LA TIMES: Paul Ryan rehashes an old Social Security LIE--at your expense

[kpete]

Paul Ryan rehashes an old Social Security lie--at your expense

his misunderstandings--heck, let's go ahead and call them misrepresentations--are aimed at taking your money.

What's at issue is a passage in the budget resolution Ryan released today, the fourth annual version of his "Path to Prosperity" budget. Like the others, this budget calls for large cuts in government programs for the poor, in order to preserve tax breaks for the rich and finance lavish defense spending.

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-paul-ryan-rehashes-20140401,0,6898624.story#ixzz2xgvajxIM

Here's the passage in question, from page 66 of his plan.

"Any value in the balances in the Social Security Trust Fund is derived from dubious government accounting. The trust fund is not a real savings account. From 1983 to 2010, it collected more Social Security taxes than it paid out in Social Security benefits. But the government borrowed all of these surpluses and spent them on other government programs unrelated to Social Security. The Trust Fund holds Treasury securities, but the ability to redeem these securities is completely dependent on the Treasury’s ability to raise money through taxes or borrowing."

....................

But if Ryan has his way, yes, the money will be stolen. It's up to you and me to make sure that doesn't happen. ... So, to put all these pieces together, there's no "dubious government accounting" involved here--the dubious accounting is all Ryan's. The trust fund is indeed a real savings account, involving deposits and interest. Yes, the government borrowed the money, and it has paid interest on it every year (duly recorded and published, down to the last dollar, in the annual reports of the Social Security trustees). ...

The most important factor is the one that people like Ryan want you to forget: The money in the Social Security trust fund came directly or indirectly from the payroll taxes paid by millions of American workers--100% of it. It was paid by workers in the trust that the government would pay it back. Paul Ryan is hinting, pretty strongly, that he doesn't want to pay it back.

MORE:
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-paul-ryan-rehashes-20140401,0,6898624.story#axzz2xguKz5W4

[Timez Squarez]

1. Time to throw out Ryan

I'm sure his Janesville district is itching to throw him out permanently, immediately arrested (after losing his Congressional priveleges) and thrown into prison for the rest of his life for treason against United States of America.

[Samantha]

2. This is not new news and I do believe it is worse than that

I have written several times here that the reason the Republicans want to privatize Social Security (or as Bernanke mentioned once, it can be repealed) is due to the fact the government "borrowed" the money and cannot afford to repay its debt. In order to withdraw funds from the Trust Fund account, a like amount of securities must be sold to replace the marker for those funds. In this economy, that is extremely difficult to do. Restructuring seniors retirement could be done in such a way that debt evaporates, thus cutting the overall debt Uncle Sam owes by that amount.

Additionally, the Government has borrowed from Federal Employees retirement funds. There is a law which enables them to do this. Of course, statements have been made this money will be repaid, but more cries that the Federal employees pensions are too high drown that out. Cutting the pensions would over time alleviate part of that debt.

Also, we know the U.S. Post Office has accumulated 75 years worth of funds to pay its employees benefits. I have been looking from time to time in which pocket those funds are being held to determine the total. I cannot find the pocket. It stands to reason that if Uncle would borrow against employees' pensions and Social Security, it probably could not resist dipping into the benefit funds the Post Office has accrued. Privatize that organization and eliminate that debt.

We do know in various states, governors neglected to make mandatory deposits into their employees' pension funds. When the time has come the money is needed, we hear governors saying employees' pensions are too high.

If the Government cannot afford to repay its debt, it obviously it is not going to say that, it can just "erase" a lot of it.

There is a pattern to all this and it is not pretty.

Sam

[okaawhatever]

3. Thanks for that info Samantha. Please post any time you find new info. nt

[Enthusiast]

5. Thank you, Samantha.

They borrowed money to pay for tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans and to pay for wars of choice. They got away with it because they COMPLETELY control the media.

[Samantha]

7. So true

It is amazing the scope of important matters completely passed over by the MSM.

Sam

[Cha]

4. HECK.. Let's just call them what they are.. LIES from the cheezebrain.. and what did the gop offer?.

Martin Bashir ✔ @MartinBashir
Follow
As Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman said, this is the best they've got: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/02/us/politics/paul-ryan-budget.html?hp&_r=0 … cuts Medicaid eviscerates SNAP repeals ACA Bravo!
12:36 PM - 1 Apr 2014 Ryan’s Budget Would Cut $5 Trillion in Spending Over a Decade
Representative Paul D. Ryan’s plan, which increased defense spending and carved deeply from domestic programs, may serve as a guide for Republican candidates in this year’s coming elections.
The New York Times @nytimes

55 Retweets 15 favorites
Reply
Retweet
Favorite

[Enthusiast]

6. K&R! This post should have hundreds of recommendations!

[Nye Bevan]

8. It is true that the "trust fund" is essentially an accounting fiction.

The excess of Social Security taxes over benefits has been completely spent on other stuff, and the "trust fund" is essentially a giant IOU that the government has written to itself. In the future when benefits payable exceed Social Security taxes that are being paid, the government will need to either (1) raise taxes, (2) borrow money, (3) find savings elsewhere, or (4) print money.

By the way, I support the Social Security program. My intention is not to undermine it but to state economic facts.

These [Trust Fund] balances are available to finance future benefit payments and other Trust Fund expenditures – but only in a bookkeeping sense.... They do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits. Instead, they are claims on the Treasury that, when redeemed, will have to be financed by raising taxes, borrowing from the public, or reducing benefits or other expenditures. The existence of large Trust Fund balances, therefore, does not, by itself, have any impact on the Government’s ability to pay benefits. (from FY 2000 Budget, Analytical Perspectives, p. 337)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_Trust_Fund