Social Sec will stay solvent for 20 years... *IF* we pay off 1/3 of the National Debt

[g5000]

Hey genius, Social Security HAS NO MONEY - except for government IOUs. The federal government has been taking OUR money, replacing it with IOU's and using the funds for other things. Most of those items are wasteful pork barrel spending.
SS will not be able to pay off when the rush of baby boomers set to retire do just that.
Why are you libs so in bed with SS anyway?

Yes, we get it that there is NO MONEY - except for government IOUs. We know it was transferred into the General Fund. We also get that Social Security holds what it is owed in U.S. debt - which also draws interest.

BTW, it isn't Social Security's fault that the funds were transferred into the General Fund.

How the fuck does it draw interest?....The money isn't being used for productive purposes.

The IOUs given to the Social Security Trust Fund are bonds which pay interest.

 

[Lakhota]

The rate of interest on special issues is determined by a formula enacted in 1960. The rate is determined at the end of each month and applies to new investments in the following month.

The numeric average of the 12 monthly interest rates for 2012 was 1.458 percent. The annual effective interest rate (the average rate of return on all investments over a one-year period) for the OASI and DI Trust Funds, combined, was 4.091 percent in 2012. This higher effective rate resulted because the funds hold special-issue bonds acquired in past years when interest rates were higher.

Social Security Trust Fund Data - Frequently Asked Questions

 

[Oddball]

Yes, we get it that there is NO MONEY - except for government IOUs. We know it was transferred into the General Fund. We also get that Social Security holds what it is owed in U.S. debt - which also draws interest.

BTW, it isn't Social Security's fault that the funds were transferred into the General Fund.

How the fuck does it draw interest?....The money isn't being used for productive purposes.

The IOUs given to the Social Security Trust Fund are bonds which pay interest.

The "interest" is nothing more than more taxes.

Honest interest comes from productive pursuits, not from IOUs.

 

[Oddball]

The right has always hated Social Security. Now they want to make a gift of it to Wall Street Bankers, in return for enormous contributions.

Thank you, Nancy Peloski.

 

[whitehall]

Are you kidding? LBJ made sure social security would never be solvent when he officially authorized the government to steal every dime. Before that government just stole most of it.

 

[Lakhota]

The government pays "interest" to China, Japan and other major holders of U.S. debt - including Social Security.

 

[Meister]

The OP is basically bullshit. I would suggest you link to Social Security instead of Treasury - and also do some research on what a real Ponzi scheme is.

Social Security Trust Fund Data

A Venn Diagram for Rick Perry: Social Security Is Not a Ponzi Scheme | Mother Jones

The Biggest Holders of US Government Debt

The CBO is not bullshit. The government has stolen more than 33.8 trillion dollars from Social Security. Here's the link to the CBO, enjoy having your vision of utopia shattered Lakhota.

http://www.gao.gov/financial/fy2011/11guide.pdf
Go ahead to page 15 of the pdf. Then go to "Social Insurance Net Expenditures" then read the attached asterisk. Enjoy slavery Lakhota!

Lakhota is going to realize how bad she's been lied to. It's in plain sight for every citizen to see. Will Lakhota commit suicide?

But, but, but, Mother Jones said.........

 

[Oddball]

The government pays "interest" to China, Japan and other major holders of U.S. debt - including Social Security.

...by printing it up out of thin air.

Rube.

 

[flacaltenn]

The rate of interest on special issues is determined by a formula enacted in 1960. The rate is determined at the end of each month and applies to new investments in the following month.

The numeric average of the 12 monthly interest rates for 2012 was 1.458 percent. The annual effective interest rate (the average rate of return on all investments over a one-year period) for the OASI and DI Trust Funds, combined, was 4.091 percent in 2012. This higher effective rate resulted because the funds hold special-issue bonds acquired in past years when interest rates were higher.

