If no deal by Aug. 2, Obama can't guarantee Social Security checks will go out

[David Gill]

Source: MSNBC

In an interview with CBS Evening News, President Obama says he can't guarantee Social Security checks will go out Aug. 3rd if a debt-ceiling deal is not reached by the Aug. 2nd deadline.

Read more: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/07/12/7068367-if-no-deal-by-aug-2-obama-cant-guarantee-social-security-checks-will-go-out

---

First Dens attacked the GOP on Ryan's proposed Medicare cuts, now they can say their risking the halt of Social Security benefits. But has Obama given up this attack with his talks of cutting both programs?

[Larkspur]

1. That should also mean no $ to the wars Obama supports

How come he's not touting that?

[tridim]

3. Because this is about the GOP, not Obama.

And Obama isn't stupid.

[robinlynne]

9. really. you find this to be an intelligent move?

[tridim]

10. He said he can't guarantee it, which is 100% true.

He's just stating the truth of the situation which the GOP will be blamed for.

Would you rather he lie?

[robinlynne]

14. Social secuirty payments have NOTHING to do with what is going on. Why is it true?

The money is there. Why on earth would he not be able to guarantee SS payments? This is a threat, a bluff, and a terrible one.

[tridim]

16. I don't think you understand basic politics.

That's okay, Obama's statement isn't directed at you. It's directed at the idiot GOP who are on their way back to the WH as we speak.

[No Elephants]

122. Good lord. Please see Reply 121.

[freshwest]

30. Pelosi said at the last government shut down threat that mailing would be affected.

Not direct payments that are made electronically automatically.

Because it really does mean something when the debt ceiling is not raised, and government shuts down. Those are real people in real time that mail those printed checks and maintain the machinery. Not by hand, true, but furloughing makes this happen.

They have to be sent out by law within a certain time frame, but they can't be sent out in advance to cover a government shut down, as far as I know. So he's telling the truth.

But the Tea Party people are ecstatic at their chance to get back at 'the man,' the evil, statist government, that is. They're drunk with the idea of inflicting mass chaos on those they consider unworthy. It's blackmail for the rest of the country that really can't fight back, who need that money and they will push this as far as possible.

The Chinese expect their payments on the debt to be paid. They don't have social security for their people, they believe like the libertarians and now most of the GOP does, it's a family affair. So they aren't going to hold their hands out waiting to be paid while we wail about our safety net going bye.

So Obama will have to make a deal, because the GOP won't.

[No Elephants]

118. If I worked for the feds, I would volunteer to work on the mailing. Ditto if I were a member of

Congress or a staffer of a member. Has he asked anyone to volunteer?

If not, how is that defensible? For just one thing, I bet more than one landlord has had an eviction notice in hand for a while, especially for apartments that are rent stabilized.

In his statements about halting OASDI payments, does Obama really make a very clear distinction between direct deposit checks--the bulk of the payments--and hand mailed checks, or does he just alarm ALL feeble disabled and elderly folks?

If not, how is that defensible?

FYI, the Chinese have nothing to do with OASDI. The funds for OASDI are there. No borrowing necessary.

[CountAllVotes]

51. he is playing a very sick game

and I do not like it!

:mad: :argh: :grr:

:kick:

[AndyTiedye]

78. There Might Not Even be a Functioning Post Office to Mail the Checks

[No Elephants]

119. Most checks are direct deposit, done electronically and automatically.

No end to rationalizations, though.

[robinlynne]

15. What does the deficit have to do with social security? answer: nothing.

What do the tax cuts have to do with the deficit? EVERYTHING. They caused the deficit. So why are we discussing social security AT ALL?

Why didn't Obama say the wealthy may have to pay back those excess temporary tax cuts we made. I may not be able to guarantee the tax cuts. or I may not be able ot guarantee American military presence overseas.

[tridim]

17. Maybe he's saving that for tomorrow.

Again, I don't think you understand basic politics.

And BTW, he has said many times that the Bush tax cuts should expire for the top 2%. I guess you missed that.

[nyy1998]

22. Agreed, it's a smart move by Obama

This forces AARP and Seniors who are already pissed off at the Republicans and Paul Ryan to get into the fight. Very useful ploy here by Obama

[No Elephants]

112. Yeah, nothing's as smart as scaring the beejesus out of the elderly and disabled so they fight

your battles for you.

ETA: Assuming they are not too feeble.

[okasha]

43. Was that at the same time he was caving and restoring them?

n/t

[robinlynne]

81. Obama just signed the BUSh tax cuts into law again in December. I guess you missed that.

HE SAYS they would be renewed over his dead body, and could have let them expire, but HE renewed them. He signed those tax cuts into law with his very own pen. he had the power to let them expire.
What he says is not what he does.

[No Elephants]

113. With respect, Obama signing Bush laws is impossible. In December, 2010, Obama signed Obama tax cuts

Bush tax cuts expired under their own terms on December 31, 2010. Since then, we have been under the Obama tax cuts.

[No Elephants]

111. He didn't say it when it mattered, though. When it mattered, we got the Obama tax cuts.

[bahrbearian]

45. He is lying , or playing naive , he can Guarantee it

When we hit the debit limit, it is him and Giethner that decide.

[No Elephants]

127. Why can't he guaranty electronic OASDI payments? And what efforts has he made

to even try to guaranty the hand mailed? Not as though he couldn't see this coming.

I'm guessing if any President wanted to, s/he could have a back plan for the small percentage of OASDI payments that are not direct deposited electronically. An printing of mailing labels and checks, stuffed and ready to go. IF the President wanted to. That's also probably true, but I don't expect Obama to cop to it.

Please see also Reply 118.

[No Elephants]

126. Let's wait and see if this backfires on him before we comment on how smart this is.

It's really irrelevant if you or I think this is about the GOP. It will matter whether most American's see this as Obama's fault or theirs. Right now, I wouldn't make book either way.

[dipsydoodle]

5. He's using the life insurance salesman's ploy

Selling fear. That stunt wouldn't work if he tried to sell no more wars.

[brooklynite]

20. Because however you feel about military activity...

...it means American military forces in harms way won't be paid, and funds to support them in place (since its not funcitonally possible to remove them instantly, however you feel about the drawdown schedule) won't be available either.

[No Elephants]

115. Let's be real. They can halt payments to contractors without halting troop's salaries.

Pentagon salaries, too.

Only a fraction of our troops are in harm's way, but I don't support cutting the salary of any them.

[Demeter]

2. Booga Booga

You created this Administration, Mr. O. Congratulations on the FUBAR.

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CakeGrrl]

104. What does the Administration have to do with the default?

Have people suddenly brain-farted and forgotten how government works?

[No Elephants]

114. The administration has nothing to do with it. It's our fault.

[eppur_se_muova]

4. No payments to defense contractors either, right?

Yeah, right.

[robinlynne]

8. exactly, and Congressmen and Supreme Court judges?

[No Elephants]

116. Judges, yes. Halting salaries of Congress may present a Constitutional issue, though.

[Lucinda]

6. More unnecessary stress for people in the name of political

maneuvering. It's not right, no matter who does it.

[hamsterjill]

36. I agree with you.

And I fear it will blow up in Obama's face for being the one who is publicly saying it. Yes, seniors, etc. will be mad, but will they focus their anger on the GOP? Or will they focus their anger on Obama? That's the question.

[amandabeech]

77. The GOP will do everything possible to get people to focus on Obama,

He will be the one who will actually have to do it, instead of cutting all the things that the GOP will suggest cutting at the last minute.

It's not good to be the one who actually ends up doing the bad deed. "You forced me into it" never plays well.

However, my recollection is that SS taxes cannot be diverted to any other use. What comes in must go out or be invested in a special series of U.S. bonds. People may get most of their money, but it might be delayed, unfortunately.

[No Elephants]

117. If only no one had used OASDI taxes for things other than OASDI. If only.

That was the promise. Government never kept it.

"It's not good to be the one who actually ends up doing the bad deed. "You forced me into it" never plays well."

Agree. Saying "The GOP left me no choice" makes him seem weak, a reputation he already has and the GOP has been exploiting. He will lose either way.

[dgibby]

49. I agree.

My income consists of military retirement and ss. All I think about is what if those checks aren't here next month? Not a good feeling. In fact, I checked my acct today, have a deposit pending (SS). It's for less than 1/10th of what it's supposed to be. What's wrong with this picture? Looks like I'll be talking to SS tomorrow if the rest of the payment isn't there. I hate this.

[MilesColtrane]

71. Make no mistake.

The Republicans in Congress and their leaders are the ones who created this in the first place.

The four Republicans in Congressional leadership positions combined to vote for a debt limit increase 19 times during the presidency of George W. Bush. In doing so, they increased the debt limit by nearly $4 trillion.


June 2002: Congress approves a $450 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $6.4 trillion. McConnell, Boehner, and Cantor vote “yea”, Kyl votes “nay.”

May 2003: Congress approves a $900 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $7.384 trillion. All four approve.

November 2004: Congress approves an $800 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.1 trillion. All four approve.

March 2006: Congress approves a $781 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.965 trillion. All four approve.

September 2007: Congress approves an $850 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $9.815 trillion. All four approve.

THEY have taken the American people and the entire world economy hostage, not Obama.

[Lucinda]

76. Oh, I understand the source of the problem. But I also understand

that our POTUS is playing the same public opinion games that the other side plays, and that they are causing people to go through incredible stress.

[MilesColtrane]

79. So do you believe he just should have kept quiet about the consequences of a default, or...

that a default won't happen?

[No Elephants]

120. OASDI payments have nothing to do with default.

[robinlynne]

7. That is some bullshit. The social security money is there. Available. Go fuck with

something else.

[David Gill]

11. It's just politics. Nothing will happen.

[Zhade]

41. So it's okay to play politics with people's livelihood?

Kinda fucked up, if you ask me.

[No Elephants]

124. Apparently, IOKIODI. (It's O.K if Obama does it.) If Bush had done this, though. WOWZA!

[No Elephants]

121. Unless you count extreme anxiety and stress on people least able to withstand it.

If it's "only politics," it's a very cynical and callous political game indeed.

[yodermon]

12. I don't understand. If SS is running a surplus, how can there be no $$ to disburse?

If it's still in surplus, then doesn't that mean by definition that existing payroll taxes cover SS payments?

[roxiejules]

32. There are dollars to disburse

According to the most recent DTS the YTD (fiscal) amount paid out on Social Security is $469 billion, well below the amount collected from Federal Tax Deposits of $780 billion.


https://www.fms.treas.gov/fmsweb/viewDTSFiles?dir=w&fname=11070800.pdf

[defendandprotect]

69. Nothing gets paid without Boehner's approval --- he's be gone the day after this, btw!!!

[No Elephants]

123. I doubt OASDI payments need Boehner's approval.

[MilesColtrane]

73. The money will be there.

The federal workers who print and mail the checks may not be.

[harun]

149. He's just saying this to scare people. GOP supporters are driven by

fear, not facts or logic. This is for them.

[MannyGoldstein]

13. Social Security Takes In More Than It Pays Out

And will for the next decade.

So Obama is thinking of robbing recipients in order to pay for wars and other shit.

Obama's fetish for attacking Social Security seems to know no bounds.

[neoralme]

19. This man is Disgust personified. Does he think we're all stupid? Or

is this supposed to be some tricky hint that there is no money left in the SS trust fund.

[stockholmer]

84. the SS 'trust fund' is an accounting myth that cannot be detached from overall US debt

I believe that a old-age government national pension plan is an ABSOLUTE must, but to dislocate it from all the other US debt is simply to ignore reality. The empiric wars, exploding 'for-profit' health care costs, and other financial recklessness will bring the US into a state of bankruptcy and default, thus making the special Treasuries that the SS monies are invested in worthless.



http://moneywatch.bnet.com/retirement-planning/blog/money-life/the-social-security-trust-fund-myth/2944/


snip

Our political leaders continue a long tradition of using words to describe Social Security that give you an impression that is different from reality. Normally, when you hear the words “trust fund,” you think of an arrangement where money and investments have been set aside that are dedicated to a specific purpose, such as providing retirement benefits. And typically, the money and investments in a trust fund are separate from the entity that sponsors the trust fund. The trust funds supporting your 401k and pension benefits operate this way.

But the Social Security “trust fund” is invested in special government bonds issued by the federal government. Principal and interest on these bonds must be repaid by future generations, according to law. The bonds in the Social Security trust fund are counted both as an asset of the trust fund and as a liability, since they are part of the total federal debt. Basically, one hand of the government owes the other hand, and the investments in the “trust fund” are not separate from the entity that sponsors the trust fund.

In the distant past, Social Security was a “pay-as-you-go” system, where current tax collections paid for current benefits. The Social Security trust fund idea gave us the illusion that we were advance funding Social Security benefits, in a manner similar to the private pension system. In reality, though, Social Security is still pay-as-you-go, with the difference being that future generations will pay for both the benefits outlay and the repayment of principal and interest on the special government bonds in the trust fund.

Some people are outraged by the operation of the Social Security trust fund, using inflammatory language to describe our politicians as having “raided” the trust fund. I don’t happen to be outraged. I realize and accept that the government has a variety of revenue sources, including FICA taxes, and a variety of expenditures, including Social Security benefits. There is — and never has been — any real link between our Social Security benefits and the FICA taxes that we pay. What the Social Security trust fund does represent is a legal obligation for our government to repay the principal and interest on the special bonds in the trust fund. I have faith that these bonds will be honored — provided that future generations can afford to repay the bonds.


snip

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.businessinsider.com/myth-of-the-social-security-trust-fund-2010-8


Let me ask you this,” continues Suzy. “Suppose we doubled that number on your piece of paper. Suppose we just cross out the $17,400 balance on your so-called Social Security Trust Fund, and instead we write in $35,000. We’ll round up.”

Billy says eagerly, “Suzy, that’s fantastic! Now I won’t run out of money for music spending any time soon! With $3,500 in my Social Security Trust Fund, it will take decades to draw down that balance.”

“That’s exactly what worries me,” replies Suzy. “We haven’t actually created any more money by doing this. We have just changed an accounting balance for an imaginary account. You can tell yourself that you have more money to spend on Social Security music, but you don’t actually have any more cash, now or in the future. It’s not like a bank account balance, or even like the real credit card debt you have been accumulating. I’m really worried that this Trust Fund balance and your Trust Fund reports are giving you a false sense of security, and they are preventing you from taking a hard look at how much you spend each year on Social Security music.”

“You don’t have enough dedicated allowance this year to pay for your Social Security music spending this year. You have an immediate cash flow problem, in that you’re having to sacrifice $400 of other stuff just this year to make up the difference between what you collect in dedicated Social Security payroll tax allowance, and what you spend on Social Security. And that $400 gap will be bigger next year, and the year after that.”

“Billy, this is a problem for you right now. You need to slow the growth of your Social Security music spending. When you combine that with your spending on movies that you call Medicare, over time it’s going to grow to consume most of your $18,000 annual allowance. It will squeeze out your ability to spend your general revenue allowance on those boxing lessons, those school supplies, those museums and movies and parks and even your online farm.”

“You forget, sis,” says Billy with a grin. “While this Social Security Card isn’t a real credit card, I do have a real credit card. I can just borrow the extra money I need and run a bigger deficit this year. I promised myself I’d spend this $17,400 on Social Security music over time, and I can’t break that promise. I’ll just keep increasing my borrowing on my real credit card to do so.”

“And next year, and the year after that, …” cries Suzy. “Yep. I plan to increase my spending each year on Social Security music. I’ll draw more from my general fund allowance to pay that which is not covered by my dedicated Social Security payroll tax allowance. If that threatens to constrain my other spending, I’ll just borrow and run up my credit card debt.”

“And you’ll keep doing this until …” “By my calculations, I’ll need to do something by 2037, when my Social Security Trust Fund runs dry.”

“But there’s no money there. And if you keep telling yourself you’re OK for another 27 years, you’re not going to do anything about the real problem, which is that you can’t afford this growth rate of your Social Security spending. At some point this cash flow problem is going to cause your real credit card debt to get so high that you’ll bump against your credit limit. Then your only options will be to drastically cut back on your Social Security spending, or slash the amount your spend on other stuff, or …”

Suzy gasps. “Oh, no. Or you’ll wait until it’s too late, and then demand a bigger allowance, leaving even less money for the rest of the family.”

Billy sits quietly, failing to suppress a smirk. “And we haven’t even discussed Medicare.”

snip


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Social Security trust fund consists totally of special issue Treasury bonds and certificates of indebtedness. These bonds can only be issued to and redeemed by the Social Security trust funds. These bonds cannot be sold in the open market.

The Social Security trust fund bonds pay the same interest as regular Treasury bonds issued on the same day and in the same maturity. When the bonds mature, they are rolled over into new bonds that include both the original issue amount and any interest due. The new bonds pay whatever interest as regular Treasury bonds of the same maturity issued on that date. These bonds are really nothing more than IOUs from one branch of government to another. They are not a real financial asset.

Social Security will eventually (2018 at the latest) need to spend more than it receives in payroll taxes. It will then have to start cashing in the bonds in the trust fund. According to the US OMB, there are only four sources that money can be drawn from. Congress could repay the money by raising other taxes. It could also authorize the Treasury to just borrow the needed funds. Another alternative would be for Congress to reduce other federal programs and to use the money that was to have been spent for them to redeem Social Security bonds. Finally, Congress could reduce Social Security benefits.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2010/11/18/131420919/are-the-social-security-trust-funds-a-mirage


Proposals to fix the deficit are coming fast and furious in Washington these days. One major target: Social Security.

