Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 150

Thread: Next in Line for a Bailout: Social Security

  1. #1
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Next in Line for a Bailout: Social Security

    next-in-line-for-a-bailout-social-security: Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance

    Don't look now. But even as the bank bailout is winding down, another huge bailout is starting, this time for the Social Security system.

    A report from the Congressional Budget Office shows that for the first time in 25 years, Social Security is taking in less in taxes than it is spending on benefits.

    Instead of helping to finance the rest of the government, as it has done for decades, our nation's biggest social program needs help from the Treasury to keep benefit checks from bouncing -- in other words, a taxpayer bailout.
    Why disregard the interest? Because as people like me have said repeatedly over the years, the interest, which consists of Treasury IOUs that the Social Security trust fund gets on its holdings of government securities, doesn't provide Social Security with any cash that it can use to pay its bills. The interest is merely an accounting entry with no economic significance.

    Social Security hasn't been cash-negative since the early 1980s, when it came so close to running out of money that it was making plans to stop sending out benefit checks. That led to the famous Greenspan Commission report, which recommended trimming benefits and raising taxes, which Congress did. Those actions produced hefty cash surpluses, which until this year have helped finance the rest of the government.
    It would have been a lot simpler to fix the system years ago, when we could have used Social Security's cash surpluses to buy non-Treasury securities, such as government-backed mortgage bonds or high-grade corporates that would have helped cover future cash shortfalls. Now it's too late.

    Even though an economic recovery might produce some small, fleeting cash surpluses, Social Security's days of being flush are over.
    People have been warning for years that this was going to happen and now that it has started, who's going to have to pay for the elderly bail out?
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  2. #2
    Dispenser of Negativity
    Cold Highway's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Newburgh, New York and World 8: Dark Land
    Last Seen
    12-24-12 @ 11:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    9,596
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Next in Line for a Bailout: Social Security

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post

    People have been warning for years that this was going to happen and now that it has started, who's going to have to pay for the elderly bail out?
    The Tax Payers sadly.
    Jackboots always come in matched pairs, a left boot and a right boot.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Next in Line for a Bailout: Social Security

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    People have been warning for years that this was going to happen and now that it has started, who's going to have to pay for the elderly bail out?
    Everyone.

    Until the government goes broke.

    What is really going to happen is this:

    Socialist Security is an internal debt.

    Nations that face unsupportable internal debt all eventually find THE solution:

    They print money.

    Germany, Brazil, Zaire, and soon the US. The US has to expand the money supply by over a hundred trillion dollars to pay off Socialist Security claims.

    That, of course, is after they raid the 401(k) funds.

    Ain't socialism just grand?

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    melbourne florida
    Last Seen
    09-24-15 @ 12:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,156

    Re: Next in Line for a Bailout: Social Security

    The democrats stopped Bush from doing anything and had no plan of their own. They did nothing but obstruct. Wait is that not what they accuse the GOP of today. So where did the GOP learn this?

    This is a portion of a op ed that shows the democrats did nothing for SS all they did was stop Bush.

    Free Frank Warner: Unless she?s stupid, Rep. Nancy Pelosi is plain dishonest about Social Security


    U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi, appearing yesterday on “Fox News Sunday,” made it clear the Democrats would rather let Social Security wither on the vine than work honestly with President Bush to save it.

    And despite repeated questions from Chris Wallace, she offered no Democratic proposal to save the program, which will be required to begin paying out more than it takes in by 2020.

    Meanwhile, Pelosi remains a hero to people like Joshua Marshall at Talking Points Memo, who daily tries to split hairs on such subjects as whether Bush is lying when he says the optional private accounts could be an “add-on” to Social Security.

    If Pelosi and the Democrats get their way, and Social Security’s benefits are cut 30 percent between 2020 and 2050, the private accounts will be a welcome add-on just to help make up the difference.

    So just what did Pelosi, the House Democratic leader, say yesterday that anyone in her position should know is not true? Let’s look look at three points.

    Pelosi dishonesty No. 1.

    She said the president’s Social Security plan, which she admitted has not even been released in full, “would necessitate slashing benefits by 40 percent.”

    How would Pelosi know this? Bush has said almost everything is on the negotiating table. He and high-ranking Republicans have even left the door open to tax increases. The only tax increase Bush has ruled out is a hike in the payroll tax rate.