Social Security Trust Fund Data - Frequently Asked Questions

You stuttering?? You posted that Twice now after I told you that NEITHER the principle or interest comes BACK OUT of the TRUST FUND.. It must be payed by CURRENT taxpayers when (like in 2010) the fund goes negative.. So not only did they ROB the working poor of the surplus --- they are making the working poor of TODAY pay it back with your ficticious "interest"..

They NEVER bought investments with the money.. It got pissed down the sewer.. I could have bought US Treasuries with that money and been far ahead of what the fraud and mismanagement of the SS has accomplished..

 

[flacaltenn]

Social security is not broke, it has run surpluses since its birth. The problem is our government takes those surpluses and spends it. In exchange for the cash, the government issues government securities that can be redeemed by the social security administration if for any given year there is more money being paid out to beneficiaries then what is taken in by payroll taxes and interest earned.
As of 2011 the government owes social security trust fund 2.7 trillion and this is applied as “intra government debt” which is a component of the public or national debt. This debt increased by 69 billion from 2010 to 2011 which means social security is still running a surplus.
Total revenue from social security payroll taxes for 2011 exceeded 1 trillion dollars which that money is allocated to “on budget” and “off budget” which “off” is spent to pay beneficiaries. In 2011, 158 million people paid into social security and there were 55 million beneficiaries paid in the total amount of 725 billion.
The reason why they are nervous about social security is largely due to the fact that there are less workers paying in and more baby boomers that are retiring. Its not that there isn’t enough to pay out, the problem is the government is no longer getting triple digit surpluses to spend on whatever they want.

Social Security went "broke" in 2010.. See my posts on page 4. The surplus went entirely away and it ran a deficit in 2010 and 2011 of over $20Bill. Don't know if it's back after Obama's "payroll tax holiday" hit the crap pile last year. That was SEVEN YEARS ahead of projections..

 

[flacaltenn]

No wonder Lahkota is a convicted leftist.. He really is naive enough to be scammed and needs SOME MIGHTY champion to get him thru life. Unfortunately for him -- his champion is a Grand Larcenist...

 

[AmazonTania]

Taxation approved by the leges of We the People is not robbery.

If you don't like it, get a coalition to overturn it. Good luck.

So you vote to increase taxes on yourselves so you can pay off retirees?

Hm, let me know how that works out.

I did not say that and you can't infer it from what I said, which was taxation is the right of We the People and is not robbery or theft.

You must show, which you can't, that minor fixes can't fix the issue.

Good luck with that.

Increasing the retirement age and decreasing benefits may be considered minor issues to you, but they are not to the people you claim to care about. The French population have rioted over that same exact issue, and they are far greater pussies than you yanks are.

 

[AmazonTania]

Social security is not broke, it has run surpluses since its birth.

No. No it hasn't. Sure, one deficit during the 1980's. It could be considered a fluke. But three consecutive years from 2010 - 2012, and a projected cash-flow deficit in 2013...

Yeah, Social Security is running dry.

 

[Flopper]

When Social Security was first implemented in the 1930s, the government assigned the "retirement age" to be 65. After that, you could start drawing benefits.

By some strange coincidence, the average age of death in the 1930s was..... 65.

Meaning, half the people who would pay in all their lives, would never draw out a dime, except for death benefits.

And the rest wouldn't draw out very much before they, too, kicked off.

Social Security was designed to be "self-supporting"... for that time. With no thought of what might change in the future... like medical science advancing enough to enable people to live a LOT longer.

BTW, all the money you've paid in, has already been spent. In the SS Trust Fund is nothing but IOUs from the government. Remember Obama's statements a year or so ago, that if the Debt Ceiling wasn't raised, Social Security checks couldn't be written to its benefits recipients?

The money has been "borrowed" by other government agencies, and spent. All the money being paid out as benefits to retirees, is coming from the money you and I are paying in now. None of it is being saved for us. This is the defining characteristic of a Ponzi scheme.

Which brings us to the other issue.

