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.

Pastimes : BS Bar & Grill - Open 24 Hours A Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: haqihana who wrote (6806)	11/22/2006 6:35:43 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6901

I agree. I don't think the "social security trust fund" made up of these bonds is very meaningful. When it stops expanding and gets "paid back" it means that general tax revenue will go to pay for social security as the "loan" gets paid back. But the net effect is just the same if the government treated all income as income and all spending as spending, and never bothered with the idea of bonds/loans from one part of the government to the other. Well one potential effect is that when the "trust fund" officially runs out, the law calls for social security spending to be automatically cut back. It doesn't call for income tax revenue to continue to go to the program. But its likely that income tax revenue will continue to go to the program, if there is a political demand for it to happen. You just need congress to act and modify the law. If you didn't have the whole "trust fund" set up, then the cuts would have to be enacted by congress. If you do have the current set up, then congress has to affirmatively make a change to avoid cuts. But if the recipients demand there money congress is likely to call along either way, unless the cost gets so high as to be impossible to maintain.