    But he and others have indicated they are willing to consider raising the cap on how much income is subject to the Social Security tax (right now, income over $90,000 is not taxed), and they have indicated that a tax on exports and imports could be created.

    So how can Pelosi honestly say she knows Bush intends to cut Social Security benefits by 40 percent? If the Democrats bargained in good faith, benefits might not be cut at all. But if the Democrats insist on no change at all in Social Security, benefits eventually will have to be cut by 30 percent.

  5. #5
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    05-13-11 @ 09:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,075
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Next in Line for a Bailout: Social Security

    This is but one reason why Obama wants Obamacare enacted ASAP, kill off the aged of the USA by denying them medicare / medicaid.
    It is also why Obama wants to exempt all Politicians from his new all embracing transparent Health reform.

  6. #6
    Guru
    USA_1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    BANNED
    Last Seen
    04-16-11 @ 02:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,142

    Re: Next in Line for a Bailout: Social Security

    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    The democrats stopped Bush from doing anything and had no plan of their own. They did nothing but obstruct. Wait is that not what they accuse the GOP of today. So where did the GOP learn this?
    .
    The republicans had control of the Whitehouse and congress for 6 years. If they really wanted to do something, they had ample opportunity.

    SS benifits have to be cut now.
    Last edited by USA_1; 02-04-10 at 04:48 PM.
    "This Administration will constantly strive to promote an ownership society in America. We want more people owning their own home. It is in our national interest that more people own their own home. After all, if you own your own home, you have a vital stake in the future of our country."" GWB

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Next in Line for a Bailout: Social Security

    Quote Originally Posted by USA-1 View Post
    The republicans had control of the Whitehouse and congress for 6 years. If they really wanted to do something, they had ample opportunity.

    SS benifits have to be cut now.
    Hint:

    Study how laws are made someday.

    Hint:

    Pay attention to what happens now that Brown is in the Sentate.

    Hint:

    The Democrats have always been able to filibuster.

    Hint:

    There's no real difference between elected Democrats and many elected Repubilcans. **** stinks, doesn't matter if it's ****(R) or ****(D) .

  8. #8
    Guru
    USA_1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    BANNED
    Last Seen
    04-16-11 @ 02:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,142

    Re: Next in Line for a Bailout: Social Security

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Hint:

    Study how laws are made someday.

    Hint:

    Pay attention to what happens now that Brown is in the Sentate.

    Hint:

    The Democrats have always been able to filibuster.

    Hint:

    There's no real difference between elected Democrats and many elected Repubilcans. **** stinks, doesn't matter if it's ****(R) or ****(D) .
    The republicans didn't even try to do anything about SS. Unless you consider the lamebrain idea to put SS into the stock market was an attempt to fix it. Using the filibuster excuse just doesn't cut it.
    Republicans are just as worthless as democrats. Maybe if they did some leading the democrats would not have won back congress and Obama wouldn't be president.
    "This Administration will constantly strive to promote an ownership society in America. We want more people owning their own home. It is in our national interest that more people own their own home. After all, if you own your own home, you have a vital stake in the future of our country."" GWB

  9. #9
    Educator Winnb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    02-22-10 @ 07:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    822

    Re: Next in Line for a Bailout: Social Security

    Quote Originally Posted by jujuman13 View Post
    This is but one reason why Obama wants Obamacare enacted ASAP, kill off the aged of the USA by denying them medicare / medicaid.
    It is also why Obama wants to exempt all Politicians from his new all embracing transparent Health reform.
    This kind of posting belongs in the Conspiracy Theory forum. Obama's not trying to kill the elderly.
    Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none.

    -------------------------------------------------

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    melbourne florida
    Last Seen
    09-24-15 @ 12:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,156

    Re: Next in Line for a Bailout: Social Security

    Quote Originally Posted by USA-1 View Post
    The republicans had control of the Whitehouse and congress for 6 years. If they really wanted to do something, they had ample opportunity.

    SS benifits have to be cut now.
    Nice try but the one vote majority that the GOP had could do nothing. The dems have had a majority 3 years now and a filibuster proof on for a year and they have done nothing. Notice the article shows the dems blocked anything the GOP wanted. The same thing they accuse the GOP of today.

    Problem is until today the GOP could not block the democrats with a filibuster proof senate.

Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •