• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The results are in on social security

WHAT "social security trust fund"?

Anyone besides the Mayor notice the 15,000 billion dollar debt that kinda dwarfs the 79 billion dollar imaginary "trust fund"?
 
donc said:
So you OK with welching on the debts of American seniors as apposed to the ChiComs and the bankers of 911?
Click to expand...

The system works this way: what people pay in *now* goes to cover the expenses of people who are receiving pay *now* from the system. Anything that's surplus in the system yearly is bought by the government - used as they wish - and the individuals that said money came from are told 'we'll pay you back later' - which nets the government *more in repayment* than it does in *what we took in the beginning* due ot interest owed on the IOU.


So - knowing that:

I believe people should *be able to* and *plan to* support theirselves for their entire lives. common sense really.

But for those who *cannot* support theirselves (disability, disease, etc) - there is (should continue to be) support for said people financially via government - aka - welfare, etc. This is already in place, it should be widened for people who need it and denied for people who don't really.

I also believe that the government cannot and should not cap wages nor consider anyone's rightfully earned money to be a leech pool for others. What I earn - I should be able to keep.

I also feel that the SSA is dishonest - gives people no 'opt out' option in life - people's hard earned pennies and cents are smeared around by the government to support every single expense and spontaneous desire that the government has under the false guise of 'when you stop working on your golden years we'll pay it back.' - Nevermind that most people would benefit greatly from simply not letting that money go *right now*

Why not just end the broken system - pay back everyone who's put into it at this moment - and if you want to tax rich people more then make them supplement what the government would no longer get through SSA without the future debt of having to pay it back. We can call it a 'filthy stealing lying government tax'

OR - better yet - the government can go on a diet and learn how to do without quite so much money rolling in from people's paychecks.

I don't support income tax - any taxes by state or federal on what you *earn* - period.
 
Lets just make this new young callous generation happy....How about this... End social Security, End Medicare, End Medicaid, End Welfare, End any and all govt expenditures on anything for AMERICANS. End ALL TAXS for anyone making over 250,000 a year and make everyone below pay for everything and GIVE all their money to anything NOT AMERICAN as long as it enhances the rich and business interests in this country....then maybe they will stop doomsaying and whining, but they wont, even then they will want mOAR and mOAR and mOAR
 
lpast said:
Lets just make this new young callous generation happy....How about this... End social Security, End Medicare, End Medicaid, End Welfare, End any and all govt expenditures on anything for AMERICANS. End ALL TAXS for anyone making over 250,000 a year and make everyone below pay for everything and GIVE all their money to anything NOT AMERICAN as long as it enhances the rich and business interests in this country....then maybe they will stop doomsaying and whining, but they wont, even then they will want mOAR and mOAR and mOAR
Click to expand...

Oh, sorry - I thought you wanted a serious response.

I think the welfare/medicaid system is more efficient in the way it's structured and the way it functions - they should expand that and narrow or end other programs - a reallocation of effort. We don't need over 10 programs and branches of government that all do the same damn thing. It's redundency.

Redundency is waste
 
Last edited:
Aunt Spiker said:
The system works this way: what people pay in *now* goes to cover the expenses of people who are receiving pay *now* from the system. Anything that's surplus in the system yearly is bought by the government - used as they wish - and the individuals that said money came from are told 'we'll pay you back later' - which nets the government *more in repayment* than it does in *what we took in the beginning* due ot interest owed on the IOU.


So - knowing that:

I believe people should *be able to* and *plan to* support theirselves for their entire lives. common sense really.

But for those who *cannot* support theirselves (disability, disease, etc) - there is (should continue to be) support for said people financially via government - aka - welfare, etc. This is already in place, it should be widened for people who need it and denied for people who don't really.

I also believe that the government cannot and should not cap wages nor consider anyone's rightfully earned money to be a leech pool for others. What I earn - I should be able to keep.

I also feel that the SSA is dishonest - gives people no 'opt out' option in life - people's hard earned pennies and cents are smeared around by the government to support every single expense and spontaneous desire that the government has under the false guise of 'when you stop working on your golden years we'll pay it back.' - Nevermind that most people would benefit greatly from simply not letting that money go *right now*

Why not just end the broken system - pay back everyone who's put into it at this moment - and if you want to tax rich people more then make them supplement what the government would no longer get through SSA without the future debt of having to pay it back. We can call it a 'filthy stealing lying government tax'

OR - better yet - the government can go on a diet and learn how to do without quite so much money rolling in from people's paychecks.

I don't support income tax - any taxes by state or federal on what you *earn* - period.
Click to expand...

