O.T. Social Security Trustees New Report
Question:
- The trust fund for Social Security will go broke in 2041 – a year earlier than previously estimated – the trustees reported Wednesday. Trustees also said that Medicare, the giant health care program for the elderly and disabled, faces insolvency in 2020. The new projections made in the trustees annual report were certain to be cited by both sides in the massive battle to overhaul Social Security, which President Bush has made the top domestic priority of his second term. http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050323/D890QBLO0.html See ya, John
Response:
The ability of SS to support the large number of retirees in 20 years is not going to depend on how much money is in the "trust fund". It is going to depend on the economy at that time. It depends on whether the working people at that time can support the retirees. Why don’t people understand that? Putting "dollars" (printed by the Federal government) away in a Federal government shoebox does not help make the food, clothing, housing and medical care necessary to support elderly people. Not on a massive scale it doesn’t. WHY DON’T PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT? Personally, I support the Bush plan to put some SS money into the stock market. It will help the economy by making more capital available to business. Business can invest that capital and create jobs, goods and services. It will stimulate the economy. But it won’t help if we don’t start pretty soon. The first baby boomers reach 62 in 2008.
Response:
>The ability of SS to support the large number of retirees in 20 years >is not going to depend on how much money is in the "trust fund".
Of course it does — the trust fund exists to cover the difference between incoming and outgoing SS funds during the big baby boom bubble of the next few decades. >It is >going to depend on the economy at that time. It depends on whether the >working people at that time can support the retirees.
As explained above, the trust fund that’s been accumutlated (via bigger SS deduction over that past couple of decades) is designed to take care of the difference between anticipated incoming and outgoing SS funds. >Why don’t people >understand that?
Both the contents of the trust fund AND the ongoing income to SS are part of what can be drawn upon to make payments to recipients — the trust fund is comprised of government securities purchased with incoming SS funds beyond what has been required to make payments to current recipients and was intended to be drawn down during an anticipated period when there will be less coming in than going out. It was all designed-in by the late Sen. Moynihan and his colleagues during the last round of SS reform. Further such revisions to system may be necessary, but a wholesale overhaul of SS and the abandonment of its founding principles are not even close to necessary or even desirable — the system is in better overall condition than ever. >Putting "dollars" (printed by the Federal government) >away in a Federal government shoebox does not help make the food,
There is no paper money in the social security trust fund — there are securities guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the United States. If those are not dependable, then we have a whole lot more to worry about than Social Security, because we will be in a full-blown, 1930s-style depression long before SS tanks! >clothing, housing and medical care necessary to support elderly people. >Not on a massive scale it doesn’t. >WHY DON’T PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT?
It’s obvious the deficiency in understanding is yours, Doug — do you really think the government prints up worthless paper currency and stuffs it into a shoe box marked "Social Security Trust Fund?" >Personally, I support the Bush plan to put some SS money into the stock >market.
That worked out real well for my 401K — no thanks, I’ll take the same kind of U.S. government securities that overseas investors are so fond of! The program is called "Social *Security*," not "Retirement Roulette." Those who want to invest their retirement savings already have tax-deferred options, why mix risk up with an insurance program that everyone benefits from? >It will help the economy by making more capital available to >business. Business can invest that capital and create jobs, goods and >services.
There is nothing to prevent "business" from investing all that stock sale income in Slovakia, Indonesia, China, or Equatorial Guinea — there is absolutely zero assurance that a single American job, good, or service will result from more cash flow into Wall Street. The only ones who are guaranteed to benefit are the securities trading industry with their double- digit commission rates — ] in contrast, Social Security has an administrative overhead of about two percent. >It will stimulate the economy.
Yeah, just like the recent round of tax cuts — completely eaten up by increases in state and local tax, not the mention the cost of energy. The economy is still stuck in neutral — improving, but at a glacial pace after years of distress. >But it won’t help if we don’t >start pretty soon.
Even the adminstration admits that their hokey scheme does nothing to remedy the relatively minor SS shortfall predicted for about 35 years from now — it’s major impact would be another mammoth increase in our already-huge national debt. How the heck is that going to "help" anything or anyone who’s not in the securities industry? >The first baby boomers reach 62 in 2008.
