SS dies in 2017??!

[Ddrak]

link

Somewhat scary read. The upshot is that the SS fund is politically completely worthless because it's all in Treasury securities which can't be paid out without the government taking a hit somewhere else, so the crisis comes when the expenditure exceeds income, not when the fund is used up.

Dd

[Partha]

We can still buy time by investing current cash surpluses in non-Treasury assets.

Translation: No, really, give US the money! We'll make it grow responsibly, REALLY!

[Croinc]

If you become a citizen of anothewr country, what the hell happens to your SS monies you supposedly earned? Does it go out the shitter? Just wondering.

[Partha]

It stays in the pool, IIRC.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

Does it really matter? I mean, by the Mayan calendar we won't even be around for that...

[Ddrak]

If you become a citizen of anothewr country, what the hell happens to your SS monies you supposedly earned? Does it go out the shitter? Just wondering.

If you become a resident of another country for tax purposes (nothing to do with being a citizen) then you are not eligible for SS benefits. Hope you guys enjoy all the money I paid into your system for you.

Dd

[Croinc]

I dont plan on going anywhere....I was just wondering. Besides, I live in Louisiana, where they take all they can and then sell the rest.

We were just named the second most dangerous state behind Nevada...GO GO New Orleans!!!!

P.S. Louisiana really aint that bad..except for the good ole N.O. (rathole scumbags)

[Flunkie]

link

Somewhat scary read. The upshot is that the SS fund is politically completely worthless because it's all in Treasury securities which can't be paid out without the government taking a hit somewhere else, so the crisis comes when the expenditure exceeds income, not when the fund is used up.

Dd

I've been telling people about this for years although I didn't know the date to worry about was 2017. When I was in High School, one of my instructors was friends with someone that worked for the Social Security department. He came in and told us how the system worked and that the big fear was the baby boomer retirement. At that point in time I recall him being worried about 2025 or so, not 2017 or 2040. But this was back in the 80's so things were probably quite a bit out of focus back then. Anyway, he described how the government basically barrows money from the trust fund to suppliment the budget every year. They projected back in the 80's that the Social Security system was unsustainable and 20 years later the government hasn't done anything to fix the problem. I don't know if they just don't care or think that the problem might just go away.

This guy's idea about how we can buy time will never happen, and my guess is that 1 or 2 years before things go negitave in the Federal Budget the government will come up with a "New Deal" that most people aren't going to be happy about. Some people will get a paltry one time payout, the rest will get diminishing returns over time.

[Klast Brell]

/snark
could have fixed social security with the money we spent in Iraq.
/snark

I seriously doubt there will ever be a problem with social security. when tens of millions of baby boomers retire and start drawing a government check, they will still vote. And they will be a huge powerful voting block. They will vote to have their checks keep coming no matter what. If the money has to be taken from somewhere else they will vote for it. If the taxes on other people have to be raised they will vote for it. If the military budget has to be gutted they will vote for it.

[Kulaf]

But wait.....what about "we can't let the children of tomorrow pay for our ride" mantra?

[Klast Brell]

That works too. The boomers have that option as well. That is if the credit rating of the US treasury is any good any more 10 or 20 years from now. We are already in debt up to our assholes.

[Croinc]

Makes you wonder which FDR puppet came up with an ingenious idea to have a government program that would always insure votes for a party. /snicker

[Flunkie]

/snark
could have fixed social security with the money we spent in Iraq.
/snark

I seriously doubt there will ever be a problem with social security. when tens of millions of baby boomers retire and start drawing a government check, they will still vote. And they will be a huge powerful voting block. They will vote to have their checks keep coming no matter what. If the money has to be taken from somewhere else they will vote for it. If the taxes on other people have to be raised they will vote for it. If the military budget has to be gutted they will vote for it.

I wouldn't mind cutting down the budgets of the military and the Treasury department, but how far are you willing to go? By 2040 you're talking about diverting 500 Billion Dollars. Even with inflation, that's going to be a lot of the budget.

[Partha]

How much would be made right now by eliminating the caps?

[Kulaf]

How much could be saved by needs based testing before payout?

Why is the first reaction of Dems to collect more taxes rather than finding ways to save?

[Harlowe]

Kulaf - honestly, that shit doesn't even make sense anymore. The Republican Party has NOOOOOOO problem spending money we don't have without cutting shit. So really, that tune is fucking way past it's prime now.

[Embar Angylwrath]

A means test isn't really cutting the tax, its restricting a benefit (which in this case would impact the more wealthy). Kulaf's point is, I think, that we should look at the purpose of SS, and adjust policy to meet the purpose, and avoid Comrade Partha's knee jerk reaction that raising taxes solves all problems.

If the purpose of SS is to provide supplemental income so that people can make ends meet, then maybe we don't send checks to people who don't need it to make ends meet, and maybe adjust the strain on the fund that way.

What would have really worked, though, is to make that SS fund off-limits for anything other than SS payments, until a reserve limit had been reached. No borrowing against it, no robbing additional funds. But Congress can't resist the temptation to spend. And please, ask yourself.. what does Congress allocate money towards?

Additional government programs, or expansion of government programs (with the odd war thrown in occassionally). If the governement didn't feel the compulsion to institute a new program for every issue, we wouldn't be where we are today.

And THAT.. is the fault of the voters. Most of us WANT the government to solve our problems. We WANT assurances of an easy life, free of hardship. And any politician who preaches a pain-free life to masses gets elected. Its our own damn fault for being self-centered, entitlement whores.

[Rsak]

The problem thought is that Social Security is not a tax.. its a deferment of your income so that you have a safety blanket when bad things happen years from now. If you take the wealthy out of the recipients then it is a blatant income redistribution scheme which is not likely to be supported by any kind of majority.

[Klast Brell]

How much could be saved by needs based testing before payout?

That has been proposed by democrats before. Guess who opposed it?

[Partha]

Don't confuse them with facts, Klast.