Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The Government DEPENDS on the SS surplus. They MUST have it to pay the Government operating costs, it is FIGURED into the Budget. It is NOT excess. Ok so the Government pays a percentage on the money it borrows, all sounds fine and dandy, right? Problem is that the Government MUST use the money from SS to pay to operate. When SS no longer has a surplus to LOAN to the Government That money not only will no longer be available to borrow and pay for operating costs BUT the SS fund will be needing the Government to PAY it back the loans it already made.
Perhaps one can explain where the Government will get the funds that it currently depends on from SS AND the funds to pay back the loans when that happens?
Individual's deposits.. just like Cyprus did...
The Government DEPENDS on the SS surplus. They MUST have it to pay the Government operating costs, it is FIGURED into the Budget. It is NOT excess. Ok so the Government pays a percentage on the money it borrows, all sounds fine and dandy, right? Problem is that the Government MUST use the money from SS to pay to operate. When SS no longer has a surplus to LOAN to the Government That money not only will no longer be available to borrow and pay for operating costs BUT the SS fund will be needing the Government to PAY it back the loans it already made.
Perhaps one can explain where the Government will get the funds that it currently depends on from SS AND the funds to pay back the loans when that happens?
The Government DEPENDS on the SS surplus. They MUST have it to pay the Government operating costs, it is FIGURED into the Budget. It is NOT excess. Ok so the Government pays a percentage on the money it borrows, all sounds fine and dandy, right? Problem is that the Government MUST use the money from SS to pay to operate. When SS no longer has a surplus to LOAN to the Government That money not only will no longer be available to borrow and pay for operating costs BUT the SS fund will be needing the Government to PAY it back the loans it already made.
Perhaps one can explain where the Government will get the funds that it currently depends on from SS AND the funds to pay back the loans when that happens?
Saying the government has raided SS is like saying the government has raided the Chinese treasury. They do what SS does,
loan the US government money as an interest paying investment.
There is much discussion on this on this board. Almost any time SS and it's solvency (or lack thereof) is discussed, everyone talks about how SS has been "raided" and used to pay for other things. The problem here is that most of you, Democrat and Republican alike, who say this don't have a clue what you're talking about. So here, I'll explain it to you. I'd like to say that we could put the issue to rest once and for all, but I doubt that will be the case.
Before I begin, a prediction: Many of you will rush to respond without bothering to read, and in the process you'll jump to conclusions and make an ass out of yourself. Some will rail off on wild tangents. Many dissenters will be folks who claim to be conservatives, but are really just fake ass Cinos who like to complain and whine, and will be completely oblivious to the highly damaging implications I'll be presenting against the entire SS system. But you'll feel good because touching yourself always feels good. Many dissenters will be liberals, who will "like" this post, will note the Cinos dissenting for all the wrong reasons, and based upon that, will launch into your Hooray for Government dance, as if idiots being wrong instantly means that government is the solution to all our problems. Finally, if most people are adequately drawn to my blue highlighting of this paragraph so as to read it, and subsequently see their planned reaction described herein, few responses will be made because you'll realize that you've already been identified and you're now embarrassed at how much of an ass of yourself you were about to make.
Okay, now that that's cleared up, let's talk about the Social Security Trust, and what happens to the money.....
Overall, the Social Security Trust is fairly simple. Money goes in with the express purpose of being used to fund Social Security. It can't be used to pay to fuel up Air Force One for Obama's latest golfing venture. Simple. That being said, money static is money lost. That is to say, if money just sits on the coffee table, it's not doing anything except sitting there. In our personal lives most people know that building up a nest egg of cash that is doing nothing typically means lost opportunities. We could invest that money and make more money. Even something as simple and safe as putting it into a Certificate of Deposit with your bank might return a little bit of cash, all while you sit back and play video games for the next 18 months. If you're not going to be using your nest egg anyway, it's like giving up free money to just let it sit there.
That's why many, many years ago Congress passed a law that requires excess funds in the Social Security Trust to be "invested." Instead of just sitting there and collecting dust, the excess is invested and collects interest, which is then rolled back into the Trust. This "investing" is done in the form of intra-governmental loans. Basically, the government borrows money from itself, on a short term basis, in pretty much the same fashion as other government borrowing occurs. A bond is given to the Trust, and a few months later the Trust is repaid with interest.
