled the White House 70 percent of the time and Republican presidents have made 86 percent of the U.S. Supreme Court appointments. In many quarters, the word "liberal" has become a pejorative. Part of the problem is that liberals have failed to define themselves and to state clearly what they believe. As a liberal, I find that appalling.

In that light, I thought it might be interesting to try to articulate 10 propositions that seem to me to define "liberal" today. Undoubtedly, not all liberals embrace all of these propositions, and many conservatives embrace at least some of them.

Moreover, because 10 is a small number, the list is not exhaustive. And because these propositions will in some instances conflict, the "liberal" position on a specific issue may not always be predictable. My goal, however, is not to end discussion, but to invite debate.

1. Liberals believe individuals should doubt their own truths and consider fairly and open-mindedly the truths of others. This is at the very heart of liberalism. Liberals understand, as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once observed, that "time has upset many fighting faiths." Liberals are skeptical of censorship and celebrate free and open debate.

2. Liberals believe individuals should be tolerant and respectful of difference. It is liberals who have supported and continue to support the civil rights movement, affirmative action, the Equal Rights Amendment and the rights of gays and lesbians. (Note that a conflict between propositions 1 and 2 leads to divisions among liberals on issues like pornography and hate speech.)" What it means to be a liberal - Chicago Tribune



"I cannot help fearing that men may reach a point where they look on every new theory as a danger, every innovation as a toilsome trouble, every social advance as a first step toward revolution, and that they may absolutely refuse to move at all for fear of being carried off their feet. The prospect really does frighten me that they may finally become so engrossed in a cowardly love of immediate pleasures that their interest in their own future and in that of their descendants may vanish, and that they will prefer tamely to follow the course of their destiny rather than make a sudden energetic effort necessary to set things right." Alexis De Tocqueville

It's become obvious that the wingnuts have given up any hope of winning this discussion, so they are running away from defending their ridiculous OP and have been reduced to childish one liners

 

[The T]

"Tbagged has no argument to make, so he pretends he's an adult" The T is an adult? Who knew.

Fuck off Jokey. At least I know who I am, what I belive and secure under my epidermis which is far from where you reside...

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Sex...Sex....Sex....the basis for most liberal "great" social beliefs.....isn't it time for liberals to finally grow up.....?

Conversely: why are conservatives so repressed when it comes to sexuality?

I don't really think conservatives are repressed when it comes to sexuality, but hey; since we are making juvenile posts........

They certainly do have more-effective/natural birth-control!!!!!

​

 

[shintao]

1. "…there has been a slow but steady decline of which liberals have been steadfastly oblivious. The heirs of the New Deal are down to around 20% of the electorate, according to recent Gallup polls. Conservatives account for 42% of the vote, and in the recent election the independents, the second most numerous group at 29% of the electorate, broke the conservatives' way. They were alarmed by the deficit.

2. Liberalism's decline might appear, at first glance, to have begun with the 1961 inauguration of President John F. Kennedy—when historians noted the first glimmerings of what was to become liberalism's distinctive trait, overreach. On the domestic side, the oratory set in motion President Lyndon Johnson's catastrophic War on Poverty.

a. JFK's stirring language represented a break with the Burkean understanding of President Dwight Eisenhower. Ike, whether he articulated it or not, wanted to put the Great Depression and the dangerous confrontations of the early Cold War period behind us. He wanted to return to normalcy.

3. Still, in tracing liberalism's decline, one cannot ignore an earlier event: the civil war that broke out in the aftermath of World War II. The conflict pitted what we might call the radicals led by Henry Wallace against the advocates of what Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. would call in his book, "The Vital Center," more practical liberals like Hubert Humphrey, Joseph L. Rauh and Walter Reuther. They were hard-headed and patriotic, and their desiderata were reasonable by comparison with the radicals' utopian ideas about the Soviet Union.

4. The practical liberals won in the late 1940s, but in 1972 civil war broke out anew. This time the radicals won. In the meantime, LBJ's Great Society caused even some liberals to warn against the "unintended consequences" of government programs. These were to be the first new recruits to modern conservatism. Jeane Kirkpatrick, Irving Kristol and, for a time, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, were in Kristol's words liberals "who were mugged by reality."

5. Conservatives have had Edmund Burke and the Founding Fathers as their cynosures. Sometimes they have provided discipline; sometimes conservatives have followed their own star. The problem for liberals is they have been denied a cynosure. Some had looked to the British Fabian Socialists and some to Karl Marx, but since the late 1940s liberals became coy about their intellectual mentors.

