Washington Post Fact-Checks CNBC Debate. It's not pretty.

[mikegriffith1]

'“They told you that your Social Security money is in a trust fund. All that’s in that trust fund is a pile of IOUs for money they spent on something else a long time ago. And they’ve stolen from you because now they know they cannot pay these benefits and Social Security is going to be insolvent in seven to eight years.”

— Christie

Christie loves to say this but that doesn’t make it true...

It is absolutely true.

There is no SS 'Trust Fund' with a cent in it.

SS monies are spent in the same year that they are confiscated. Then the government sets up a Bond, the proceeds from which it spends as quickly as they are sold. The Government then pays the interests over and above the principle value of the bonds, when they come due.

So, the government spends your SS money, borrows money to pay the current year's payment, and spends anything above the principle in that same year... creating an exponential growth in never ending, ever increasing, mind-numbing debt.

What the above idiot wants you to believe is that the Government takes you SS 'contribution', and buys bonds with those monies... thus you believe that those monies are 'invested'.

See the difference?

In reality, the US Federal government has ABSOLUTELY NO MONEY IN ANY ACCOUNT WHICH THEY USE TO PAY SS... The US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PAYS SS WITH THE FEDERAL REVENUES THAT THEY RECEIVE IN WHATEVER YEAR THEY ARE PAYING.

That is why the Government cannot sustain itself on 3.2 trillion dollars in revenue and why the government MUST borrow money to continue to operate.

There is no money in private trust funds or investment portfolios either. Who thinks the funds in these funds are hoarded away in a vault. Does anyone really believe that if the US government crashes in an economic catastrophe private funds will somehow survive and be able to pay off the trust funds, private portfolios and investments?

The government has options to save and protect Social Security funds. Those options include some actions that may be unpopular with some, but they are options that can be quickly put into place. There may be some objections by a minority, but the majority will win out to protect themselves.
Got a big income of a million dollars a year or even hundreds of thousands per year, no SS for you. When and if you lose that substantial income, you can let us know, we will sign you up. People paying taxes into SS expecting a cut-off amount after specific income, forget it, no more cut off. Last resort, we have real estate all over America. Some of it is the most valuable real estate in the world. We can pass a few laws and start selling off some of our surplus assets. The US is not going to go broke and be unable to pay it's bills in the long run. Some fools may hand the USA a temporary setback, but those fools will be quickly tossed out on their asses in the next election when the consequences of their foolishness are realized.

Sheesh, again, can you guys read? You missed Christie's point, completely. His point is that SS taxes used to be kept separate from the rest of the budget and were set aside in their own account/fund/whatever you want to call it. That is no longer the case, and there are now a ton of IOUs where there used to be SS taxes that had been collected. How can you not know this?

So, once again, your "fact check" is bogus. Christie was making a perfectly rational, factual point.

By the way, just exactly how are going to meet our SS obligations without either raising the age and means testing benefits or raising SS taxes to prohibitive levels?

 

[Camp]

'“They told you that your Social Security money is in a trust fund. All that’s in that trust fund is a pile of IOUs for money they spent on something else a long time ago. And they’ve stolen from you because now they know they cannot pay these benefits and Social Security is going to be insolvent in seven to eight years.”

— Christie

Christie loves to say this but that doesn’t make it true...

It is absolutely true.

There is no SS 'Trust Fund' with a cent in it.

SS monies are spent in the same year that they are confiscated. Then the government sets up a Bond, the proceeds from which it spends as quickly as they are sold. The Government then pays the interests over and above the principle value of the bonds, when they come due.

So, the government spends your SS money, borrows money to pay the current year's payment, and spends anything above the principle in that same year... creating an exponential growth in never ending, ever increasing, mind-numbing debt.

What the above idiot wants you to believe is that the Government takes you SS 'contribution', and buys bonds with those monies... thus you believe that those monies are 'invested'.

See the difference?

In reality, the US Federal government has ABSOLUTELY NO MONEY IN ANY ACCOUNT WHICH THEY USE TO PAY SS... The US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PAYS SS WITH THE FEDERAL REVENUES THAT THEY RECEIVE IN WHATEVER YEAR THEY ARE PAYING.