Now, you might be thinking that "Well, this really does amount to raiding the SS Trust to pay for other things." On it's surface, it might appear that way. But in reality, it's not that way. And there are two reasons for that:
1 - At it's core, it's little more more than moving around cash. If your car broke down on Wed and you were short on cash, causing you to transfer $500 from your savings into your checking until payday Friday, at which point you put back the $500 plus added your normal per-paycheck savings contribution, would you call that "raiding" your savings account to pay you mechanic? Of course not. All you did was move your own cash around so that your check won't bounce.
2 - The law requires that the Trust be invested in his way. It doesn't matter how much or how little the government is spending on other things. Congress could pass a balanced budget, and the same thing would happen. Heck, the Congress could pass a budget that only authorizes $1,500 in spending, and the same thing would still happen. The Trust would still be invested, and the government would still borrow from itself.
This is why you may have heard such seemingly absurd things as "The debt is $18 trillion, but the real dept is only $10 trillion." What the "real" debt refers to is the amount of debt that is not in the form of intra-governmental loans; intra-governmental loans are included in the official calculation of the debt, so a sizable part of the $18 trillion includes cash that the government has just shifted around between accounts. (***Note: I do not know the actual figures off the top of my head, the $10 trillion amount is merely an explanatory tool).
Now that we understand that investing the excess funds in the Social Security Trust by means of intra-governmental debt is a long standing legal requirement that happens without regard to how much the government spends, some people might be ready to rejoice in the alleged marvel that is the Social Security system. Some might feel relieved that in fact the SS Trust is not being "raided" and might even see this as evidence that SS can remain solvent for many decades to come. But don't be so fast to celebrate. Because everything I've just said actually underscores the fact that Social Security is a drain on the American economy, and on the taxpayer.
As I explained, when excess funds from the SS Trust are loaned out to other parts of the government they are paid back with interest. This brings more money into the Trust. That money didn't come from your SS payroll taxes. It comes directly from your income tax. You are investing more money into the SS Trust than just your SS taxes!! The SS Trust is like a black hole. It sucks in money from every direction, and all it spits out are the decayed remnants of what's left over.
The amount of money a person receives in terms of SS retirement benefits will almost always be less than what you've paid into it as SS taxes. And now that we understand that we invest more than just our SS taxes into the SS Trust, the disparity of return is understood to be even greater. Allowing individuals to retain their SS taxes would allow them to instead invest those funds into retirement plans that would yield better returns, resulting in having more funds available for their own retirement. Additionally, the interest that the SS Trust sucks in from the taxpayers would result in a net savings of government expenses, allowing for lower deficits.
One minor quibble is that government has gotten used to these loans to provide part of the budget. Plus as long as SS has a collection surplus, they really don't have to "pay back" anything, new loans are made as the old ones are "cashed out".
Beyond personal finance, once SS becomes non-self sufficient, no more loans will be made, and SS will have to collect on the loans outstanding.
Social Security is a "safety net" - a valuable lesson learned from the Great Depression. It's "insurance" - that is totally paid for by those who paid into it during their working years. It doesn't cost the government anything - other than the interest it must pay on the loan (like China, Japan and others). Social Security is by far the largest holder of U.S. debt.
In 2014 SS paid out 714 BILLION and took in 769 billion.
Privatizing SS would mean that those numbers would be SS paying out 714 billion and taking in ZERO, or close to it.
Where would the 714 billion have to come from? Your taxes.
Ideological extremists on the Right who are slaves to the idea that nothing the government does can possibly work are always going to go after SS with risky harebrained schemes made to look plausible by cherry picked data run through the rightwing propaganda machine.
Don't fall for it.
Ideological extremists on the Right who are slaves to the idea that nothing the government does can possibly work are always going to go after SS with risky harebrained schemes made to look plausible by cherry picked data run through the rightwing propaganda machine.
Don't fall for it.
Really? cherry-picked? right-wing propaganda? Let's start here. There is NOTHING OF VALUE in the SS Trust Fund. It was fleeced, spent and ignored. You've been robbed. WHO says that??
page 12...
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/history/pdf/tr09summary.pdf
Social Security’s annual surpluses
of tax income over expenditures are expected to fall sharply this
year and to stay about constant in 2010 because of the economic recession,
and to rise only briefly before declining and turning to cash flow
deficits beginning in 2016 that grow as the baby-boom generation retires.