Emphasis is mine.

Do you have any idea what paying everyone back (it's going to have to be adjusted for inflation (today's dollars + interest)) would cost? There are a zillion of us who have payed in every year that we have worked for our whole lives. Can you say "double the deficit"?

Sure. I knew you could.
 
Mickey Shane said:
Emphasis is mine.

Do you have any idea what paying everyone back (it's going to have to be adjusted for inflation (today's dollars + interest)) would cost? There are a zillion of us who have payed in every year that we have worked for our whole lives. Can you say "double the deficit"?

Sure. I knew you could.
Click to expand...

That's hardly a reason not to do it - it costs more every year to perpetuate than it would to end it, for sure.

They could start by just ending new approrpiations - and slowly work everyone out of the system as nature deems it over the next few decades.

Sounds more appealing than being continually in inflated debt which grows exponentially every year instead.
 
Last edited:
donc said:
Kinda looks like all the doom and gloom was for naught as for as Social Security was concerned.:2wave:

THE RESULTS ARE IN ON SOCIAL SECURITY

Do you ever worry that Social Security might not be there for you when you need it? On May 13, the Trustees of the Social Security Trust Fund released their annual report that affirmatively answers that question: yes, Social Security is alive and well. Below you will find some highlights from the Trustee’s report and important facts about Social Security:

Amount of annual surplus in 2011: $69 billion

Projected Trust Fund Balance for 2011: $2.7 trillion

Number of years Social Security is projected to be able to pay full benefits, without any shortfall: 25 years

Cost of administering Social Security as percentage of total expenditures: 0.9%

Average monthly Social Security benefit received by retired Americans: $1,164

Drop in value of private retirement accounts during the Great Recession: $2.8 trillion

Drop in value of Social Security benefits during the Great Recession: $0

Number of recessions Social Security has weathered without failing to pay benefits: 13

Number of times Social Security has failed to pay an earned benefit: 0

In response to the Trustee’s report Rep. Becerra, the highest ranking Democrat on the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Social Security, said: “Today’s report confirms what we already know: Social Security will weather the storm once again. You simply can’t buy the kind of retirement, disability and life-insurance protection on the private market that Social Security provides.”

The Becerra Bulletin, May 2011
Click to expand...

And if we raise the contribution cap and prevent the theft from it for general revenue needs as an alternative to eliminating the tax cuts for the rich, it could become completely self-sustaining again. :sun
 
donc said:
Kinda looks like all the doom and gloom was for naught as for as Social Security was concerned.:2wave:

THE RESULTS ARE IN ON SOCIAL SECURITY

Do you ever worry that Social Security might not be there for you when you need it? On May 13, the Trustees of the Social Security Trust Fund released their annual report that affirmatively answers that question: yes, Social Security is alive and well. Below you will find some highlights from the Trustee’s report and important facts about Social Security:

Amount of annual surplus in 2011: $69 billion

Projected Trust Fund Balance for 2011: $2.7 trillion

Number of years Social Security is projected to be able to pay full benefits, without any shortfall: 25 years

Cost of administering Social Security as percentage of total expenditures: 0.9%

Average monthly Social Security benefit received by retired Americans: $1,164

Drop in value of private retirement accounts during the Great Recession: $2.8 trillion

Drop in value of Social Security benefits during the Great Recession: $0

Number of recessions Social Security has weathered without failing to pay benefits: 13

Number of times Social Security has failed to pay an earned benefit: 0

In response to the Trustee’s report Rep. Becerra, the highest ranking Democrat on the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Social Security, said: “Today’s report confirms what we already know: Social Security will weather the storm once again. You simply can’t buy the kind of retirement, disability and life-insurance protection on the private market that Social Security provides.”

The Becerra Bulletin, May 2011
Click to expand...

You trusted Bernie Madoff to the very end didnt you Donc...........

........just keep telling yourself its all going to be sunshine and lollipops.........

Social Security to pay out more than it takes in for first time ever - New York Daily News

Social Security to pay out more than it takes in for first time ever
.
.
.
.....Social Security is surely a ponzi scheme built to last........
.
.
.
 
Catawba said:
And if we raise the contribution cap and prevent the theft from it for general revenue needs as an alternative to eliminating the tax cuts for the rich, it could become completely self-sustaining again. :sun
Click to expand...


It seems our winger contingent would rather bum money from China for our two and a half wars, than honor an IOU made forty years ago. Same thing, borrowed money.

The same ChiComs who almost sixty years ago, backed by their Commie puppet master in the Kremlin, in support of fellow Commie North Korea, attacked the United States Army’s 8th Cav and the ROK,s 15th,near Unsan.

