SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Neocon who wrote (17077)11/21/2002 2:34:10 PM
From: Steve Dietrich  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 93284
 
As i told you, the President's Commission claims SS is in trouble starting 2016 (btw i was wrong in an earlier post where i said that date was 2006.). You can read it here:

csss.gov

As you can see they contradict SS Trustees who say SS is good until 2041. And it hardly runs dry in 2041, it would just be slightly under funded. They could still pay out over 90% of benefits indefinitely.

This from the commission's report:

Social Security Cash Deficits are Projected to Begin in 2016. Social Security’s primary source of revenue is a 12.4 percent payroll tax applied to the covered earnings of wage earners. Social Security also receives money from the taxation of Social Security benefits. In 2016, under current projections, Social Security will collect less in tax revenues than it has committed to pay out in benefits. When that happens, the Social Security Trust Fund will still show a positive balance. But the Trust Fund holds not accumulated reserves of wealth but debt obligations that future taxpayers will be asked to redeem. Whether the balance in the Trust Fund is $5 trillion or zero, to make the current system sustainable the nation faces identical choices: either raise taxes, reduce benefits, decrease other government spending, or increase borrowing from the public. When Social Security deficits begin in 2016, annual cash shortfalls will be relatively small and could possibly be financed through surpluses in the rest of the government’s budget. But these annual cash deficits will eventually grow very large: $194 billion in 2025, $271 billion in 2030, and $318 billion in 2035 (in 2001 dollars).4 The cost of paying benefits will rise from 10.5 percent of taxable earnings today to almost 18 percent in 2035. The effects of these pressures on beneficiaries and taxpayers will be shown on subsequent pages.

The real scandal of this argument is that SS holds only about 1/6 of our federal debt. How is it that redeeming that 1/6 will wreak some kind of havoc on our fiscal health but the other 5/6 goes unmentioned? Won't we have to "raise taxes, reduce benefits, decrease other government spending, or increase borrowing from the public" to honor the other 5/6 of our debt when it is redeemed?

Why cut SS to honor federal debt? That's a scandal.

It's a dishonest argument. And by arguing for restructuring SS to avoid having to pay back that money the treasury owes to SS (because paying it back will stress out our system) is in fact an argument to appropriate that money.

And as i've pointed out before: they're using the current surpluses in SS to finance their income and estate tax cuts while arguing that honoring the debt owed to SS will be too onerous, so changes must be made now.

Steve