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 : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (13256)	3/21/2012 1:27:51 PM
From: Steve Lokness	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

<<<<<No it doesn't. SS spends more than the SS tax brings in. That's a deficit not a surplus>>>> But by your argument, what the hell difference does that make? You said the surplus meant for just this time wasn't a surplus at all - so if the surplus is not a surplus how can the deficit be a deficit? <<<<<It should probably have not been started in its present form ........you can't reasonably just end it.>>>> Well what should have been is pretty meaningless isn't it? We shouldn't have gone into Iraq either - but you can't bring all those lives back. Allllllll those soldiers who will get payments from the government for many decades - can't really change that either can we? So if you don't want to end it and by your silly argument you can't prepare for demographics - what the hell is the solution? Demographics isn't anyones fault - it just is. <<<<<I didn't say it should be blended,>>>> Huh? But if you say it ALREADY has been blended! <<<<<Every dollar of spending drives the deficit by one dollar >>> EXCEPT SS. It has been self funded - and funding the war with it's surplus - until this year.

To: TimF who wrote (13256)	3/21/2012 1:52:24 PM
From: Little Joe	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

I have watched with interest this back and forth between Steve and Tim and what strikes me is the complexity of the whole subject. A complexity which is introduced by Politicians who are hell bent on confusing us. at any rate I ran accross this wikipedia article which may or may not have been posted and I thought the cited language set out the realities of the situation. en.wikipedia.org The following two scenarios help illustrate the concept. Depending on which scenario is right, Social Security is either an accounting fiction or represents real economic savings. Scenario 1 (Trust Fund is an accounting fiction): 1984: $1 payroll tax collected in 1984 1984: $1 lent by Social Security to the federal government 1984: Federal government increases spending on government programs by $1 2020: Federal government raises taxes by $1 plus interest to repay the loan to Social Security 2020: $1 plus interest transferred from Federal Government to Social Security. Scenario 2 (Trust Fund represents real economic savings): 1984: $1 payroll tax collected in 1984 1984: $1 lent by Social Security to the federal government 1984: Federal government borrows $1 less from other sources and increases spending on government programs by $0 2020: Federal government raises taxes by $0, but may borrow from other sources, to repay the loan to Social Security. Any tax increases that occur in 2020 would have happened anyway without Social Security. 2020: $1 plus interest transferred from Federal Government to Social Security. lj