Remember the other predictions various govt officials have made, saying that SS will be "solvent" for the next 15 or 20 or 30 years (depending on which politician you listen to)? They mean that they will be able to pay retirees their scheduled benefits from that money supposedly in the Trust Fund, until then.

But all the Trust Fund money has been "borrowed", and is gone. This means that those agencies that "borrowed" it, have to pay back ALL the money by that deadline (15 or 20 or etc. years from now), so it can be paid out to retirees that need it. And of course, if they are going to be replenishing the Trust Funds this way, they can't borrow any more while they're paying it back.

So, how much money is owed to the SS Trust Fund and other such govt-held trust funds?

Answer: 30.1% of the entire National Debt is owed to these Trust Funds. That's $4.7 trillion. (See reference below.)

That's how much must be paid back into the SS Trust fund and other such funds, to keep them "solvent" for that long.

Has anyone heard of any plans to pay off 30% of the National Debt within the next 15 years? Or 20? Or.....?

Neither have I.

Next time someone tells you how solvent the Social Security Trust fund is, or any other government trust fund, show him the numbers and see what he says then.

Reference: See Current and Back Issues: Overview: Daily Treasury Statement: Publications & Guidance: Financial Management Service . Pick a recent date, and and look under "Intergovernmental Holdings".

Social Sec will stay solvent for 20 years... *IF* we pay off 1/3 of the National Debt or we continue to refinance the debt as we have done yearly for over 50 years and will continue to do.

 

[billyerock1991]

Come on Lakhota, don't be afraid to confront the truth that Social Security is in a $33.8 trillion debt. No MSNBC talking points, no Marxist website (Salon.com who supports Nazi gun control) can deny this basic fact. Come on. Say something...

you say the stupidest shit ... it's amazing how stupid republicans are .... social security isn't in any kind of debt ... pull your head out

According to the CBO, it is 33.8 trillion dollars in debt.

http://www.gao.gov/financial/fy2011/11guide.pdf
Go ahead to page 15 of the pdf. Then go to "Social Insurance Net Expenditures" then read the attached asterisk

U MAD BRO?


U MAD BRO?


U MAD BRO?

you have no Idea what you're talking about social security is not in debt ... Bro !!!!!

U Mad cause I nailed ya as a liar BRO!!!!!!

 

[billyerock1991]

It might still be solvent if you increase the retirement age and lower benefits, but it will still provide negative returns. But even this idea has trouble working.

Social Security is sustained by nothing more than the Government's ability to tax the hell out of people.

It has worked for 75 years and will work for another 75 with some minor adjustments

All good things eventually come to an end, for better or for worse. But I'm sure it can work for an extended period of time if the public is willing to allow the Government to rob citizens of their wealth.

do you always have your head in your ass??? it sure looks like it

 

[billyerock1991]

You don't know what you're talking about.

Social Security did not run a 'deficit'. Social Security in the last 2 years paid its benefits out of payroll tax revenues plus a small amount of earned interest on its securities.

That is not running a deficit.

A wee bit misinformed, aren't we? Social Security has ran a deficit for 3 consecutive years now.

Every year, the Government borrows from the Social Security Trust Fund, by law, and uses the extra funds to fund the general budget where the Government can spend the money how it wants to spend it. The following year, every year, the government takes in a bigger portion in Social Security taxes but it has to pay the interest on these bonds. This money has already spent so the money is taken from the general budget and used to help pay beneficiaries. The more beneficiaries, the more revenue accumulates, the more the Government borrows, the greater the interest.

Eventually, majority of the revenue collected will be consumed in interest payments alone, leaving the rest to pay out some beneficiaries, creating a cash-flow deficit. A cash-flow deficit means that the Treasury can no longer cover interest payments to the Social Security fund by issuing bonds. Instead, Social Security has paid out beneficiaries by using the General Budget.