Including me, sonny — and you better demonstrate one heckuva lot more in the way of understanding before I’ll be convinced that we have to effectively destroy the SS system to "help" it! Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
>> The trust fund for Social Security will go broke in 2041 >The Grand Pyramid Scheme. I have to say, it’s the longest running one I can >think of right now. Just like all pyramid schemes, the tail-enders are >gonna get screwed. I doubt I’ll be around to see it though.
With a few minor revisions, it will go on forever — because it’s not a "pyramid scheme," it’s an insurance program that’s in better overall financial shape than most insurance companies! Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
> - The trust fund for Social Security will go broke in 2041
Bullshit. It will not "go broke" in 2041. That’s another Republican lie. If you accept this worst-case scenario, one that historically doesn’t happen, then in 2041 the Social Security trust fund will be empty, but the Social Security system will still be able to pay out at least 75 percent of then-current obligations with the then-incoming FICA taxes collected.
Response:
> Personally, I support the Bush plan to put some SS money into the stock > market. It will help the economy by making more capital available to > business.
It will create another stock market bubble and do nothing but enrich the folks on Wall Street.
Response:
> > The trust fund for Social Security will go broke in 2041 > The Grand Pyramid Scheme.
It isn’t.
Response:
> >> The trust fund for Social Security will go broke in 2041 > With a few minor revisions, > it will go on forever
Amen.
Response:
Social Security will go broke in 2041 > With a few minor revisions, > it will go on forever > Amen.
What could be more minor than setting aside 5% of the employees, or, overall, setting aside about 1% to 2%. What revision would be less than that? See ya, John
Response:
> >> The trust fund for Social Security will go broke in 2041 > With a few minor revisions, > it will go on forever > Amen.
Timepixdc, I have a problem with you leaving my name as an attribution to something that I didn`t write. Some would call that misleading or dishonest. Please don`t do it any more. See ya, John
Response:
> > The trust fund for Social Security will go broke in 2041 > The Grand Pyramid Scheme. > It isn’t.
Timepixdc, I have a problem with you leaving my name as an attribution to something that I didn`t write. Some would call that misleading or dishonest. Please don`t do it any more. See ya, John
Response:
> It will not "go broke" in 2041. That’s another Republican lie. If you > accept this worst-case scenario, one that historically doesn’t happen, > then in 2041 the Social Security trust fund will be empty, but the > Social Security system will still be able to pay out at least 75 percent > of then-current obligations with the then-incoming FICA taxes collected.
The Social Security Trustees are a bipartisan, read DEMOCRATS as well as Republicans. They agreed unanomously in the report. If you don`t like it, take it up with the Trustees that are responsible for the SS Program. See ya, John
Response:
> >> With a few minor revisions, >> it will go on forever > Amen. > What could be more minor than setting aside 5% of the employees, or, > overall, setting aside about 1% to 2%. What revision would be less than > that?
Letting everyone put aside an ADDITIONAL 1, 2 or 5 percent of their incomes into a plan to supplement their Social Security benefits.
Response:
> > It will not "go broke" in 2041. That’s another Republican lie. > The Social Security Trustees are a bipartisan, read DEMOCRATS as well as > Republicans.
Make that Democrat, singular. There are three trustees form the cabinet, the Treasury Secretary, the Health and Human Services Secretary and the Labor Secretary. Then there are two "independent" trustees, Republican Thomas R. Saving and Democrat John L. Palmer. So if you think that a 4 to 1 Republican to Democratic tilt is "bipartisan" in the traditional sense then you’re an idiot. Not to mention the fact that the two "independent" trustees didn’t say that Social Security was going to "go broke."
Response:
>> >> With a few minor revisions, > >> it will go on forever > > Amen. > What could be more minor than setting aside 5% of the employees, or, > overall, setting aside about 1% to 2%. What revision would be less than > that? > Letting everyone put aside an ADDITIONAL 1, 2 or 5 percent of their > incomes into a plan to supplement their Social Security benefits.
