• 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!

Social Security Trust Fund Real Or Not

JoeTheEconomist said:
Here is where you took a detour from the original point.
Click to expand...

that is because they were wrong.
hence why I provided the links to support what I was saying.

which it seems that you ignored.
 
ludin said:
that is because they were wrong.
hence why I provided the links to support what I was saying.

which it seems that you ignored.
Click to expand...

You changed the subject, and claimed he was wrong. The original point was about low-wage workers, and you changed the subject to median income. This is like me saying the Bruins lost to the Caps on Sunday, and you saying "You are wrong. The 49ers beat Rams, and then talking about how many sacks the 49ers had."

I am not ignoring what you said, I am commenting upon the original point.
 
ludin said:
your numbers are wrong.

the average median income in AZ is about 46k dollars a year.
not 9-10.

in 2014 it was 50k.

so evidently there are plenty of people making money in the state of AZ.
the SS tax rate is 12.4%. 6.2% split between employee and employer.
medicare is 2.9%.

list of tax rates for SS

https://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/taxRates.html

so unless these people retired in 1956 they were paying more than 2%.
Click to expand...

The Average job does not include the incomes for executives or professional people. It only includes
incomes for AVERAGE people.

Hiding the SS tax, makes no difference. It comes out of the workers pay, ie money that should go directly to
the worker.

the people that are retired now, and WORKED in 1956, yes they payed tiny SS taxes ...............FACT.
 
ernst barkmann said:
then why are you not blaming the u.s. federal government for the mess they made according to you....because old people do not make the law.
Click to expand...

Yes old people make the law, they have the time to vote. They did not have working lives "competing " with
slaves, and own everything in USA. They did not have to buy fraudulent homes for 2 lifetime incomes. 3rd rail.......SS.
 
JoeTheEconomist said:
I have an article out this AM, and as always I welcome feedback. It pulls apart the criticism of the Trust Fund. The critics usually pull out at least three arguments - and I am looking for more. The longer piece is on MoneyTips and is based on the recent announcement that the Govt repaid not only interest to the Trust Fund but (for the first time in 30 years) principal as well.

1.Critics claim that the government owes the money to itself. Technically this isn't true. The government has no liability for Social Security benefits. The government is a fiduciary that collects revenue and distributes cash. If the amount collected is insufficient to cover expenses, the expenses are reduced to the level of revenue. The government does not owe Social Security benefits.

2.Critics claim that the bonds aren't marketable. This is true – and pointless. The government securities held in the Social Security Trust Fund contain a put option, which enables the fiduciary to request immediate payment for the bonds. If the government were unable to honor this commitment, the bonds would not be marketable anyway.

3.Critics claim vehemently that the bonds do not represent economic assets. For example, critics point to the observation made by the White House's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that these bonds "are claims on the Treasury, that, when redeemed, will have to be financed by raising taxes, borrowing from the public, or reducing benefits or other expenditures." No kidding. Yes if you borrow money, you have to repay it. What is the drama in that?

Whether the Trust Fund is held in government securities, IOUs, or gold bullion will not change the math of the system. You can't pay a dollar of promises with a dime.
Click to expand...


I don't really understand your point with all of this.. what angle is it you are pursuing?
Government does have an obligation ( the social security trustees refer to what is owed that it doesn't have money for as Unfunded Obligation. Most people refer to it as Unfunded Liability essentially the same thing )
However as you said if the money isn't there well then they cant pay it.
I don't know why people bother with the bond whining. all that matters is are they collecting enough money to pay out near future obligations... I think there has been some corrections but reform is needed still to ensure solvency.
That's really all I care about.
 
274ina said:
Yes old people make the law, they have the time to vote. They did not have working lives "competing " with
slaves, and own everything in USA. They did not have to buy fraudulent homes for 2 lifetime incomes. 3rd rail.......SS.
Click to expand...

sorry wrong, officials of government make law.
 
JoeTheEconomist said:
Your theory is right, whether your adjective is or not is a readers decision.

The SS tax rate is 12.4%. I think you are talking about what it would take if SS were going to be kept solvent. SSA says that it is (15.08% up to CBO which says 16.8%). The 2% tax rate was kept low between 1937 and 1950. Yes today's workers contributed significantly less. Keep in mind that SS taxes were raised to 12.4% in 1990, so someone retiring today paid the full amount for more than half of their working career.
Click to expand...