Whether you favor cutting Social Security may depend on how you view the Social Security trust funds, which currently contain $2.5 trillion for retirement benefits. That's $2.5 trillion that, according to some people, don't actually exist.

Here's the back story.

If you look at your paycheck, in the spot where it lists deductions, there's a line that says "FICA." That's the money that gets taken out of your check to pay for Social Security.

For the past 25 years or so, the amount of money the government has raised through those taxes has been greater than what it's been spending to fund Social Security.

The surplus came largely from the baby boomers — and we're going to need that extra money when they retire and start collecting Social Security.

This is where the $2.5 trillion trust funds come in.

The government has invested all that money in Treasury bonds, which are traditionally considered among the safest investments in the world.

But a Treasury bond, remember, is the way the government borrows money. So the government is lending the Social Security surplus to itself. And the obligation to repay those loans is the trust funds.

"They are nothing like any trust fund that any one of us would think of," says Maya MacGuineas of the New America Foundation. "It conjures up an image of really holding savings, and it doesn't do that at all."

But there's another way to think about what the government is doing here.

The federal government owes $2.5 trillion to the Social Security trust funds. And if the government doesn't pay that money, it will default on its debt — something the U.S. has never done in its history.

By the middle of the next decade, the Social Security surplus will turn into yearly deficits as more Baby Boomers retire. And the government will have to come up with hundreds of billions of dollars a year to cover its obligations to the trust fund.

At that point, the debate over whether or not the trust funds exist becomes a moot.

"The policy choices that we have to make good on Social Security obligations are exactly the same with the trust fund or if we'd never had the trust fund," MacGuineas says. "Raise taxes, cut Social Security benefits, cut other government spending, or borrow the money. That's the only way to repay the money."

[No Elephants]

133. Wow. I don't recall seeing such a long rationalization of government theft and fraud before.

[stockholmer]

155. Im not rationalizing, it IS theft and fraud, it's a giant ponzi scheme,& people in need will screwed

The choice is simple, end the empire, end the privately-run central banking cartel, and end the crony corporatist fascism, or the whole American system will collapse. There is no way to grow your way put of this, the only way out is to institute a 1% Tobin tax on ALL financial turnover (with the first $1 million dollars exempted), and end the systemic controllers death grip on the reigns of public and private power.

[neoralme]

148. I disagree with part of your statement

Some people are outraged by the operation of the Social Security trust fund, using inflammatory language to describe our politicians as having “raided” the trust fund. I don’t happen to be outraged. I realize and accept that the government has a variety of revenue sources, including FICA taxes, and a variety of expenditures, including Social Security benefits.

I am one of those outraged people. SS funds are funds entrusted to the government. As such, they should not be mingled. Do I know that they are and have been? Of course. I also know that the US is now one of the most crooked countries in the world, all things considered. I believe the government will end social security and medicare, but they will have to do it slowly, or they will see riots that will take them down, depending on whether or not the army will fire on its civilians. Bush reversed posse comitatus for just this reason, so troops could be used to quell riots by its citizens.

We all have our stories about how importance Social Security is to us. Leave it be said ( and I know this to be a fact), there are private groups of citizens forming all over the country to take on the government if they deny the people their justly earned benefits. I will be with these people with every piece or hardware I can carry. I would rather have the US go down completely than live under the rule of Koch Brother types.

[stockholmer]

156. those were the CBS Moneywatch author's words, not mine, and I personally would be outraged

this was my sole contribution to the post:

I believe that a old-age government national pension plan is an ABSOLUTE must, but to dislocate it from all the other US debt is simply to ignore reality. The empiric wars, exploding 'for-profit' health care costs, and other financial recklessness will bring the US into a state of bankruptcy and default, thus making the special Treasuries that the SS monies are invested in worthless.

[neoralme]

158. Yeah, Okay, but I still do not understand why that would not be

possible.

[brooklynite]

18. Why should this be a problem?

Since some people claim he wants to "slash benefits", isn't this just giving him an early start?

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bahrbearian]

23. He is the decider, he chooses where the money goes, he can guarantee where the money goes

[tridim]

25. So the executive branch now has the power of the purse?

Got a link for that?

[bahrbearian]

39. Ya, its called the U.S. Treasury,, Giethner is the Sec. and Obama his Chief, Link

http://www.treasury.gov/Pages/default.aspx

[No Elephants]

125. Payment, like OASDI, and those of military contractors, are indeed "administered" by the administra-

tion. All the votes necessary to make things like OASDI and the Pentagon budget, etc. have been taken, in some cases, long ago. Creating new obligations would indeed be an Article I function. Things like the topic of this thread and payments to the military, from Pentagon to Halliburton, that are already oblligations, however, are indeed up to Obama at this point.

