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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Broken_Clock who wrote (920932)	2/12/2016 9:52:21 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Recommended By J_F_Shepard Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577060

Its negative because the formula for payout is negative. The funds were not stolen, they where, as required by the law, put in treasury securities. Unfortunately that means the government let money to itself. Sure the SSA and the Treasury are two different parts of the federal government, but there really is only one federal government of the US. If you lend money to yourself, you can either consider it neither a debt nor an asset, or you can consider it both, but they are equal and opposite and cancel each other out. Either way you have no net asset in the system as a whole. If non Social Security Spending had been much lower you still wouldn't have had a real store of wealth for the feds in the SS trust fund.