Frank -
washingtonpost.com
"... The Clinton administration's fiscal year 2000 budget indicated a similar perspective:
"These balances are available to finance future benefit payments and other Trust Fund expenditures -- but only in a bookkeeping sense. . . . They do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits. Instead, they 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. The existence of large Trust Fund balances, therefore, does not, by itself, have any impact on the Government's ability to pay benefits." ..."
You are saying it's underfunded now, underfunded when it started. That the govt gave it an inadequate grubbstake when it did start. And, if SS is going to pay benefits the money has to come from another place than the Trust Fund,,,,
Still, there are securites in there and they have some kind of face value and represent some kind of obligation, don't they? ...
No, as the above shows, it is not now, and has never been funded at all. At best, it could be called a kind of obligation, but as such it would simply duplicate the obligations already required by law for SS payouts. The key point is that it is not effective in any way whatsoever in helping to fund the meeting of those obligations.
Regards, Don
washingtonpost.com
ncpa.org |