[zalinda]

26. This is probably the first intelligent thing he has done.

With threatening that Social Security checks may not go out in August, everyone will be calling their reps. And, the most active political callers are.....those receiving Social Security checks. You can be sure that A LOT of repubs will get their ears burned off with this move.

I know I'm going to be calling my repub rep, how about you?

zalinda

[Zhade]

46. Uh, noooo -- this sends the message that SS is adding to the deficit. IT. DOES. NOT.

The SS money is there. There is no reason to hold it back, because THERE IS NOTHING STOPPING IT FROM GOING OUT.

[zalinda]

64. We know that.

But, I do know that when I talked to my rep before, she told me how upset the seniors were about getting cuts to SS. Her phones didn't stop ringing for days. I can only imagine what is going on at the office now.

I'll be calling the office tomorrow, I want them to be worn down and desperate when I call. I have all my talking points ready. About millionaires and corporations getting tax cuts, and I won't be getting my SS check. As I am a registered indie, she'll be looking for my vote, which I will tell her she won't get if the repubs don't tax the millionaires.

zalinda

[CountAllVotes]

54. I already did that

You should have already done that too!

Where have you been?

[CakeGrrl]

108. He's not THREATENING.

He's stating a fact.

And I call bullshit on the claim that he's done nothing "intelligent" up to this point. And you didn't even get this assessment right.

[No Elephants]

137. Actually, he isn't just stating facts. Read the thread.

[No Elephants]

128. Really? Please see replies 112., 121., and 126., among others on this thread.

[florida08]

27. this sounds like something a republican would do

Put fear into vets, the disabled and seniors? For what? To force pressure on the tea party? Dangerous game of chicken and not what a leader should do. Apparently he's saying he will take from ss to keep the government going by saying that. If the government defaults Geithner will get to decide who gets paid. That seems to be where we're headed.

[tridim]

34. He's saying the GOP will take from SS to keep governement going (and paying themselves)

It shines a big spotlight on the GOP cockroaches who aren't just playing the politics of fear, they are actually attempting to impliment it.

This isn't that difficult to understand.

[florida08]

53. you really believe that?

He is the POTUS. The buck stops with him. You do realized the most of the country didn't know they received tax cuts right? They will let the default happen. He will get the blame. Democrats will get the blame.

[No Elephants]

131. The GOP simply can't take from OASDI to pay themselves. Obama is the only one who can do that.

OASDI money is under his administration's control. And Congress--most certainly not only GOP members of Congress--can't legally vote to steal it.

If Democrats AND the GOP were to vote to do that, (committing political suicide with their "ayes"), it would be the job of Obama and Timmeh to refuse them the money, on the ground the vote is illegal under both statutes and the 14th amendment.

If anyone has messed with OASDI money since January, 2009, it would have to be Obama and Timmeh.

So much for "He's simply being honest," eh?

[Raschel]

28. Bad move. The Republicans won't care if we eat cat food. The President's constituents will resent

him for this statement. Lose lose.

[CountAllVotes]

38. your are right

He is a damn fool for pulling this one out of his hip pocket. It will hang over his head until he is no longer the President and thereafter as well. It could damage the Democratic party as a whole in fact!

What a freakin fool he is.

ENOUGH OF THE CRAP ALREADY MR. PRESIDENT!!!!!!!

:kick:

[Raschel]

44. I don't think he's a fool, and I don't think he wants to see anyone go without SS, but I think

it was a bad move because those words came out of HIS mouth, and people are going to remember it. Especially some elderly whom I can guarantee you are buzzing each other on the phone lines as we speak.

He should have left that to the Republicans, who really don't give a rat's ass if we starve or not.

[CountAllVotes]

47. and the words will spread amongst the disabled

Might be silent it seems but I wonder how long this country will enjoy seeing disabled people on the streets with no food.

Soon it will look like the streets of Calcutta the way things are going.

As for Pres. Obama - he can go to hell!

Trying to get what he wants by throwing stones at the very weakest among us.

SHAME SHAME SHAME ON YOU MR. PRESIDENT! :mad:

[Raschel]

55. I guess I don't get the strategy. It just leaves him holding the bag. Most people aren't politically

informed and go off of sound bites. Most haven't heard the words of Orrin Hatch, etc. but they'll hear this.This is is a bad sound bite for the President.