6. Conservatism has steadily spread through the country since its larval days in the 1950s, and the reason is that the vast majority of Americans favor free enterprise and personal liberty. Note the tea party movement. The Republicans just took the House of Representatives by over 60 seats and gained six seats in the Senate. The social democrat in the White House has been routed.

7. Over the past two years the Democrats showed their true colors. Faced with an entitlement crisis, they rang up trillion dollar deficits. We now face an entitlement crisis and a budget crisis—and liberals have no answer for it beyond tax and spend. They still have support in the media, but even here they are faced with opposition from Fox News, talk radio and the Internet.

a. As a political movement liberalism is dead. They do not have the numbers. They do not have the policies. They have 23 seats in the Senate to defend in 2012 (against the Republicans' 10) and Republican control of state houses and legislatures will give them even more seats in the future. Liberalism R.I.P. "

R. Emmett Tyrell Jr.: Liberalism—An Autopsy - WSJ.com
(emphasis mine)

There are a few errors in your article, like the assumption the seats won in Congress belong to Republicans and not T-Party. A recent poll ("Do you consider yourself to be a supporter of the Tea Party movement, or not?") shows that 47% of republicans, and 70% of Independents say a resounding NO! So no, those are not the seats of borrow & spend Republicans, they are seats of past republicans that had enough of righty bullshit, and started their own party.

Another poll asks, ""Who do you trust to do a better job?" Democrats were more trusted to handle the economy, health care, and creating jobs, so I don't see where liberalism is dead by any stretch of the imagination.

You see the people have not forgotten about your poor choice of a president, and with the loons you have chosen of late, you don't stand a chance of getting a conservative foot back into the White House. A poll asks, "Looking back, do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush handled his job as president?" An overwhelming 70% disapprove, so not likely we will see a con president anytime soon.

So I feel secure in knowing Liberalism is going to be around for a long time.

PollingReport.com

 

[Mr. Shaman]

"Tbagged has no argument to make, so he pretends he's an adult" The T is an adult? Who knew.

Fuck off Jokey. At least I know who I am, what I belive and secure under my epidermis which is far from where you reside...

wow.....how profound.


​

 

[The T]

"Tbagged has no argument to make, so he pretends he's an adult" The T is an adult? Who knew.

Fuck off Jokey. At least I know who I am, what I belive and secure under my epidermis which is far from where you reside...

wow.....how profound.​

​

Your mommy done screaming for you to give back her computer yet? Obviously not. You're still here.

 

[shintao]

"Tbagged has no argument to make, so he pretends he's an adult" The T is an adult? Who knew.

Fuck off Jokey. At least I know who I am, what I belive and secure under my epidermis which is far from where you reside...

When did you learn who you were? Whoever it was, pedo, they were wrong pukeface. Now crawl back in that garbage can and STFU!!!

 

[Cuyo]

Besides yourself, who has suggested "cutting social security"?

Are you taking the position that preserving Social Security is now a mainstream conservative point of view?

See? That's the point I just made.

Social Security was a promise made to millions of senior citizens who planned their lives around it. That needs to be preserved.

But it's insolvent.

SS has a 2-point-something trillion dollar surplus and is solvent, with no changes whatsoever, for 20-some years...

They're lyin to ya again. As we continue to live longer lives, adjustments need to be made, most likely in raising the benefit age. But it's in no way responsible for current deficits whatsoever...

 

[shintao]

"Tbagged has no argument to make, so he pretends he's an adult" The T is an adult? Who knew.

Hmm, I didn't know worms had adults.

 

[Cuyo]

Today's Liberals are not Socialists/Progressives and today's Socialists/Progressives are not Liberals. Most people still think they're the same thing but they're not. Socialists/Progressives do not care about individual Freedom & Liberty. It's all about the State for them. A true Liberal would not subscribe to that philosophy. Liberalism is alive,and that's not a bad thing. Libertarians and real Conservatives are who will save the Republican Party in the end. There is no hope for the Democratic Party though. Their Socialists/Progressives have plunged them into Goose Stepping madness.

Libocalypse is skipping again.

Someone put down their beer, walk over to the corner, and smack him in the head.

Hopefully that will fix it.

OMG too f**kin funny

 

[shintao]

Are you taking the position that preserving Social Security is now a mainstream conservative point of view?

See? That's the point I just made.

Social Security was a promise made to millions of senior citizens who planned their lives around it. That needs to be preserved.

But it's insolvent.

SS has a 2-point-something trillion dollar surplus and is solvent, with no changes whatsoever, for 20-some years...