So sad, when you see Americans in favor of honoring a debt made to Commies, over those, that are more than likely the offspring of those that were fighting the ChiComs. Don’t get me started on the billions we borrow from the Saudi’s and others that want us dead.:(
 
Catawba said:
And if we raise the contribution cap and prevent the theft from it for general revenue needs as an alternative to eliminating the tax cuts for the rich, it could become completely self-sustaining again. :sun
Click to expand...


While tax cuts impacting the deficit and debt is a valid issue, let's not conflate it with the lie above. This comingling of funds has gone on for many years and you are informed enough to know that.
 
washunut said:
While tax cuts impacting the deficit and debt is a valid issue, let's not conflate it with the lie above. This comingling of funds has gone on for many years and you are informed enough to know that.
Click to expand...

What lie are we not to conflate?
 
donc said:
What lie are we not to conflate?
Click to expand...

The talk about taking social security funds to maintain tax cuts for the rich. Social security was dropped into the "unified" budget decades ago. Now I do consider it a theft, but the reason in my view was to sugarcoat deficits, not for any specific tax cut.
 
donc said:
assets.gif

I don't pretend to be an accountant, as a mater of fact It’s difficult for me to keep my check book balanced but these two graphs from SS sure don't look to me like were in as bad a shape as the wingers are claiming.

First graph says the trust fund is $2.6 trillion to the good as of 2010.(
Click to expand...
The first graph shows all of the IOUs. There is no money. It was all spent. There is a promise to pay. Who pays? Taxpayers. It is a huge lie. It may be the worst lie in the history of the world.

There are no assets.
 
hazlnut said:
How about end of life counseling? You know, so we don't keep people alive on machines because they never left any instructions...
Click to expand...
Now this is something the government has a great deal of experience in. Hounding people to death.

hazlnut said:
I think the brilliant stateswoman former ex-Gov of a welfare state call them 'Death Panels'. And that statement was ranked the #1 lie of the year.
Click to expand...
And yet, it turned out to be true. There are rationing panels. They are death panels. A government bureaucrat will get to decide whether you live or die. Liberals might prefer to call them life panels in honor of the select few who will be allowed to live. If it comes to fruition everyone will want to become a card carrying member of the communist party of the United Sta...uh, Democratic party.

hazlnut said:
So, you see, the Dems tried to do something about the cost of public health care for the elderly. Something very sensible, something pragmatic and compassionate, helping people to make informed decisions about their own health care.
Click to expand...
It seems compassionate to me. Imagine someone thinking they should be able to live even though they are no longer (choose one) a liberal or a taxpayer.
 
Misterveritis said:
The first graph shows all of the IOUs. There is no money. It was all spent. There is a promise to pay. Who pays? Taxpayers. It is a huge lie. It may be the worst lie in the history of the world.

There are no assets.
Click to expand...


There are no assets?:shock:

U. S. Government securities are not assets??The last time I checked they still had a 5 star rating by Morningstar.Of course that could change pretty fast if the tea baggars don’t lift the debt ceiling.
 
washunut said:
The talk about taking social security funds to maintain tax cuts for the rich. Social security was dropped into the "unified" budget decades ago. Now I do consider it a theft, but the reason in my view was to sugarcoat deficits, not for any specific tax cut.
Click to expand...

Yes, it has been going on for years. That doesn't justify continuing to rob from it. In 2000, voters had the chance to choose between a presidential candidate that proposed locking the SS fund from general fund use. The voters instead chose the guy they would rather have a beer with. The rest, as they say is history:

"Looted from the Inside Out

Whatever Happened to the Social Security Trust Fund?


"Your president, in his first State of the Union address (February 27, 2001), promised to make sure that no Social Security money was used for any other program. He specifically said: "To make sure the retirement savings of America's seniors are not diverted in any other program, my budget protects all $2.6 trillion of the Social Security surplus for Social Security, and for Social Security alone."

Now that is what he said: "for Social Security alone." But it seems like your president left something out.

And with that said and done, it seems like the same Bush went on to do something entirely different. No surprise there.

What Bush did in his first fours years was he looted the sacred Social Security trust fund. Down to the last nickel and dime.

In the Bush-Cheney first term the White House mob gleefully looted the entire $509 billion Social Security surplus. No surprise there again. And, at this very moment, Bush has his fingers in the same trust fund to the tune of $400 million or so a day.

But you can look at it this way. It is for a good cause.

Somebody has to pay for those tax cuts and the war in Iraq.