[CountAllVotes]

60. yep, you nailed it

Most people don't frequent places like the DU.

They listen to Faux News, etc. for their "real" info. :puke:

It is literally like the blind and stupid leading the populace at large which is becoming more brainwashed with every day that passes!

It will be Obama's words that shall follow him forever. What a fool he is for doing this.

[No Elephants]

132. Exactly. This and his willing to mess with OASDI and Medicare will hang on the necks of Democrats

from now on.

Whenever Rethugs can manage a cut, they will say, even a Democratic President acknowledged there's no choice but to cut these programs--and he had the support of "sane" Democrats.

If I were a Democrat in Congress, especially if I were up for re-election in 2012, I would be beside myself.

[No Elephants]

134. Not only the President's constituents will resent him. Everyone's constituents will.

The one upside may be that Rethugs hate OASDI so much that the corporate media may not fuel the flames--not until we get closer to the first Tuesday in November 2012, anyway.

[kstewart33]

29. Very smart return of fire by Obama.

McConnell's statement first, and then this from the prez.

[Historic NY]

40. I see old turtle neck is complaining...so then things must be okay.

[No Elephants]

136. Talk about fallacious reasoning!

[MineralMan]

31. And the literalists scream and the people who actually understand

politics say "Attaboy, President Obama." There is a difference in understanding displayed in this thread. That makes me sad.

[bowens43]

59. ridiculous........

I am always amazed when I see posts like this one. It makes me sad.

[KittyWampus]

70. Reactionary Screamers make me sad- constantly reacting with absolutely no clue.

[No Elephants]

138. LOL!

[No Elephants]

135. I so agree about lack of understanding. You and I would probably point to different posts to

support our respective points, though.

[CountAllVotes]

33. and while you play politics Mr. President

People relying on Social Security can just panic and freak out and worry that they will not have money for food, shelter and other necessities soon. Some might end up doing drastic things, like commit suicide even.

This is a real great way to get what you want Mr. President -- scare the sh*t out of the American people that rely of their Social Security every month.

Enough with all of your pandering and other crap!

Why don't you threaten the rich and all those banks you have been tossing billions of dollars at on a seemingly endless basis and end the god damn wars without end?

How many people will end up dying if this happens?

If even one person dies because of this, the blood is on your hands Mr. President! :mad:

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JAnthony]

42. We need something to scare the SH*T out of the complacent American

voters!

Obama needs to tell them WHY and WHO IS HOLDING THIS UP!

Republicans need to fear the American voter will no longer buy TREEPARTYBUBLICAN bull crap!

[CountAllVotes]

48. is an elderly and/or disabled person "complacent"

It can be quite difficult for some to even get out of bed in the morning. I suppose this thought never occurred to you, or did it? Many of the elderly cannot see very well as age is cruel and slowly but surely robs people of their ability to do things in life -- like walk for example. No wheelchair for you loser is the message! It is awfully damn hard to be out there fighting when you have a progressive disease or are in a nursing home!

If this is how Obama is getting his agenda pushed through, whatever that "agenda" might be, I don't want a damn thing to do with it as it stinks like sh*t!

[JAnthony]

50. Sometimes the truth STINKS! Too bad elder Americans

and those who voted for idiot Republicans will have to smell the stink of truth
just like the rest of us.

I'm a Social Security retiree, and I know I'm not alone knowing what might come down in the next month or two if there is no agreement.

Lack of a Social Security check will feel like a day at the park, compared to how the world economies will grind virtually to a hault, how many milllions MORE Americans will be out of work in two months, due to government shut-down, a debt crisis as well

Figure on eating your last fresh fruit or vegetable in the fall, since merchants will not be able to obtain them, transport them, stock them! Figure on shortages everywhere. Figure on a 25% drop in previously owned housing prices. There will simply be NO credit available.

[CountAllVotes]

52. tell that to someone in a nursing home

You've got a pension or something else backing you up. If you are relying on SS for your livelihood, as are many Americans, you'd be pissed off, not accusing people of being "complacent".

Enjoy your fruits and vegetables. :puke:

[JAnthony]

66. I have two relatives in Nursing Homes, they know what's up

as do I. And I depend upon Social Security and a small savings to live day to day.

Please take your attitude elsewhere, some of us seniors know we are about to be put out to slaughter through no fault of Obama.

[No Elephants]

129. And some time half truths, lies and damned lies stink even worse.

The money for OASDI is there. Most payments are direct deposit, made electronically. And, if anyone wanted to, he or she could have taken care of the other payments by now, there having been plenty of notice that a shutdown was a possibility.