[[Note FCT -- Actually it went bust in 2010 when Obama gave breaks on payroll taxes
and has stayed in the RED at least thru 2012 when I last checked. Ahead of schedule]
The combined difference grows each year, so that by 2016, net revenue
flows from the general fund would total $369 billion (1.8 percent of
GDP). The positive amounts that begin in 2016 for OASDI, and started in
2008 for HI, initially represent payments the Treasury must make to the
trust funds when assets are depleted to help pay benefits in years prior to
exhaustion of the funds. Neither the redemption of trust fund bonds, nor
interest paid on those bonds, provides any new net income to the Treasury,
which must finance redemptions and interest payments through
some combination of increased taxation, reductions in other government
spending, or additional borrowing from the public.
Yeah -- Do as NYCarb suggests -- Don't Fall For It...
Social Security is a "safety net" - a valuable lesson learned from the Great Depression. It's "insurance" - that is totally paid for by those who paid into it during their working years. It doesn't cost the government anything - other than the interest it must pay on the loan (like China, Japan and others). Social Security is by far the largest holder of U.S. debt.
SS Trust FUnd holds nothing of value. Every yearly deficit is borrowed from NEW debt issued by the Treasury.
It's GONE.. About a $$trill stolen from workers pockets. And NOW -- their children will be paying AGAIN for the same debt.
In 2014 SS paid out 714 BILLION and took in 769 billion.
Privatizing SS would mean that those numbers would be SS paying out 714 billion and taking in ZERO, or close to it.
Where would the 714 billion have to come from? Your taxes.
Were you even aware of the how much the privatization was? It was 2 or 4% of your personal contributions. Get a grip! And why was it a good deal? Because if you died, you could pass it on to your wife, or kids.
Now why don't you take that left wing hat off for a second and use your noggin! If you invest 100 bucks, and lose 50%, you still have 50 dollars to pass on to your kids after you assume room temperature. Problem is, the government has to have 50 bucks of actual cash to give them, lol. That is why it was fought by EVERY big government person, both DEMOCRAT, and REPUBLICAN.
And another thing............I don't understand why you despise establishment Republicans. They are JUST LIKE YOU! You can't fit a piece of printer paper between an establishment Democrat, and an establishment Republican. They both want to make excuses for their failures, kiss a bunch of illegal a**, and lie to the American people. You two groups should really merge and rename yourselves, the TOTALITARIANS!
FDR knowingly lied about SS. Just like all dem program ended up in the general fund.the thought of a RW wanting to, or managing an investment portfolio when they can't understand the difference between deficit/debt makes me cry with laughter.
Ideological extremists on the Right who are slaves to the idea that nothing the government does can possibly work are always going to go after SS with risky harebrained schemes made to look plausible by cherry picked data run through the rightwing propaganda machine.
Don't fall for it.
Really? cherry-picked? right-wing propaganda? Let's start here. There is NOTHING OF VALUE in the SS Trust Fund. It was fleeced, spent and ignored. You've been robbed. WHO says that??
page 12...
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/history/pdf/tr09summary.pdf
Social Security’s annual surpluses
of tax income over expenditures are expected to fall sharply this
year and to stay about constant in 2010 because of the economic recession,
and to rise only briefly before declining and turning to cash flow
deficits beginning in 2016 that grow as the baby-boom generation retires.
[[Note FCT -- Actually it went bust in 2010 when Obama gave breaks on payroll taxes
and has stayed in the RED at least thru 2012 when I last checked. Ahead of schedule]
The combined difference grows each year, so that by 2016, net revenue
flows from the general fund would total $369 billion (1.8 percent of
GDP). The positive amounts that begin in 2016 for OASDI, and started in
2008 for HI, initially represent payments the Treasury must make to the
trust funds when assets are depleted to help pay benefits in years prior to
exhaustion of the funds. Neither the redemption of trust fund bonds, nor
interest paid on those bonds, provides any new net income to the Treasury,
which must finance redemptions and interest payments through
some combination of increased taxation, reductions in other government
spending, or additional borrowing from the public.
Yeah -- Do as NYCarb suggests -- Don't Fall For It...
You're pretending that the bonds SS holds are not backed by the US government. That is idiotic.