They're lyin to ya again. As we continue to live longer lives, adjustments need to be made, most likely in raising the benefit age. But it's in no way responsible for current deficits whatsoever...

It is BS to raise the benefit age. The idea is you work hard half your life, and retire the second half. If anything they should set it back to 65, or 55. I can't believe how placid Americans are over this issue.

 

[sangha]

"Tbagged has no argument to make, so he pretends he's an adult" The T is an adult? Who knew.

Fuck off Jokey. At least I know who I am, what I belive and secure under my epidermis which is far from where you reside...

When did you learn who you were? Whoever it was, pedo, they were wrong pukeface. Now crawl back in that garbage can and STFU!!!

We know who you are too

 

[shintao]

Fuck off Jokey. At least I know who I am, what I belive and secure under my epidermis which is far from where you reside...

When did you learn who you were? Whoever it was, pedo, they were wrong pukeface. Now crawl back in that garbage can and STFU!!!

We know who you are too

That is good you do Sangha. Start a scrapbook to keep my magnificant posts in.

Photo books made easy in minutes

That way when I test later, you can have a study guide.

 

[Cuyo]

If you actually bothered to read the SS Annual Report, you'd see (well, maybe not you, but an intelligent person would) that SS is expected to decline into insolvency in 2014.

Paying benefits will require redeeming funds from the Fake Trust Fund, which is stuffed with IOUs that current and future taxpayers will have to pay off with higher taxes.

The Ponzi Scheme is tumbing down.


Social Security expenditures are expected to exceed tax receipts this year
for the first time since 1983. The projected deficit of $41 billion this year
(excluding interest income) is attributable to the recession and to an
expected $25 billion downward adjustment to 2010 income that corrects
for excess payroll tax revenue credited to the trust funds in earlier years.
This deficit is expected to shrink substantially for 2011 and to return to
small surpluses for years 2012-2014 due to the improving economy. After
2014 deficits are expected to grow rapidly as the baby boom generation’s
retirement causes the number of beneficiaries to grow substantially more
rapidly than the number of covered workers. The annual deficits will be
made up by redeeming trust fund assets in amounts less than interest
earnings through 2024, and then by redeeming trust fund assets until
reserves are exhausted in 2037, at which point tax income would be sufficient
to pay about 75 percent of scheduled benefits through 2084.

Actuarial Publications

The entire economy is a ponzi scheme, Boe, specifically the goldsmith method.

Social Security, on the other hand, has a tremendous surplus. And yes, when you have a huge surplus, you don't stick it under the mattress. You invest it in interest-bearing accounts with minimal risk, in this case, government bonds and the general government fund. The country has a huge deficit, but Social Security is not responsible for it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If you actually bothered to read the SS Annual Report, you'd see (well, maybe not you, but an intelligent person would) that SS is expected to decline into insolvency in 2014.

Paying benefits will require redeeming funds from the Fake Trust Fund, which is stuffed with IOUs that current and future taxpayers will have to pay off with higher taxes.

The Ponzi Scheme is tumbing down.


Social Security expenditures are expected to exceed tax receipts this year
for the first time since 1983. The projected deficit of $41 billion this year
(excluding interest income) is attributable to the recession and to an
expected $25 billion downward adjustment to 2010 income that corrects
for excess payroll tax revenue credited to the trust funds in earlier years.
This deficit is expected to shrink substantially for 2011 and to return to
small surpluses for years 2012-2014 due to the improving economy. After
2014 deficits are expected to grow rapidly as the baby boom generation’s
retirement causes the number of beneficiaries to grow substantially more
rapidly than the number of covered workers. The annual deficits will be
made up by redeeming trust fund assets in amounts less than interest
earnings through 2024, and then by redeeming trust fund assets until
reserves are exhausted in 2037, at which point tax income would be sufficient
to pay about 75 percent of scheduled benefits through 2084.

Actuarial Publications

The entire economy is a ponzi scheme, Boe, specifically the goldsmith method.

Social Security, on the other hand, has a tremendous surplus. And yes, when you have a huge surplus, you don't stick it under the mattress. You invest it in interest-bearing accounts with minimal risk, in this case, government bonds and the general government fund. The country has a huge deficit, but Social Security is not responsible for it.

"You invest it in interest-bearing accounts with minimal risk, in this case, government bonds..."