And the Social Security trust fund does come in handy in these cases. Furthermore, and to rub it in, the shameless Bush now admits it. This is what he has been saying lately in his Social Security scare speeches. "The money-payroll taxes going into Social Security are spent. They're spent on benefits and they're spent on government programs. There is no trust."

Now that's what he says. "There is no trust."

"Every dime that goes in from payroll taxes is spent. It's spent on retirees, and if there's excess, it's spent on government programs. The only thing that Social Security has is a pile of IOUs from one part of the government to the next."

Those words were spoken just a few days ago. Where's the outrage? Where's Alan Greenspan on this subject.

In other words - why isn't anybody asking what happened to the trust fund that Bush said he would protect way back in 2001?"
Jackie Corr: Whatever Happened to the Social Security Trust Fund?
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
Yes, it has been going on for years. That doesn't justify continuing to rob from it. In 2000, voters had the chance to choose between a presidential candidate that proposed locking the SS fund from general fund use. The voters instead chose the guy they would rather have a beer with. The rest, as they say is history:

"Looted from the Inside Out

Whatever Happened to the Social Security Trust Fund?


"Your president, in his first State of the Union address (February 27, 2001), promised to make sure that no Social Security money was used for any other program. He specifically said: "To make sure the retirement savings of America's seniors are not diverted in any other program, my budget protects all $2.6 trillion of the Social Security surplus for Social Security, and for Social Security alone."

Now that is what he said: "for Social Security alone." But it seems like your president left something out.

And with that said and done, it seems like the same Bush went on to do something entirely different. No surprise there.

What Bush did in his first fours years was he looted the sacred Social Security trust fund. Down to the last nickel and dime.

In the Bush-Cheney first term the White House mob gleefully looted the entire $509 billion Social Security surplus. No surprise there again. And, at this very moment, Bush has his fingers in the same trust fund to the tune of $400 million or so a day.

But you can look at it this way. It is for a good cause.

Somebody has to pay for those tax cuts and the war in Iraq.

And the Social Security trust fund does come in handy in these cases. Furthermore, and to rub it in, the shameless Bush now admits it. This is what he has been saying lately in his Social Security scare speeches. "The money-payroll taxes going into Social Security are spent. They're spent on benefits and they're spent on government programs. There is no trust."

Now that's what he says. "There is no trust."

"Every dime that goes in from payroll taxes is spent. It's spent on retirees, and if there's excess, it's spent on government programs. The only thing that Social Security has is a pile of IOUs from one part of the government to the next."

Those words were spoken just a few days ago. Where's the outrage? Where's Alan Greenspan on this subject.

In other words - why isn't anybody asking what happened to the trust fund that Bush said he would protect way back in 2001?"
Jackie Corr: Whatever Happened to the Social Security Trust Fund?
Click to expand...

First of all calling Bush my president is nuts. Although he was the president of all Americans for 8 years, he NEVER got my vote. So come out of your fog.

That being said, there is a social security trust fund that has treasuries, not sure if you really don't know this or are acting like someone who does not know.

Sorry but you don't get to have your own facts.
 
washunut said:
First of all calling Bush my president is nuts. Although he was the president of all Americans for 8 years, he NEVER got my vote. So come out of your fog.

That being said, there is a social security trust fund that has treasuries, not sure if you really don't know this or are acting like someone who does not know.

Sorry but you don't get to have your own facts.
Click to expand...

I didn't say your president. When quotes are provided in text followed by a link that means the text is quoted from that source. Hope that helps in the future!

If you have evidence that refutes SS funds were used to help offset the cost of the Iraq war and the Bush tax cuts, as Bush's own quotes show, please present it.
 
donc said:
There are no assets?:shock:

U. S. Government securities are not assets??The last time I checked they still had a 5 star rating by Morningstar.Of course that could change pretty fast if the tea baggars don’t lift the debt ceiling.
Click to expand...
An IOU is not an asset. If you promise to pay yourself at some future date and you do not have a real asset you can convert into that payment what do you have? Nothing. That is what the government did. It wrested money from taxpayers for one purpose, used it on something else and wrote itself a promise to pay itself. Now if the US government decided to sell of most of its real estate holdings and converted that to cash we might have a real solution.
 
donc said:
Kinda looks like all the doom and gloom was for naught as for as Social Security was concerned.:2wave:

THE RESULTS ARE IN ON SOCIAL SECURITY

Do you ever worry that Social Security might not be there for you when you need it? On May 13, the Trustees of the Social Security Trust Fund released their annual report that affirmatively answers that question: yes, Social Security is alive and well. Below you will find some highlights from the Trustee’s report and important facts about Social Security:

Amount of annual surplus in 2011: $69 billion

Projected Trust Fund Balance for 2011: $2.7 trillion

Number of years Social Security is projected to be able to pay full benefits, without any shortfall: 25 years

Cost of administering Social Security as percentage of total expenditures: 0.9%

Average monthly Social Security benefit received by retired Americans: $1,164

Drop in value of private retirement accounts during the Great Recession: $2.8 trillion

Drop in value of Social Security benefits during the Great Recession: $0

Number of recessions Social Security has weathered without failing to pay benefits: 13

Number of times Social Security has failed to pay an earned benefit: 0

In response to the Trustee’s report Rep. Becerra, the highest ranking Democrat on the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Social Security, said: “Today’s report confirms what we already know: Social Security will weather the storm once again. You simply can’t buy the kind of retirement, disability and life-insurance protection on the private market that Social Security provides.”

The Becerra Bulletin, May 2011
Click to expand...

Number of times they raised the payroll deduction rate = ?
Number of times they raised the age of retirement = ?
Number of times they adjusted benefits = ?

Answer these questions. Government never has to take a loss because they simply raise taxes. You ****ing report is bogus.
 
How did I know the doom and gloom We dont want to pay any taxs club would dispute it in its entirety...lol...well the good news is everyone I speak to in florida believes the teaparty whining has gone to far.
 
Catawba said:
I didn't say your president. When quotes are provided in text followed by a link that means the text is quoted from that source. Hope that helps in the future!

If you have evidence that refutes SS funds were used to help offset the cost of the Iraq war and the Bush tax cuts, as Bush's own quotes show, please present it.
Click to expand...

The money still being in the trust fund does not count as as a fact??
 
Catawba said:
Yes, it has been going on for years. That doesn't justify continuing to rob from it. In 2000, voters had the chance to choose between a presidential candidate that proposed locking the SS fund from general fund use. The voters instead chose the guy they would rather have a beer with. The rest, as they say is history:

"Looted from the Inside Out

Whatever Happened to the Social Security Trust Fund?


"Your president, in his first State of the Union address (February 27, 2001), promised to make sure that no Social Security money was used for any other program. He specifically said: "To make sure the retirement savings of America's seniors are not diverted in any other program, my budget protects all $2.6 trillion of the Social Security surplus for Social Security, and for Social Security alone."

Now that is what he said: "for Social Security alone." But it seems like your president left something out.

And with that said and done, it seems like the same Bush went on to do something entirely different. No surprise there.

What Bush did in his first fours years was he looted the sacred Social Security trust fund. Down to the last nickel and dime.

In the Bush-Cheney first term the White House mob gleefully looted the entire $509 billion Social Security surplus. No surprise there again. And, at this very moment, Bush has his fingers in the same trust fund to the tune of $400 million or so a day.

But you can look at it this way. It is for a good cause.

Somebody has to pay for those tax cuts and the war in Iraq.

And the Social Security trust fund does come in handy in these cases. Furthermore, and to rub it in, the shameless Bush now admits it. This is what he has been saying lately in his Social Security scare speeches. "The money-payroll taxes going into Social Security are spent. They're spent on benefits and they're spent on government programs. There is no trust."

Now that's what he says. "There is no trust."

"Every dime that goes in from payroll taxes is spent. It's spent on retirees, and if there's excess, it's spent on government programs. The only thing that Social Security has is a pile of IOUs from one part of the government to the next."

Those words were spoken just a few days ago. Where's the outrage? Where's Alan Greenspan on this subject.

In other words - why isn't anybody asking what happened to the trust fund that Bush said he would protect way back in 2001?"
Jackie Corr: Whatever Happened to the Social Security Trust Fund?
Click to expand...

So... your 'proof' that Bush looted SS to pay for Iraq... is the word of one guy? Typical.
 
washunut said:
The talk about taking social security funds to maintain tax cuts for the rich. Social security was dropped into the "unified" budget decades ago. Now I do consider it a theft, but the reason in my view was to sugarcoat deficits, not for any specific tax cut.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you have heard something that i haven't then.This is from the Social Security FAQ.


<Far from being "worthless IOUs," the investments held by the trust funds are backed by the full faith and credit of the U. S. Government. The government has always repaid Social Security, with interest. The special-issue securities are, therefore, just as safe as U.S. Savings Bonds or other financial instruments of the Federal government.>

The last I heard U.S. Savings Bonds are pretty secure which "special issue" securities are comparable to.


Trust Fund FAQs
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom