10 ms·

While I agree that it's hard to have a real discussion about SS or Medicare without people sensationalizing one side or the other, the math is very real and the

While I agree that it's hard to have a real discussion about SS or Medicare without people sensationalizing one side or the other, the math is very real and the consequences are already here. SS is bleeding out right now with a negative annual run, and will get worse every year for at least the next 20 years. There is no SS trust that we can tap into. It's all going to come from Fed monetization. By the time this decade is out, SS will be running a negative $100+ billion per year cash flow. We were supposed to have eight more years of surplus than what we did, that didn't happen. http://www.factcheck.org/2011/02/democrats-deny-social-securitys-red-ink/ http://www.factcheck.org/2011/02/democrats-deny-social-secur... It's also worth pointing out that we're taking on over $5 trillion per year in new liabilities that we don't have the cash flow to pay for, when you count debt + entitlements that have to eventually be paid for. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-05-18/federal-deficit-accounting/55179748/1 http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-05-18/fed...

muzz 14y ago
The Social Security trust fund is $2.7 Trillion http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/assets.html http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/assets.html Changes to the program-- much smaller than the 1983 reform-- can insure solvency for a long, long time to come.
- jandrewrogers 14y ago
  Those are "assets" in an accounting sense but they do not represent capital held by the government. Those assets can only be redeemed by taxing citizens. Social Security is only "solvent" in a conventional sense if those assets can be redeemed without taxation. Since Social Security is a pay-as-you-go system, the cash-flow definition of "solvency" is appropriate.
  - me2i81 14y ago
    That's the case for all government securities, marketable or non-marketable.
- Aloisius 14y ago
  The problem is that other government programs have borrowed from the trust fund as if it was a piggy bank. Social Security would have been perfectly solvent had both sides not treated the trust fund as a slush fund. This is not social security's fault. In fact, if you eliminate social security, you will almost certainly have to raise taxes to create a new piggy bank for all the programs that are currently run off the social security one.
- adventureful 14y ago
  That trust fund doesn't exist, there is no actual money in it, as noted by the other comments. The Federal Reserve ultimately will lend the US Government that money (the Fed is now buying 95% of all long term US govt debt), now with interest on the debt, instead of there being an actual trust there earning interest. So any math that relies on that trust existing, is Enron accounting.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - muzz 14y ago
    Wow. Hurry-- you'd better tell that to "the Chinese" and anyone else who's been buying our debt. And also, that must mean that we can all stop worrying about that $15T govt debt, since it's all "Enron accounting". Whew! Problem solved!

muzz 14y ago

The Social Security trust fund is $2.7 Trillion http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/assets.html http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/assets.html Changes to the program-- much smaller than the 1983 reform-- can insure solvency for a long, long time to come.

jandrewrogers 14y ago
Those are "assets" in an accounting sense but they do not represent capital held by the government. Those assets can only be redeemed by taxing citizens. Social Security is only "solvent" in a conventional sense if those assets can be redeemed without taxation. Since Social Security is a pay-as-you-go system, the cash-flow definition of "solvency" is appropriate.
- me2i81 14y ago
  That's the case for all government securities, marketable or non-marketable.
Aloisius 14y ago
The problem is that other government programs have borrowed from the trust fund as if it was a piggy bank. Social Security would have been perfectly solvent had both sides not treated the trust fund as a slush fund. This is not social security's fault. In fact, if you eliminate social security, you will almost certainly have to raise taxes to create a new piggy bank for all the programs that are currently run off the social security one.
adventureful 14y ago
That trust fund doesn't exist, there is no actual money in it, as noted by the other comments. The Federal Reserve ultimately will lend the US Government that money (the Fed is now buying 95% of all long term US govt debt), now with interest on the debt, instead of there being an actual trust there earning interest. So any math that relies on that trust existing, is Enron accounting.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- muzz 14y ago
  Wow. Hurry-- you'd better tell that to "the Chinese" and anyone else who's been buying our debt. And also, that must mean that we can all stop worrying about that $15T govt debt, since it's all "Enron accounting". Whew! Problem solved!