What purpose? That was self evident, to repay the SSTF that you constantly lament has been used to cover deficits. Ground hog day.It is great pointing back to what you perceive Clinton did but for what purpose.
Actually, it was Bush that wiped out the projected surplus long before Obama was elected...but you knew that....and forgot it...over and over.Obama has wiped any projected surplus out completely and that seems to be something you want to ignore.
No, it actually is further down the line and is @ 6% of the budget.Right now debt service is the 4th largest budget item. Want to make it number one?
Wash rinse repeat.
You seem to miss the point, where are the dollars going to come from to pay those obligations? What does your textbook tell you about the effects of printing and borrowing money on the value of the dollar?Kushinator;1062104345]U.S. government securities are about as risk free as you can get. The inability of the U.S. government to meet any and all financial obligations would equate to a collapse of the global economy. Therefore, unless you believe the U.S. (and global) economy is going to collapse, they can issue as much revenue and/or debt as they need to fulfill promises.
Was SS designed to prop up the Treasury and give the President and Congress a slush fund to spend? Imagine what kind of condition we would be in now without trillions in IOU's?As it is designed to!
I see, so your return on your "investment" in SS is generating the kind of return you would generate without it and then having that investment your Money? Trillions of risk free IOU's you mean? Where is the money going to come from to fund the cost of our bloated Federal Govt. and those SS/Medicare IOU's?They have trillions of dollars in risk free, cash flow generating assets.
Actual analysis is nothing more than an educated guess that future activities will follow historical performance? How many predictions of Obama have been accurate?Actuarial analysis trumps ideological analysis when it comes to public insurance funding.
What will a rise in interest rates to do debt service on the current 17 trillion dollar debt? Any idea what printing and borrowing money will do to interest rates? What does your textbook tell you?A rise in interest rates will be predicated upon economic growth.
Right now debt service is about 250 billion a year and rising. That is the fourth largest budget item. Tell me that is good fiscal policy to have a rising debt and rising debt service taking up a bigger percentage of the budget?Debt is only an issue when it crowds out private investment. We can easily observe when such a situation arises, and when the U.S. economy operates with an output gap, crowding out will not occur.
Your projections of a significant reduction in debt service is misguided glee especially since the deficit will still be close to a trillion dollars if not over a trillion. 139 billion isn't a good indication of what is going to happen during these summer months.This has already been analyzed in another post:
That are self insured by the Federal Govt. who has to print or borrow money to pay off those obligations. Logic and common sense apparently aren't of interest to you either.My contributions are held in the form of special purpose treasury securities. Top line growth is beginning to decelerate to the point where the growth of input costs is sure to hit margins. Political rhetoric is of no interest to me.
Analyze until your heart's content but what happens if you are wrong? The private sector is growing at a very poor rate. Never in the history of this country have we had such a slow recovery after the end of a recession, a recovery stymied by the poor leadership of our community organizer. Until you stimulate the private sector to put 21 plus million unemployed/underemployed/discouraged workers back to work full time the economic situation isn't going to get any better. Bank on it. Actual reality trumps your analysisIt allows us to understand S.S. outlays relative to national income; a most necessary metric when analyzing the long to medium term solvency of the program. The private sector is growing, but it has yet to be able to sustain necessary growth in the face of a pull-back in government stimulus.
It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
"Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911