There is much discussion on this on this board. Almost any time SS and it's solvency (or lack thereof) is discussed, everyone talks about how SS has been "raided" and used to pay for other things. The problem here is that most of you, Democrat and Republican alike, who say this don't have a clue what you're talking about. So here, I'll explain it to you. I'd like to say that we could put the issue to rest once and for all, but I doubt that will be the case.
Before I begin, a prediction: Many of you will rush to respond without bothering to read, and in the process you'll jump to conclusions and make an ass out of yourself. Some will rail off on wild tangents. Many dissenters will be folks who claim to be conservatives, but are really just fake ass Cinos who like to complain and whine, and will be completely oblivious to the highly damaging implications I'll be presenting against the entire SS system. But you'll feel good because touching yourself always feels good. Many dissenters will be liberals, who will "like" this post, will note the Cinos dissenting for all the wrong reasons, and based upon that, will launch into your Hooray for Government dance, as if idiots being wrong instantly means that government is the solution to all our problems. Finally, if most people are adequately drawn to my blue highlighting of this paragraph so as to read it, and subsequently see their planned reaction described herein, few responses will be made because you'll realize that you've already been identified and you're now embarrassed at how much of an ass of yourself you were about to make.
Okay, now that that's cleared up, let's talk about the Social Security Trust, and what happens to the money.....
Overall, the Social Security Trust is fairly simple. Money goes in with the express purpose of being used to fund Social Security. It can't be used to pay to fuel up Air Force One for Obama's latest golfing venture. Simple. That being said, money static is money lost. That is to say, if money just sits on the coffee table, it's not doing anything except sitting there. In our personal lives most people know that building up a nest egg of cash that is doing nothing typically means lost opportunities. We could invest that money and make more money. Even something as simple and safe as putting it into a Certificate of Deposit with your bank might return a little bit of cash, all while you sit back and play video games for the next 18 months. If you're not going to be using your nest egg anyway, it's like giving up free money to just let it sit there.
That's why many, many years ago Congress passed a law that requires excess funds in the Social Security Trust to be "invested." Instead of just sitting there and collecting dust, the excess is invested and collects interest, which is then rolled back into the Trust. This "investing" is done in the form of intra-governmental loans. Basically, the government borrows money from itself, on a short term basis, in pretty much the same fashion as other government borrowing occurs. A bond is given to the Trust, and a few months later the Trust is repaid with interest.
Now, you might be thinking that "Well, this really does amount to raiding the SS Trust to pay for other things." On it's surface, it might appear that way. But in reality, it's not that way. And there are two reasons for that:
1 - At it's core, it's little more more than moving around cash. If your car broke down on Wed and you were short on cash, causing you to transfer $500 from your savings into your checking until payday Friday, at which point you put back the $500 plus added your normal per-paycheck savings contribution, would you call that "raiding" your savings account to pay you mechanic? Of course not. All you did was move your own cash around so that your check won't bounce.
2 - The law requires that the Trust be invested in his way. It doesn't matter how much or how little the government is spending on other things. Congress could pass a balanced budget, and the same thing would happen. Heck, the Congress could pass a budget that only authorizes $1,500 in spending, and the same thing would still happen. The Trust would still be invested, and the government would still borrow from itself.
This is why you may have heard such seemingly absurd things as "The debt is $18 trillion, but the real dept is only $10 trillion." What the "real" debt refers to is the amount of debt that is not in the form of intra-governmental loans; intra-governmental loans are included in the official calculation of the debt, so a sizable part of the $18 trillion includes cash that the government has just shifted around between accounts. (***Note: I do not know the actual figures off the top of my head, the $10 trillion amount is merely an explanatory tool).
Now that we understand that investing the excess funds in the Social Security Trust by means of intra-governmental debt is a long standing legal requirement that happens without regard to how much the government spends, some people might be ready to rejoice in the alleged marvel that is the Social Security system. Some might feel relieved that in fact the SS Trust is not being "raided" and might even see this as evidence that SS can remain solvent for many decades to come. But don't be so fast to celebrate. Because everything I've just said actually underscores the fact that Social Security is a drain on the American economy, and on the taxpayer.
As I explained, when excess funds from the SS Trust are loaned out to other parts of the government they are paid back with interest. This brings more money into the Trust. That money didn't come from your SS payroll taxes. It comes directly from your income tax. You are investing more money into the SS Trust than just your SS taxes!! The SS Trust is like a black hole. It sucks in money from every direction, and all it spits out are the decayed remnants of what's left over.
