Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: TimF who wrote (261888)	4/18/2008 7:26:58 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (2) of 281500

It's a reasonable point. An analogy might be a family's budget. The mortgage or rent can be removed from the total available income and the percentage that goes into, say, eating out is analyzed in relationship to the remaining income. Evaluating an expenditure like eating out looks different when evaluating it as a percentage of the total budget versus the budget minus the mortgage payment. SS really isn't available as part of the budget. It's not like (ok, it shouldn't be like) the government can say that we have all this excess money because we've decided only to pay out 50% of SS benefits this year. They can, however, say that there is money for munitions because they aren't going to pay for infrastructure this year. The problem isn't that there is a SS liability, the problem is the US government keeps dipping into the SS pot and then pundits keep claiming that SS will be bankrupt. The big pot of SS hides the actual size of expenditures on things like the military. Their point is that, when budget decisions are made, the military gets a huge portion of that disposable expenditure.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next