Social Security is obligated by law to take whatever surpluses remain and invest them. It cannot do this because there are no surpluses, it is currently running a deficit. Just because the Social Security Administration is forced to acquire funds from other parts of the General Budget doesn't make this any less of a deficit. You really don't have a clue how Social Security works, but I can only assume you expect to collect 100% what you paid into it when you have retired. Well, good luck with that.

You're an idiot.

Let me quote directly from the Trustees Report:

"Social Security’s total expenditures have exceeded non-interest income of its combined trust funds since 2010, and the Trustees estimate that Social Security cost will exceed non-interest income throughout the 75-year projection period.

The deficit of non-interest income relative to cost was about $49 billion in 2010, $45 billion in 2011, and $55 billion in 2012. The Trustees project that this cash-flow deficit will average about $75 billion between 2013 and 2018 before rising steeply as income growth slows to the sustainable trend rate after the economic recovery is complete and the number of beneficiaries continues to grow at a substantially faster rate than the number of covered workers.

Redemption of trust fund asset reserves by the General Fund of the Treasury will provide the resources needed to offset Social Security’s annual aggregate cash-flow deficits.

Since the cash-flow deficit will be less than interest earnings through 2020, reserves of the combined trust funds measured in current dollars will continue to grow...."

Trustees Report Summary

They are talking about a cash-flow deficit, which is not a draw down of principal. The Trust Fund is still growing and will, as it says above, continue to grow until 2020, and that's if nothing is done.

Even if SS was adjusted only to keep the cash flow deficit lower than the annual earned interest, it could run forever.

and when we vote out these worthless republicans and tea baggers we will see the social security trust fund get bigger .... do to more people working ... the only reason we are stagnant is because of republicans and tea baggers

 

[billyerock1991]

It has worked for 75 years and will work for another 75 with some minor adjustments

All good things eventually come to an end, for better or for worse. But I'm sure it can work for an extended period of time if the public is willing to allow the Government to rob citizens of their wealth.

Social Security was within one year of going broke in 1983, and every conservative's favorite president Ronald Reagan got together with the Democrats and fixed it for about 50 years.

that's because Reagan had no other choice ... he did what ???? he raised taxes on everybody ...

 

[billyerock1991]

All good things eventually come to an end, for better or for worse. But I'm sure it can work for an extended period of time if the public is willing to allow the Government to rob citizens of their wealth.

Nobody has yet lost their wealth to Social Security. Millions of Americans have depended on it to provide a safety net when they were too old to work

Considering that you have to live to be 105 to collect 100% of what you paid into Social Security, that's not true. The average couple pays $598,000 into social security and can expect to collect at least $556,000 if they both live to be 85.

http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/41...dicare-Taxes-and-Benefits-Over-a-Lifetime.pdf

No other investment strategy provides negative returns continually for participants, except Social Security. Any other business model would have been brought up on charges of fraud.

For working Americans, the concept of retirement did not exist before Social Security

People saved for their retirement or invested before Social Security. Social Security was created because it was assumed people were too stupid to do it on their own.

so when the republicans passed laws that deregulated the banks an you lost every dime you made, now whose the stupid one ??? you or me ??? who has social security to stay alive ... you republicans really do say the stupidest shit ...

 

[JakeStarkey]

So you vote to increase taxes on yourselves so you can pay off retirees?

Hm, let me know how that works out.

I did not say that and you can't infer it from what I said, which was taxation is the right of We the People and is not robbery or theft.

You must show, which you can't, that minor fixes can't fix the issue.

Good luck with that.

Increasing the retirement age and decreasing benefits may be considered minor issues to you, but they are not to the people you claim to care about. The French population have rioted over that same exact issue, and they are far greater pussies than you yanks are.

(1) You do not speak for Americans at all, you know, only for yourself. (2) Americans are not the French, thank heavens. (3) Increasing the retirement age a year or two for the under 50 crowed, increasing the taxable to $250,000, should (4) lead to no riots or tremendous upset.