Well I see SS has dropped...........

"making the total Social Security tax 12.4% of wages and the total Medicare tax 2.9%. (Self-employed people are responsible for the entire FICA percentage of 15.3% (= 12.4% + 2.9%), since they are in a sense both the employer and the employed; however, see the section on self-employed people for more details.)"

but 15.3 % total tax is close to 17%, depends on the Fed unemployment and other taxes they add in too.

The hidden "employer" portion of the SS is just a way to fake out, and lie to the employee how much they are taxed, only the self employed person "sees" the true tax on wages.

So 17% is about right.
 
274ina said:
The Average job does not include the incomes for executives or professional people. It only includes
incomes for AVERAGE people.

Hiding the SS tax, makes no difference. It comes out of the workers pay, ie money that should go directly to
the worker.

the people that are retired now, and WORKED in 1956, yes they payed tiny SS taxes ...............FACT.
Click to expand...

the people that retired in 1956 are 110 years old now? are you being serious or just your typical appeal to emotion?

the people that are collecting SS now might have been born in the 1940 or 50 but they didn't retire.
 
SocialD said:
I don't really understand your point with all of this.. what angle is it you are pursuing?
Government does have an obligation ( the social security trustees refer to what is owed that it doesn't have money for as Unfunded Obligation. Most people refer to it as Unfunded Liability essentially the same thing )
However as you said if the money isn't there well then they cant pay it.
I don't know why people bother with the bond whining. all that matters is are they collecting enough money to pay out near future obligations... I think there has been some corrections but reform is needed still to ensure solvency.
That's really all I care about.
Click to expand...

The article is a reference point for me. I am able to point people to an article rather than replying with the same information to follow the tortured logic. There are times that I come to the board, and get some insight or a better quote.
 
JoeTheEconomist said:
The article is a reference point for me. I am able to point people to an article rather than replying with the same information to follow the tortured logic. There are times that I come to the board, and get some insight or a better quote.
Click to expand...

fair enough.
 
274ina said:
Well I see SS has dropped...........

"making the total Social Security tax 12.4% of wages and the total Medicare tax 2.9%. (Self-employed people are responsible for the entire FICA percentage of 15.3% (= 12.4% + 2.9%), since they are in a sense both the employer and the employed; however, see the section on self-employed people for more details.)"

but 15.3 % total tax is close to 17%, depends on the Fed unemployment and other taxes they add in too.

The hidden "employer" portion of the SS is just a way to fake out, and lie to the employee how much they are taxed, only the self employed person "sees" the true tax on wages.

So 17% is about right.
Click to expand...

The 17% maybe total taxes, but only 12.4% is actually related to SS. You really can't blame SS for the cost of your unemployment insurance. You are correct that the employer portion is generally believed to be paid for by the employee in the form of lower wages. It is not extortion. 50% of the voting public is 48 and younger. So we vote for all of this stuff. You need to organize a group or join one. DC doesn't listen to numbers. They listen to organization. Push you issue with numbersusa.
 
274ina said:
Well I see SS has dropped...........

"making the total Social Security tax 12.4% of wages and the total Medicare tax 2.9%. (Self-employed people are responsible for the entire FICA percentage of 15.3% (= 12.4% + 2.9%), since they are in a sense both the employer and the employed; however, see the section on self-employed people for more details.)"

but 15.3 % total tax is close to 17%, depends on the Fed unemployment and other taxes they add in too.

The hidden "employer" portion of the SS is just a way to fake out, and lie to the employee how much they are taxed, only the self employed person "sees" the true tax on wages.

So 17% is about right.
Click to expand...

The 17% maybe total taxes, but only 12.4% is actually related to SS. You really can't blame SS for the cost of your unemployment insurance. You are correct that the employer portion is generally believed to be paid for by the employee in the form of lower wages. It is not extortion. 50% of the voting public is 48 and younger. So we vote for all of this stuff. You need to organize a group or join one. DC doesn't listen to numbers. They listen to organization. Push you issue with numbersusa.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom