Social Security and it's Surplus. Over 2 Trillion

And I still think SS and Medicare should be state run and funded. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I'm curious as to how you think this would be feasible.

I live in NY all my working life, then retire to Florida. Now what?

Solvency is a matter of question for social security that has more to do with longevity of the American people which is directly tied to health care and a swell of retiring Americans with not enough people in the work force to support them than with defense. Social Security holds money in trust for the American people until they reach retirement age. It is running out of money. At it’s current run rate it will be bankrupt before mid-century and that’s providing that the federal government pays back that they raided from the SS Trust Fund.

We should cut the defense budget just like we should cut all departmental budgets. How hard could it be to find 10% in cuts from low hanging fruit? Everybody’s pet project / department / social program needs to pay the piper. I’m not saying gore their ox, but everyone needs to pay. It’s the only fair, and only real way, to get any corporation between the warring parties to cut spending. Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

Right..

For those who don't know what she is talking about:

“The accumulated debt held by the public will exceed 77% of the economy within a decade, not including the debt the government owes itself for raiding Social Security taxes for decades.”

Government’s “raiding” of Social Security means that American taxpayers will pay twice to provide the same benefits: first, as FICA taxes paid on earnings, then later as taxes to pay off the $2.5 trillion in Treasury Bonds in the Social Security trust fund.


You and other future taxpayers are going to have to pay tomorrow for the Social Security of tomorrow. The “FICA” you’ve paid to date was really just income tax, used to pay for long-forgotten “government programs”.
Those Social Security trust funds were supposed to be held — literally — “in trust” for America’s citizens. The raiding of that trust fund violates a fiduciary responsibility.


In the real world beyond Washington, a trustee or mutual-fund manager who violated that sort of trust — the fiduciary relationship — would go to jail. That’s exactly what Bernie Madoff was all about.
When did all this occur? The answer is in two parts. The first thing you need to know is that all the dollars held in the trust fund are invested in U. S. Treasury bonds. That’s the same thing as saying that they were loaned to the government, and of course all the money that is loaned to the government is spent right away.


And the government’s borrowing has been larger than you thought, because each year they’ve been claiming those Social Security contributions as an offset to make that year’s deficit look smaller.


According to the Social Security Administration, this “unified budget” was a bipartisan effort between Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, and the 1969 Congress, and since then no Congress or President has had the courage to tell the truth.


Every budget of the last 40 years has been less than forthright about this simple fact.


If the Social Security “trust fund” had remained in trust for its future beneficiaries, it would be $2.5 trillion closer to solvency, and much of the current conversation about cutting benefits and raising the retirement age would be unnecessary.

I understand that we have SS and Medicare BUT I also ask where is the mandate in the Constituion for these programs.
I can point you to the mandate for defense.


Now I will tell you that I think we spend way too much on defense but I also think we have some serious problems in who is sucking on the SS tit. I think we have some serious problems with abuses of medicare and in some of the was that they throw money away.

An example. A person with wet macular degeneration can be treated with a shot of Avastin that costs in toptal about 350 bucks to administer with the drug costing about 45 bucks. this is an off label use of the drug but is effective. Medicare will not pay for that treatment They will pay for a drug I think is called lucent that cost over 2000 per treatment, a drug made by the same company that makes Avastin. Both are equally effective but one is approved for that use and the other is off label.

that is just one example of how our government wastes our tax dollars because of bureaucrats making decisions that should be made by doctors. Just another reason that Obamacare is going to cost a hell of a lot more than they are lying to us about now.

social security is a pet project on the cutting board for the right wingers. PERIOD.

there are several ways to FIX the program that are seemingly painless, but the right refuses to even begin to listen to them much less do something with them, and more often than not, spin bullshit stats to try and confuse the general public. The simpletons buy into the spin hook, line, and sinker ... but theyre simpletons.

and for all you simpletons that lump SS in the debt/deficit picture, it never has or ever will be included in either, its against the law.

Now open your right wing talking points booklet to Social Security, page 1, and continue to shoot yourselves in the foot until the election, After that you can blame the dems because you lost, AGAIN.

Begin.

What are the painless fixes to the SS program CJ; instead of your bullshit assertions, why not just tell us what the painless fixes are?


This should be interesting........awaiting your response...........

social security is a pet project on the cutting board for the right wingers. PERIOD.

there are several ways to FIX the program that are seemingly painless, but the right refuses to even begin to listen to them much less do something with them, and more often than not, spin bullshit stats to try and confuse the general public. The simpletons buy into the spin hook, line, and sinker ... but theyre simpletons.

and for all you simpletons that lump SS in the debt/deficit picture, it never has or ever will be included in either, its against the law.

Now open your right wing talking points booklet to Social Security, page 1, and continue to shoot yourselves in the foot until the election, After that you can blame the dems because you lost, AGAIN.

Begin. Originally Posted by CJ7

What are the painless fixes to the SS program CJ; instead of your bullshit assertions, why not just tell us what the painless fixes are?


This should be interesting........awaiting your response........... Originally Posted by Whirlaway

drop the $106,000.00 cap.


anything else?

I have never been a proponent of slashing SS. I am a proponent of doing away with it completely with the acknowledgement that it will have to be done in stages and may take a generation or two. In the meantime, I wold like to hear the lefts proposals on how to pay SS back the money that the government has issued IOUs for without printing money that decreases in value before the ink dries.
Please explain that one to me if that is at all possible..

And that is painless for who?

dont want to raise the cap, raise the tax 1.1%

also totally solves the problem ...


however, Republicans signed a pledge not to raise taxes ... not 1.1% even if it eliminates the SS issues completely. ...

anything else?

I have never been a proponent of slashing SS. I am a proponent of doing away with it completely with the acknowledgement that it will have to be done in stages and may take a generation or two. In the meantime, I wold like to hear the lefts proposals on how to pay SS back the money that the government has issued IOUs for without printing money that decreases in value before the ink dries.
Please explain that one to me if that is at all possible.. Originally Posted by The2Dogs

congrats, youve finally become a minority

Here you go , It is a fact check blog from the Washington post that will tell you that Who really knows if the cost of Obamacare will double since they are dealing with estimates and projections and that they really canfnot predict what is going to happen but that the number that is proclaimed by the Democrats is as bobus as it can be and is derived by predicted savings that may or may not be realized.

the fact of the matter is they really do not know and using them as a sole source isnt the best plank to stand on in an argument.

Oh and as for being a minority, how did you know?

I thought it w one of the most stupid things that could be done to cut the SS tax which in essence is reducing the funding and will affect those that have paid in for a number of years but are not currently eligible for benefits. Once again this is stealing from the middle class, does not affect the rich and does not help the poor.I suppose in the mind of the left they will borrow dollars that are worth much less in the future in order to pay the obligations that they did not collect for now.

I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.

Phase SS and Medicare out slowly. Let people under 30 know they will have to take care of themselves. Or let the states do it where it would be Constitutional, if the states wanted it.

Oh, and Doofe? Ever hear of the Postal Service? But to make sure you get it, use FedEx.

pssssssst


we're not talking about bama care


anyway, fact check claimed social security added to the deficit ... it doesnt, its self financed through taxes, not the government.


nice try though, anything else?

Phase SS and Medicare out slowly. Let people under 30 know they will have to take care of themselves. Or let the states do it where it would be Constitutional, if the states wanted it.

Oh, and Doofe? Ever hear of the Postal Service? But to make sure you get it, use FedEx.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

some 80% of the people 18/45 years old want to keep SS as is ... let them pay the 1.1% tax increase ... we paid our 12%, they pay their 13%

pretty fuckin easy isnt it?

Still unconstitutional.