That is why the Government cannot sustain itself on 3.2 trillion dollars in revenue and why the government MUST borrow money to continue to operate.

There is no money in private trust funds or investment portfolios either. Who thinks the funds in these funds are hoarded away in a vault. Does anyone really believe that if the US government crashes in an economic catastrophe private funds will somehow survive and be able to pay off the trust funds, private portfolios and investments?

The government has options to save and protect Social Security funds. Those options include some actions that may be unpopular with some, but they are options that can be quickly put into place. There may be some objections by a minority, but the majority will win out to protect themselves.
Got a big income of a million dollars a year or even hundreds of thousands per year, no SS for you. When and if you lose that substantial income, you can let us know, we will sign you up. People paying taxes into SS expecting a cut-off amount after specific income, forget it, no more cut off. Last resort, we have real estate all over America. Some of it is the most valuable real estate in the world. We can pass a few laws and start selling off some of our surplus assets. The US is not going to go broke and be unable to pay it's bills in the long run. Some fools may hand the USA a temporary setback, but those fools will be quickly tossed out on their asses in the next election when the consequences of their foolishness are realized.

Sheesh, again, can you guys read? You missed Christie's point, completely. His point is that SS taxes used to be kept separate from the rest of the budget and were set aside in their own account/fund/whatever you want to call it. That is no longer the case, and there are now a ton of IOUs where there used to be SS taxes that had been collected. How can you not know this?

So, once again, your "fact check" is bogus. Christie was making a perfectly rational, factual point.

By the way, just exactly how are going to meet our SS obligations without either raising the age and means testing benefits or raising SS taxes to prohibitive levels?

I didn't know I was doing a fact check on Chirstie. What the heck is new and unknown about what he has to say. Social Security has been used as a private bank by generations of Presidents and Congresses like gamblers borrowing from a loan shark. The only way out of the debt is to increase the borrower's income to pay the debt. Fortunately, the US government is the borrower and has the best and easiest ability in the world of paying the debt. As I said in the previous post, it may be unpopular with some, but it is what it is. Some people will have to pay more in taxes and some people will not collect monthly checks from the government in addition to their sizable private retirement funds. In the long run, the SS fund stays solvent and the bulk of the citizenry continues to receive retirement checks every month in their old age.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

 

[mikegriffith1]

'“They told you that your Social Security money is in a trust fund. All that’s in that trust fund is a pile of IOUs for money they spent on something else a long time ago. And they’ve stolen from you because now they know they cannot pay these benefits and Social Security is going to be insolvent in seven to eight years.”

— Christie

Christie loves to say this but that doesn’t make it true...

It is absolutely true.

There is no SS 'Trust Fund' with a cent in it.

SS monies are spent in the same year that they are confiscated. Then the government sets up a Bond, the proceeds from which it spends as quickly as they are sold. The Government then pays the interests over and above the principle value of the bonds, when they come due.

So, the government spends your SS money, borrows money to pay the current year's payment, and spends anything above the principle in that same year... creating an exponential growth in never ending, ever increasing, mind-numbing debt.

What the above idiot wants you to believe is that the Government takes you SS 'contribution', and buys bonds with those monies... thus you believe that those monies are 'invested'.

See the difference?

In reality, the US Federal government has ABSOLUTELY NO MONEY IN ANY ACCOUNT WHICH THEY USE TO PAY SS... The US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PAYS SS WITH THE FEDERAL REVENUES THAT THEY RECEIVE IN WHATEVER YEAR THEY ARE PAYING.

That is why the Government cannot sustain itself on 3.2 trillion dollars in revenue and why the government MUST borrow money to continue to operate.

There is no money in private trust funds or investment portfolios either. Who thinks the funds in these funds are hoarded away in a vault. Does anyone really believe that if the US government crashes in an economic catastrophe private funds will somehow survive and be able to pay off the trust funds, private portfolios and investments?