I.O.U.'s

The 1983 Greenspan Commission initiated changes in Social Security that generated large surpluses. “As soon as the first surpluses began to role in, in 1985, the money was put into the general revenue fund and spent on other government programs.” How Ronald Reagan and Alan Greenspan Pulled off the Greatest Fraud Ever Perpetrated against the American People | Dissident Voice

 

[kiwiman127]

The Democrats have not spent the way Bush and the Republicans did. Much of what appears to be current Democratic spending is simply paying for the ongoing cost of the Bush/GOP Congress.

The Democrats 'budgets since 2007 are not really the Democrats' budgets?

The Republicans are passing them by remote control? From the dead?

I guess you have never heard of future deficts?
OK, maybe this will make it easier,,,in 2003 Medicare Part D was passed by Congress and signed by GWB, it went into effect in 2006. The cost of this program is roughly 80 billion annually. http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ReportsTrustFunds/downloads/tr2009.pdf (page 126)
This 2003 GOP legislation is an example of a future deficit. The cost of this program has been mandated to be in every budget no matter who is president or who controls Congress. So right here we are addressing almost a trillion dollars in budgetary costs in the next ten years for this one program.
Thank you got your attention.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Democrats 'budgets since 2007 are not really the Democrats' budgets?

The Republicans are passing them by remote control? From the dead?

I guess you have never heard of future deficts?
OK, maybe this will make it easier,,,in 2003 Medicare Part D was passed by Congress and signed by GWB, it went into effect in 2006. The cost of this program is roughly 80 billion annually. http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ReportsTrustFunds/downloads/tr2009.pdf (page 126)
This 2003 GOP legislation is an example of a future deficit. The cost of this program has been mandated to be in every budget no matter who is president or who controls Congress. So right here we are addressing almost a trillion dollars in budgetary costs in the next ten years for this one program.
Thank you got your attention.

David Stockman, Reagan’s budget director, invented the “magic asterisk” which he added when he couldn’t justify expenditures: it included the phrase “Future saving to be identified.” An asterisk that made billions of expenditure disappear! More David Stockman Magic Asterisk Blogging - Grasping Reality with Both Hands

And if a new program is far too expensive to reveal, use the ‘Healthcare’ gambit: get OMB to calculate the costs over 10 years, but don’t set the program to begin for two or three years, essentially costing for seven years. They did this Medicare Part D, 2003, which didn’t fully phase in until 2006. This gave it the expense of ‘only’ $395 for ten years…but it is now estimated to be $952 billion for the next ten years, or an unfunded $7.2 trillion over seventy-five years.

 

[Cuyo]

If you actually bothered to read the SS Annual Report, you'd see (well, maybe not you, but an intelligent person would) that SS is expected to decline into insolvency in 2014.

Paying benefits will require redeeming funds from the Fake Trust Fund, which is stuffed with IOUs that current and future taxpayers will have to pay off with higher taxes.

The Ponzi Scheme is tumbing down.


Social Security expenditures are expected to exceed tax receipts this year
for the first time since 1983. The projected deficit of $41 billion this year
(excluding interest income) is attributable to the recession and to an
expected $25 billion downward adjustment to 2010 income that corrects
for excess payroll tax revenue credited to the trust funds in earlier years.
This deficit is expected to shrink substantially for 2011 and to return to
small surpluses for years 2012-2014 due to the improving economy. After
2014 deficits are expected to grow rapidly as the baby boom generation’s
retirement causes the number of beneficiaries to grow substantially more
rapidly than the number of covered workers. The annual deficits will be
made up by redeeming trust fund assets in amounts less than interest
earnings through 2024, and then by redeeming trust fund assets until
reserves are exhausted in 2037, at which point tax income would be sufficient
to pay about 75 percent of scheduled benefits through 2084.

Actuarial Publications

The entire economy is a ponzi scheme, Boe, specifically the goldsmith method.

Social Security, on the other hand, has a tremendous surplus. And yes, when you have a huge surplus, you don't stick it under the mattress. You invest it in interest-bearing accounts with minimal risk, in this case, government bonds and the general government fund. The country has a huge deficit, but Social Security is not responsible for it.

"You invest it in interest-bearing accounts with minimal risk, in this case, government bonds..."

I.O.U.'s

The 1983 Greenspan Commission initiated changes in Social Security that generated large surpluses. “As soon as the first surpluses began to role in, in 1985, the money was put into the general revenue fund and spent on other government programs.” How Ronald Reagan and Alan Greenspan Pulled off the Greatest Fraud Ever Perpetrated against the American People | Dissident Voice

Uhh yes, like I said, the funds were spent on other government programs. Social Security in and of itself has a surplus.

If you have a business that makes lots of money, and you invest it all in another company that loses the money, the first business still made money.