The amount of money a person receives in terms of SS retirement benefits will almost always be less than what you've paid into it as SS taxes. And now that we understand that we invest more than just our SS taxes into the SS Trust, the disparity of return is understood to be even greater. Allowing individuals to retain their SS taxes would allow them to instead invest those funds into retirement plans that would yield better returns, resulting in having more funds available for their own retirement. Additionally, the interest that the SS Trust sucks in from the taxpayers would result in a net savings of government expenses, allowing for lower deficits.
Ideological extremists on the Right who are slaves to the idea that nothing the government does can possibly work are always going to go after SS with risky harebrained schemes made to look plausible by cherry picked data run through the rightwing propaganda machine.
Don't fall for it.
Really? cherry-picked? right-wing propaganda? Let's start here. There is NOTHING OF VALUE in the SS Trust Fund. It was fleeced, spent and ignored. You've been robbed. WHO says that??
page 12...
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/history/pdf/tr09summary.pdf
Social Security’s annual surpluses
of tax income over expenditures are expected to fall sharply this
year and to stay about constant in 2010 because of the economic recession,
and to rise only briefly before declining and turning to cash flow
deficits beginning in 2016 that grow as the baby-boom generation retires.
[[Note FCT -- Actually it went bust in 2010 when Obama gave breaks on payroll taxes
and has stayed in the RED at least thru 2012 when I last checked. Ahead of schedule]
The combined difference grows each year, so that by 2016, net revenue
flows from the general fund would total $369 billion (1.8 percent of
GDP). The positive amounts that begin in 2016 for OASDI, and started in
2008 for HI, initially represent payments the Treasury must make to the
trust funds when assets are depleted to help pay benefits in years prior to
exhaustion of the funds. Neither the redemption of trust fund bonds, nor
interest paid on those bonds, provides any new net income to the Treasury,
which must finance redemptions and interest payments through
some combination of increased taxation, reductions in other government
spending, or additional borrowing from the public.
Yeah -- Do as NYCarb suggests -- Don't Fall For It...
You're pretending that the bonds SS holds are not backed by the US government. That is idiotic.
Can't you read? SS.gov is telling you there are no bonds to redeem. Bonds were never bought on the open market when the debt was posted. If the "excess" they robbed that year --- was used to buy EXISTING bonds, THEN there would be a net asset.
Don't understand what SS just told you? Let's try the CBOffice..
Federal Debt and Interest Costs
Gross debt, which comprises federal debt held by the public plus Treasury securities held by federal trust funds and other government accounts, is sometimes used to evaluate the government's overall fiscal situation. At the end of 2010, gross federal debt totaled $13.5 trillion--the $9.0 trillion in debt held by the public plus $4.5 trillion in debt held by government accounts. More than half of the latter amount is held by the Social Security trust funds. Because those trust funds and other government accounts are part of the federal government, transactions between them and the Treasury are intragovernmental; that is, the government securities in those funds are an asset to the individual programs but a liability to the rest of the government. The resources needed to redeem the government securities in the trust funds and other accounts in some future year must be generated from taxes, income from other government sources, or borrowing by the government in that year.
Didya get the tricky accounting there? An ASSET to SS trust fund, but a DEBT to the Treasury. The money was SPENT bought nothing of value, and to REDEEM the IOUs, NEW DEBT must be issued.
There's nothing of value in the SS Trust Fund but a promise to ISSUE DEBT for your kids to pay..
There is much discussion on this on this board. Almost any time SS and it's solvency (or lack thereof) is discussed, everyone talks about how SS has been "raided" and used to pay for other things. The problem here is that most of you, Democrat and Republican alike, who say this don't have a clue what you're talking about. So here, I'll explain it to you. I'd like to say that we could put the issue to rest once and for all, but I doubt that will be the case.