The government has options to save and protect Social Security funds. Those options include some actions that may be unpopular with some, but they are options that can be quickly put into place. There may be some objections by a minority, but the majority will win out to protect themselves.
Got a big income of a million dollars a year or even hundreds of thousands per year, no SS for you. When and if you lose that substantial income, you can let us know, we will sign you up. People paying taxes into SS expecting a cut-off amount after specific income, forget it, no more cut off. Last resort, we have real estate all over America. Some of it is the most valuable real estate in the world. We can pass a few laws and start selling off some of our surplus assets. The US is not going to go broke and be unable to pay it's bills in the long run. Some fools may hand the USA a temporary setback, but those fools will be quickly tossed out on their asses in the next election when the consequences of their foolishness are realized.

Sheesh, again, can you guys read? You missed Christie's point, completely. His point is that SS taxes used to be kept separate from the rest of the budget and were set aside in their own account/fund/whatever you want to call it. That is no longer the case, and there are now a ton of IOUs where there used to be SS taxes that had been collected. How can you not know this?

So, once again, your "fact check" is bogus. Christie was making a perfectly rational, factual point.

By the way, just exactly how are going to meet our SS obligations without either raising the age and means testing benefits or raising SS taxes to prohibitive levels?

I didn't know I was doing a fact check on Chirstie. What the heck is new and unknown about what he has to say. Social Security has been used as a private bank by generations of Presidents and Congresses like gamblers borrowing from a loan shark. The only way out of the debt is to increase the borrower's income to pay the debt. Fortunately, the US government is the borrower and has the best and easiest ability in the world of paying the debt. As I said in the previous post, it may be unpopular with some, but it is what it is. Some people will have to pay more in taxes and some people will not collect monthly checks from the government in addition to their sizable private retirement funds. In the long run, the SS fund stays solvent and the bulk of the citizenry continues to receive retirement checks every month in their old age.

Gosh, you didn't know you were doing a fact check on Christie?! Uh, the OP quotes Christie's statement about Sanders and the 90-percent tax rate and pretends to "fact check" it as being false, when in fact Sanders has made it abundantly clear that he would love to go back to that tax rate.

Ditto for SS. Christie made a simple, factual point: that the SS trust fund has been looted, that it contains nothing but a bunch of IOUs, and that it will go insolvent in the relatively near future if we merely stick with the status quo.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

'“They told you that your Social Security money is in a trust fund. All that’s in that trust fund is a pile of IOUs for money they spent on something else a long time ago. And they’ve stolen from you because now they know they cannot pay these benefits and Social Security is going to be insolvent in seven to eight years.”

— Christie

Christie loves to say this but that doesn’t make it true...

It is absolutely true.

There is no SS 'Trust Fund' with a cent in it.

SS monies are spent in the same year that they are confiscated. Then the government sets up a Bond, the proceeds from which it spends as quickly as they are sold. The Government then pays the interests over and above the principle value of the bonds, when they come due.

So, the government spends your SS money, borrows money to pay the current year's payment, and spends anything above the principle in that same year... creating an exponential growth in never ending, ever increasing, mind-numbing debt.

What the above idiot wants you to believe is that the Government takes you SS 'contribution', and buys bonds with those monies... thus you believe that those monies are 'invested'.

See the difference?

In reality, the US Federal government has ABSOLUTELY NO MONEY IN ANY ACCOUNT WHICH THEY USE TO PAY SS... The US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PAYS SS WITH THE FEDERAL REVENUES THAT THEY RECEIVE IN WHATEVER YEAR THEY ARE PAYING.

That is why the Government cannot sustain itself on 3.2 trillion dollars in revenue and why the government MUST borrow money to continue to operate.

There is no money in private trust funds or investment portfolios either. Who thinks the funds in these funds are hoarded away in a vault. Does anyone really believe that if the US government crashes in an economic catastrophe private funds will somehow survive and be able to pay off the trust funds, private portfolios and investments?

The government has options to save and protect Social Security funds. Those options include some actions that may be unpopular with some, but they are options that can be quickly put into place. There may be some objections by a minority, but the majority will win out to protect themselves.
Got a big income of a million dollars a year or even hundreds of thousands per year, no SS for you. When and if you lose that substantial income, you can let us know, we will sign you up. People paying taxes into SS expecting a cut-off amount after specific income, forget it, no more cut off. Last resort, we have real estate all over America. Some of it is the most valuable real estate in the world. We can pass a few laws and start selling off some of our surplus assets. The US is not going to go broke and be unable to pay it's bills in the long run. Some fools may hand the USA a temporary setback, but those fools will be quickly tossed out on their asses in the next election when the consequences of their foolishness are realized.

