Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Social Security Does Not Contribute One Nickel to the Deficit! (Original Post) grahamhgreen Apr 2013 OP
who would promote/endorse republican party values and principles? nt msongs Apr 2013 #1
Yeah but, Obama did it so it's all cool. neverforget Apr 2013 #2
He KNOWS it can't pass, see? That's why he's pushing it. Marr Apr 2013 #3
Crazy world. Gregorian Apr 2013 #4
We all know that, but it seems that Obama is not aware of it. n/t RebelOne Apr 2013 #5
We have to "offer them something" and "look forward", blah blah blah just1voice Apr 2013 #6
And why has Obama consistantly refered to Social Security as an entitlement? avaistheone1 Apr 2013 #7
Because the greedy wealthy & corprats don't want to... ProfessionalLeftist Apr 2013 #8
Yup. Absolutely right, grahamhgreen. Demoiselle Apr 2013 #9
Uhhh, because the Republicans want it in. Duh! nm rhett o rick Apr 2013 #10
Prexactly indepat Apr 2013 #11
But it contributes to something more important econoclast Apr 2013 #12
 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
3. He KNOWS it can't pass, see? That's why he's pushing it.
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 03:35 PM
Apr 2013

You know, the same way he pushed for Single Payer.

/sarcasm

Odd, isn't it? If he'd pushed for Single Payer and been blocked, that would've actually made the people doing the blocking look bad. This? This is a fucking joke.

 

just1voice

(1,362 posts)
6. We have to "offer them something" and "look forward", blah blah blah
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 04:03 PM
Apr 2013

Why convict torturer camp creators, criminal bankers and propagandists when we can steal money from retirees? That's the illogical nature of the propaganda that we the people are just supposed to believe when the elite speak.

ProfessionalLeftist

(4,982 posts)
8. Because the greedy wealthy & corprats don't want to...
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 04:10 PM
Apr 2013

...pay their fair share of taxes and Wall St. wants ALL the SS money for themselves.

Propagandizing it as part of the debt/deficit (even tho it doesn't contribute a damn nickel to it) is just a conveeeenient way for them to destroy the program and get their hands on the money (in the case of Wall St.) and to balance the budget off the backs of the elderly and poor (in the case of the wealthy/corprat pigs who don't want to pay their fair share of taxes).

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Portal:Fix_the_Debt

EDIT: And Barack Obama is HELPING them do it. Look at the link above. Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson are the FIRST TWO names on their little roster/board of bastards, behind Pete Peterson. OBAMA appointed these schmucks KNOWING their background and M.O.



econoclast

(543 posts)
12. But it contributes to something more important
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 05:49 PM
Apr 2013

SS tax receipts (box 4 on the W2) are used immediately by SS to pay current benefits. A surplus exists if SS collects more in current taxes than it pays out in current benefits.

SS is "off budget". The budget deficit does NOT include SS in any way. ( except perhaps the interest paid to the SSTF on their holdings of US Treasury securities ... I have to check that out ).

But ...... It impacts something much more important.

If the budget deficit is 500 billion dollars and SS has a 100 billion surplus, that does NOT reduce the deficit to 400 billion dollars. What it DOES do is reduce the amount of the 500 billion deficit that the government has to borrow IN THE MARKET.

The budget deficit may be 500 billion, but they only have to raise 400billion in the market. The rest comes from selling 100 billion to the SSTF. This is how it was designed. Really. You can go to the SS website and search for the official historian. They have one. There you can see for yourself that it has been like this sinse the 30's

Nobody "raided" anything. The program is working as designed by FDR

FYI. For a period starting in the LBJ administration and ending in the Reagan administration SS WAS "on budget" and SS surpluses WERE put "on the budget" and any SS surplus did reduce the reported budget deficit. They called it the "unified budget". (There is a school of thought that thinks LBJ did this to hide the true cost of the Vietnam war.) But that stopped in the 1980's and SS was again put "off budget".

What about when SS itself has a deficit? IE SS takes in less in taxes than it pays out in benefits. I think this is the first year that will happen. Then, the process works in reverse.

Suppose the government budget deficit is 300 billion dollars. But suppose further that SS has to pay out 80 billion in benefits in excess of what they collected in taxes. Where do they get the money? They redeem 80 billion of their treasuries. Ok. Where does the treasury get the money from if the government already has a deficit. They borrow it in the market. So, the budget deficit is 300 billion but they have to go to the market to raise 380 billion dollars in the market..... 300 to finance that year's budget deficit and 80 to pay off SS

So, SS doesn't impact the budget deficit, but does impact how much the government has to raise in the market.

To turn the 2.6 trillion in assets in the SSTF into the cash needed to make future payments, those assets have to be redeemed. Which means that, since the government seems likely to continue running budget deficits, to get that cash the government will have to borrow an additional 2.6 trillion dollars in the market. That is an additional 2.6 trillion on top of what they need to borrow to cover the annual budget deficits.

Seeing as how we already owe 14, 15 (is it 16 yet?) trillion dollars, the question is this .....is there a limit to how much the US can borrow at reasonable interest rates? Is the well bottomless? And if it is not, What will interest rates have to be to attract enough cash to meet our future borrowing needs?

In a sense, the current crisis atmosphere around the world plays into our hands as it increases demand for Safe assets. And nothing is safer than US treasuries. So the "flight to quality" helps keep rates down and US borrowing costs relatively low. But the crisis atmosphere abroad won't last forever. What happens to demand for US Treasuries when the Euro is "safe" again?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Social Security Does Not ...