Don`t look now but, that isn`t a revision and does nothing to save a system that the trustees say will go broke as currently designed. See ya, John
Response:
> >> What could be more minor than setting aside 5% of the employees, or, >> overall, setting aside about 1% to 2%. What revision would be less than >> that? > Letting everyone put aside an ADDITIONAL 1, 2 or 5 percent of their > incomes into a plan to supplement their Social Security benefits. > Don`t look now but, that isn`t a revision
Uh. Yes it is. > and does nothing to save a system > that the trustees say will go broke as currently designed.
All that would take would be a few tweaks. Let’s remove the FICA cap for a start, then how about getting rid of those idiotic tax-cuts for the rich?
Response:
> – The trust fund for Social Security will go broke in 2041 – a year > earlier than previously estimated – the trustees reported Wednesday. > Trustees also said that Medicare, the giant health care program for the > elderly and disabled, faces insolvency in 2020. > The new projections made in the trustees annual report were certain to be > cited by both sides in the massive battle to overhaul Social Security, > which President Bush has made the top domestic priority of his second > term. > http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050323/D890QBLO0.html > See ya, > John
Here’s a question: IF SS was privatized, what would happen to my money I already paid into SS?
Response:
Bruce, When you retire, you will need food, clothing, shelter and medical care. The fact that there is an entry on a government ledger showing X number of dollars in the SS fund DOES NOT MAKE one morsel of food, one stitch of clothing, one repair on your house or support your medical caretakers. Since you won’t be working and can’t do any of that, it will HAVE to be done by those who ARE working. It’s that simple. SS can NEVER be a savings plan, not if the government runs it. It ALL depends on the ability of the economy to support the retirees AND those who are working.. The only "solution" is to let MORE young people immigrate into this country, so we have MORE young workers, or increase the number of working young by making more babies (but that is a 25 year program, not really an option anyway). No govt program will matter much. Money in the private sector might help a little because the private sector CAN allocate it in the most efficient manner. I’m in the stock market and the money in the stock market will push my stocks up. So I have a motive. But even if I didn’t and wasn’t, I think some of the SS money going into the stock market is a good idea. It will stimulate the economy.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Bruce, > When you retire, you will need food, clothing, shelter and medical > care. The fact that there is an entry on a government ledger showing X > number of dollars in the SS fund DOES NOT MAKE one morsel of food, one > stitch of clothing, one repair on your house or support your medical > caretakers. Since you won’t be working and can’t do any of that, it > will HAVE to be done by those who ARE working. > It’s that simple. SS can NEVER be a savings plan, not if the government > runs it. > It ALL depends on the ability of the economy to support the retirees > AND those who are working.. The only "solution" is to let MORE young > people immigrate into this country, so we have MORE young workers, or > increase the number of working young by making more babies (but that is > a 25 year program, not really an option anyway). No govt program will > matter much. Money in the private sector might help a little because > the private sector CAN allocate it in the most efficient manner. > I’m in the stock market and the money in the stock market will push my > stocks up. So I have a motive. But even if I didn’t and wasn’t, I think > some of the SS money going into the stock market is a good idea. It > will stimulate the economy.
Here’s a question: IF SS was privatized, what would happen to my money I already paid into SS?
Response:
> SS can NEVER be a savings plan, not if the government > runs it.
It wasn’t designed as a savings plan and has never been one. You’re supposed to have your own savings plan so check up on IRAs and 401Ks.
Response:
>Bruce, > When you retire, you will need food, clothing, shelter and medical >care. The fact that there is an entry on a government ledger showing X >number of dollars in the SS fund DOES NOT MAKE one morsel of food, one >stitch of clothing, one repair on your house or support your medical >caretakers.
There is more than a ledger entry, Doug — that’s point you’re missing. Real money was collected, it was used to purchase government securities and the government uses the funds to buy goods and services needed to by the military, the FBI, etc. The government must make good on those securities, with interest, and it always has — if it didn’t, the U.S. economy would collapse because foreign investors would stop buying similar securities. Iow, the SS trust fund is invested much like a very conservative insurance carrier invests premiums, and goes into the economy. >Since you won’t be working and can’t do any of that, it >will HAVE to be done by those who ARE working.
True, but irrelevant. >It’s that simple. SS can NEVER be a savings plan, not if the government >runs it.
It’s not a savings plan, it’s a mandatory government- run insurance program. Your IRA and/or 401K is a savings plan, tax-deferred by law until overall income is down after retirement. >It ALL depends on the ability of the economy to support the retirees >AND those who are working..
The money from SS payments goes to pay for goods and services. [lots of naivete snipped] Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
> The ability of SS to support the large number of retirees in 20 years > is not going to depend on how much money is in the "trust fund". It is > going to depend on the economy at that time. It depends on whether the > working people at that time can support the retirees. Why don’t people > understand that? Putting "dollars" (printed by the Federal government) > away in a Federal government shoebox does not help make the food, > clothing, housing and medical care necessary to support elderly people. > Not on a massive scale it doesn’t. > WHY DON’T PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT?
Is that a rhetorical question… ? ? ? Lots of people don’t WANT to understand it… or don’t CARE to understand it, or WANT to disagree with it… so therefore refuse to accept it. But, in response… putting "dollars away" is *saving*… if they go into a "shoe box" it is not "investing", but it IS saving. The SS system is NOT a savings system/arrangement. It’s a very unusual entitlement that taxes current personal earnings to pay past promised payments based on current poverty income levels. So more people who were paying SS tax 20 years ago were paying less people a smaller payout are now COLLECTING a larger payout from less workers. No WONDER the system is going broke…! ! ! > Personally, I support the Bush plan to put some SS money into the stock > market. It will help the economy by making more capital available to > business.
Incidently, that’s called "investing"… when a person SAVES money (real wealth, as in CASH) and puts it into some type of instrument (pun intended) that has a chance of increasing in value, through either interest income, dividend income, or increase in market value. Later, when this *investment* (either grown or not) is drawn upon by the SS recipient… NOBODY ELSE HAD TO PAY THIS MONEY…! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! It was saved by the person who NEEDS it later..! ! ! ! THIS is the concept that nobody seems to want to understand nor accept. Why hasn’t anybody done a past-performance analysis on this some portion of OUR SS in private accts (broadly diversified no-load mutual funds) starting even just 15 yrs ago… regardless of the ups and downs of the market, there would be a pile of cash available for us at *retirement* that would NOT have to be paid by working people. Some will scream… "But how would the ’shortfall’ be made up for the could have NOT pushed through legislation that allowed for EXCESS (Extra SS payed by workers) to be MOVED to NON SOCIAL SECURITY ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS…! ! ! ! ! ! Imagine if the Govt. mandated a "Retirement Savings Program" in a mandated way, but into an IRA or 401K type plan, only way more strict… as in, no borrowing at ALL..! ! ! No early withdrawal.. for ANY reason other than what SS already allows (disability, death, etc) All these "saved" funds would be "invested" in our countrys’ economy, and help stimulate growth, jobs, etc… Certainly, there are caviats in the short run.. but once "in place" it would get the govt out of the "pension business" that it has been so bad at all these years. I personally have feelings about people receiving money, that they did not save, or *earn* themselves, for doing *nothing*. IMMHO, there is always SOMETHING a person can DO… (ie – work) to *earn* whatever *DOLE* is handed out. There is plenty of "community service" that could be allocated to those that never *saved* enough to justify their SS payments, etc…. However *small* the work or service… but that is another topic. gtski – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Business can invest that capital and create jobs, goods and > services. It will stimulate the economy. But it won’t help if we don’t > start pretty soon. The first baby boomers reach 62 in 2008.
Response:
>> The trust fund for Social Security will go broke in 2041 > The Grand Pyramid Scheme. I have to say, it’s the longest running one I can > think of right now. Just like all pyramid schemes, the tail-enders are > gonna get screwed. I doubt I’ll be around to see it though. > Buffalo Bob
Unfortunately, you AND I (I don’t know how old you are) may be around to see it screw us…. It will be *sooner* rather than later…. gtski
Response:
Related Posts