Sheesh, again, can you guys read? You missed Christie's point, completely. His point is that SS taxes used to be kept separate from the rest of the budget and were set aside in their own account/fund/whatever you want to call it. That is no longer the case, and there are now a ton of IOUs where there used to be SS taxes that had been collected. How can you not know this?

So, once again, your "fact check" is bogus. Christie was making a perfectly rational, factual point.

By the way, just exactly how are going to meet our SS obligations without either raising the age and means testing benefits or raising SS taxes to prohibitive levels?

Camp is trying to misinform the Reader to believe that the US Government bought Bonds with SS revenue. Thus the US Government has "Invested your SS monies".

That is false.

The US government did NOT 'BUY BONDS' with SS revenue...

The US Government SPENT the SS Revenue when it came in. It then raised a bond, in the name of that debt... (That's the I.O.U.)

The Bond requires that the US Federal Government repay the principle, plus the standing interests on THAT DEBT.

At that point, the US Federal Government has gone into debt, in two distinct instances... first for the principle of the SS revenue it spent in the same year it was confiscated... it then raised money through the bond... AND IT SPENT THAT MONEY IN THE SAME YEAR!

SO THE USE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NOW NEEDS TO BORROW THE MONEY TO PAY THIS YEARS SS RECEIVERS... AND TO PAY THE PRINCIPLE AND INTERESTS ON THOSE BONDS COMING DUE THIS YEAR! And of course, each and every year.

And THAT is the "DISASTER" that the idiots are braying about when they axiomatically run to raise the debt limit.

What this signals is the exponential consumption burn that precedes critical mass; just prior to the cataclysmic failure.

 

[Synthaholic]

The whole bunch of them are liars.


Fact-checking the third round of GOP debates

Just a taste of the lies that fall so easily from Republican lips:



“The socialist [Sen. Bernie Sanders] says they’re going to pay for everything and give you everything for free, except they don’t say they’re going to raise it through taxes to 90 percent to do it.”

— Gov. Chris Christie (R-N.J.)

This is false, though it has increasingly emerged as a GOP talking point. Sanders, an independent from Vermont who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, has not yet released a tax plan, but has repeatedly denied that he would increase taxes from the current marginal rate of 39.6 percent to 90 percent. (The margin rate is what you pay on each additional dollar earned.)

The United States had a marginal tax rate of 90 percent in the Dwight Eisenhower administration, and then John F. Kennedy proposed to reduce it to 70 percent. (The tax cut was passed after his assassination.) But even such rates would not take 90 percent of a person’s income.

really ?? what are you the snopes hall monitor here now ??... back away from the halloween candy.

I'm a Liberal. I naturally gravitate toward truth and facts, and repel spin and lies.

Sorry you can't handle my awesomeness.

 

[Camp]

'“They told you that your Social Security money is in a trust fund. All that’s in that trust fund is a pile of IOUs for money they spent on something else a long time ago. And they’ve stolen from you because now they know they cannot pay these benefits and Social Security is going to be insolvent in seven to eight years.”

— Christie

Christie loves to say this but that doesn’t make it true...

It is absolutely true.

There is no SS 'Trust Fund' with a cent in it.

SS monies are spent in the same year that they are confiscated. Then the government sets up a Bond, the proceeds from which it spends as quickly as they are sold. The Government then pays the interests over and above the principle value of the bonds, when they come due.

So, the government spends your SS money, borrows money to pay the current year's payment, and spends anything above the principle in that same year... creating an exponential growth in never ending, ever increasing, mind-numbing debt.

What the above idiot wants you to believe is that the Government takes you SS 'contribution', and buys bonds with those monies... thus you believe that those monies are 'invested'.

See the difference?

In reality, the US Federal government has ABSOLUTELY NO MONEY IN ANY ACCOUNT WHICH THEY USE TO PAY SS... The US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PAYS SS WITH THE FEDERAL REVENUES THAT THEY RECEIVE IN WHATEVER YEAR THEY ARE PAYING.

