Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : The Castle -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (148)	11/8/2002 11:14:57 AM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7936

Yes, it does have a future liability. However, there is no very good reason to put it in the debt service column, as opposed to a multi- year appropriation. Additionally, it is subject to a kind of forgiveness (such as raising the retirement age) that the ordinary debt is not. If this is the case why do we require private pension plans to accrue liabilities an annual basis? Unfunded pension liabilities are specifically prohibited in private plans. As CPAs, we have determined that financial statements that don't accrue unfunded liabilities are not a "fair presentation" of the pension's financial position. Why is it anymore "fair" for the Social Security Administration to omit these liabilities? I might add, the chronic suggestion that SSA operates at a "surplus" is part of what makes it politically untouchable -- in effect, this terminology obfuscates the truth and makes it impossible for Congress to do anything about it.