Before I begin, a prediction: Many of you will rush to respond without bothering to read, and in the process you'll jump to conclusions and make an ass out of yourself. Some will rail off on wild tangents. Many dissenters will be folks who claim to be conservatives, but are really just fake ass Cinos who like to complain and whine, and will be completely oblivious to the highly damaging implications I'll be presenting against the entire SS system. But you'll feel good because touching yourself always feels good. Many dissenters will be liberals, who will "like" this post, will note the Cinos dissenting for all the wrong reasons, and based upon that, will launch into your Hooray for Government dance, as if idiots being wrong instantly means that government is the solution to all our problems. Finally, if most people are adequately drawn to my blue highlighting of this paragraph so as to read it, and subsequently see their planned reaction described herein, few responses will be made because you'll realize that you've already been identified and you're now embarrassed at how much of an ass of yourself you were about to make.
Okay, now that that's cleared up, let's talk about the Social Security Trust, and what happens to the money.....
Overall, the Social Security Trust is fairly simple. Money goes in with the express purpose of being used to fund Social Security. It can't be used to pay to fuel up Air Force One for Obama's latest golfing venture. Simple. That being said, money static is money lost. That is to say, if money just sits on the coffee table, it's not doing anything except sitting there. In our personal lives most people know that building up a nest egg of cash that is doing nothing typically means lost opportunities. We could invest that money and make more money. Even something as simple and safe as putting it into a Certificate of Deposit with your bank might return a little bit of cash, all while you sit back and play video games for the next 18 months. If you're not going to be using your nest egg anyway, it's like giving up free money to just let it sit there.
That's why many, many years ago Congress passed a law that requires excess funds in the Social Security Trust to be "invested." Instead of just sitting there and collecting dust, the excess is invested and collects interest, which is then rolled back into the Trust. This "investing" is done in the form of intra-governmental loans. Basically, the government borrows money from itself, on a short term basis, in pretty much the same fashion as other government borrowing occurs. A bond is given to the Trust, and a few months later the Trust is repaid with interest.
Now, you might be thinking that "Well, this really does amount to raiding the SS Trust to pay for other things." On it's surface, it might appear that way. But in reality, it's not that way. And there are two reasons for that:
1 - At it's core, it's little more more than moving around cash. If your car broke down on Wed and you were short on cash, causing you to transfer $500 from your savings into your checking until payday Friday, at which point you put back the $500 plus added your normal per-paycheck savings contribution, would you call that "raiding" your savings account to pay you mechanic? Of course not. All you did was move your own cash around so that your check won't bounce.
2 - The law requires that the Trust be invested in his way. It doesn't matter how much or how little the government is spending on other things. Congress could pass a balanced budget, and the same thing would happen. Heck, the Congress could pass a budget that only authorizes $1,500 in spending, and the same thing would still happen. The Trust would still be invested, and the government would still borrow from itself.
This is why you may have heard such seemingly absurd things as "The debt is $18 trillion, but the real dept is only $10 trillion." What the "real" debt refers to is the amount of debt that is not in the form of intra-governmental loans; intra-governmental loans are included in the official calculation of the debt, so a sizable part of the $18 trillion includes cash that the government has just shifted around between accounts. (***Note: I do not know the actual figures off the top of my head, the $10 trillion amount is merely an explanatory tool).
Now that we understand that investing the excess funds in the Social Security Trust by means of intra-governmental debt is a long standing legal requirement that happens without regard to how much the government spends, some people might be ready to rejoice in the alleged marvel that is the Social Security system. Some might feel relieved that in fact the SS Trust is not being "raided" and might even see this as evidence that SS can remain solvent for many decades to come. But don't be so fast to celebrate. Because everything I've just said actually underscores the fact that Social Security is a drain on the American economy, and on the taxpayer.
As I explained, when excess funds from the SS Trust are loaned out to other parts of the government they are paid back with interest. This brings more money into the Trust. That money didn't come from your SS payroll taxes. It comes directly from your income tax. You are investing more money into the SS Trust than just your SS taxes!! The SS Trust is like a black hole. It sucks in money from every direction, and all it spits out are the decayed remnants of what's left over.
The amount of money a person receives in terms of SS retirement benefits will almost always be less than what you've paid into it as SS taxes. And now that we understand that we invest more than just our SS taxes into the SS Trust, the disparity of return is understood to be even greater. Allowing individuals to retain their SS taxes would allow them to instead invest those funds into retirement plans that would yield better returns, resulting in having more funds available for their own retirement. Additionally, the interest that the SS Trust sucks in from the taxpayers would result in a net savings of government expenses, allowing for lower deficits.
Very good. Just one question. Where does the money come from to pay the interest on the SS bonds?