That is why the Government cannot sustain itself on 3.2 trillion dollars in revenue and why the government MUST borrow money to continue to operate.

There is no money in private trust funds or investment portfolios either. Who thinks the funds in these funds are hoarded away in a vault. Does anyone really believe that if the US government crashes in an economic catastrophe private funds will somehow survive and be able to pay off the trust funds, private portfolios and investments?

The government has options to save and protect Social Security funds. Those options include some actions that may be unpopular with some, but they are options that can be quickly put into place. There may be some objections by a minority, but the majority will win out to protect themselves.
Got a big income of a million dollars a year or even hundreds of thousands per year, no SS for you. When and if you lose that substantial income, you can let us know, we will sign you up. People paying taxes into SS expecting a cut-off amount after specific income, forget it, no more cut off. Last resort, we have real estate all over America. Some of it is the most valuable real estate in the world. We can pass a few laws and start selling off some of our surplus assets. The US is not going to go broke and be unable to pay it's bills in the long run. Some fools may hand the USA a temporary setback, but those fools will be quickly tossed out on their asses in the next election when the consequences of their foolishness are realized.

Sheesh, again, can you guys read? You missed Christie's point, completely. His point is that SS taxes used to be kept separate from the rest of the budget and were set aside in their own account/fund/whatever you want to call it. That is no longer the case, and there are now a ton of IOUs where there used to be SS taxes that had been collected. How can you not know this?

So, once again, your "fact check" is bogus. Christie was making a perfectly rational, factual point.

By the way, just exactly how are going to meet our SS obligations without either raising the age and means testing benefits or raising SS taxes to prohibitive levels?

Camp is trying to misinform the Reader to believe that the US Government bought Bonds with SS revenue. Thus the US Government has "Invested your SS monies".

That is false.

The US government did NOT 'BUY BONDS' with SS revenue...

The US Government SPENT the SS Revenue when it came in. It then raised a bond, in the name of that debt... (That's the I.O.U.)

The Bond requires that the US Federal Government repay the principle, plus the standing interests on THAT DEBT.

At that point, the US Federal Government has gone into debt, in two distinct instances... first for the principle of the SS revenue it spent in the same year it was confiscated... it then raised money through the bond... AND IT SPENT THAT MONEY IN THE SAME YEAR!

SO THE USE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NOW NEEDS TO BORROW THE MONEY TO PAY THIS YEARS SS RECEIVERS... AND TO PAY THE PRINCIPLE AND INTERESTS ON THOSE BONDS COMING DUE THIS YEAR! And of course, each and every year.

And THAT is the "DISASTER" that the idiots are braying about when they axiomatically run to raise the debt limit.

What this signals is the exponential consumption burn that precedes critical mass; just prior to the cataclysmic failure.

I never mentioned the government buying bonds. How about if you criticize my post for what I actually post and not your own interpretation.

 

[Clementine]

This fails as a kill the messenger fallacy.

It's also a failed attempt to deflect – the thread topic is about the lies propagated by the GOP candidates during the third 'debate,' not Bernie Sanders.

No, the OP is merely repeating crap from an unreliable source.

 

[Synthaholic]

Really?

Liar, Liar, Pantsuit on Fire: 27 Hillary Fibs and Lies

Breitbart???

Fuck off with your Breitbart.

Look at the best of days I can put out cry little sister and demo you left wing fanatics.

If I put up a right wing website. Deal with it because I can give you the opposite as well.

Fuck you back.

It's totally your choice as to whether you are taken seriously or not.

 

[Clementine]

This fails as a kill the messenger fallacy.

It's also a failed attempt to deflect – the thread topic is about the lies propagated by the GOP candidates during the third 'debate,' not Bernie Sanders.

The subject here is the false claim by the Washington Post.

Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton and other Dems are getting away with lies, though the Washington Post not only fails to point it out, but goes out of their way to hide the dishonesty. Pointing out the clear bias of the liberal spin machine, known as the Washington Post, is sticking to topic because it challenges the entire OP. It's bullshit and the Washington Post has shown itself to be in the tank for the Dems, meaning that some opinion piece touted as fact-checking should not be taken seriously.