Now, we're making excuses for Obama at the expense of the elderly and disabled? Christ, what the hell has happened to Democrats?

[Downwinder]

56. Plus vision and hearing are not covered under Medicare.

You can have a walker or a wheelchair, but not both.

[CountAllVotes]

57. you can get a wheelchair

But those that seem to think that Medicare pays 100% for scooters and wheelchairs (and even walkers for that matter) are far from being "free". YOU pay the extra money that Medicare doesn't pay and oh, you want a power wheelchair you say? Good damn luck on that one!

Medicare pays for some things yes, but not everything. Without a costly supplemental plan and other insurances for dental/vision, you are on your own.

MEDICARE FOR ALL, OH YEAH. Let's cut it more first and then dump it! :sarcasm: :grr:

[Raschel]

85. Thanks for being a voice for the elderly and disabled!

[No Elephants]

139. Problem is, Obama would have to take responsibility for holding up OASDI payments, if they are held

up.

If you really don't get why, try reading the whole thread.

[eilen]

37. So, he actually said this, it is not a statement

from an "unnamed Administration source".

I don't even think a Republican would make this threat.

[CakeGrrl]

105. WHAT threat? This is REALITY because of what the R's are NOT doing.

Why is this so difficult to grasp?

Some of you are so blind to your anger at the President you seem to have forgotten what's going on here.

[eilen]

130. Scaring old and disabled people is poor leadership

As if Republicans care if poor people get their checks.
Why not announce no payments to military contractors. Haliburton will be on the phone in a NY minute telling Repubs they better pass it.

[bowens43]

58. So Obama resorts to scare tactics......

how pathetic....this man is no leader.....

[CountAllVotes]

61. yep, scare tactics

How very tacky at that. Scaring the sh*t out of people that can no longer work and have no other way to pay their bills.

Way to go Mr. President! :grr:

[Forkboy]

99. When Hope (copyright 2008) fails, use Fear (copyright 2011).

The only good emotional motivator left for him now is Love, and we won't be seeing that card employed any time soon.

[No Elephants]

140. I haven't finished reading this thread yet, but I'm guessing your post is the thread winner.

I might have added "contempt," but your post is better as is.

[CakeGrrl]

106. Bullshit. All he's doing is laying out what will happen because of Republican obstruction.

And as of this writing, the R's have started to blink.

[Paper Roses]

62. Dear Mr President, will you be here to back me and others when

we cannot pay for our basic necessities. Do you think the electric company, my insurance company, my town tax collector gives a damn if my SS check does not come? That SS check is what I live on. You try it someday. Every political big-whig should try and get by on $951.00 a month. And...you want to take it away? Think I live too high of the hog with my 'entitlement?'.
We paid for this pittance, don't forget that. In my case for 50 years. Planning to give those dollars back to me?

How many more millions of people will have to be on welfare or other assistance because you folks in Washington are so out-of-touch with the plight of the average American. How many more of us will see the value of our houses go to zilch. Could not sell them if we wanted to. Where do we go from there, even if we can sell them, to the streets? You guys are playing with fire and, even though we are burned, you will be also.

Money for bombs but not for citizens. Don't you see something wrong with this picture?

[hamsterjill]

67. Well said!

n/t

[RebelOne]

65. That is just wonderful, President Obama.

I voted for you not expecting you would do this to our seniors. I am collecting Social Security and I have enough in the bank to tide me over until this crisis has passed. I just hope the SS payments will be retroactive.

[CakeGrrl]

103. Why are you pissed at the POTUS?

Do you not realize whose fault this actually is?

[defendandprotect]

68. If he had the guts to do that -- they'd be no Repugs in Congress the day after that happened!!

[Cognitive_Resonance]

72. Hardball. Keep turning up the heat on the GOP. Bohner is in a real no win position. nt

[No Elephants]

142. It remains to be seen who ends up in a no win position over this.

[reformist2]

74. Let the Repugs have their default... it will be the last thing they ever do.

[Islandlife]

75. What, if anything, can the president guarantee

There are very few things guaranteed in life.

His statement is correct and he could spend the rest of his term listing other things he cannot guarantee and still not cover every possibility.

It is an empty statement worded to create fear and anger.

I don't buy it.

[No Elephants]

141. He could guaranty OASDI payments, if he had had the least desire to do so.

Most are made by direct deposit, electronically. He can certainly guaranty thos.

Checks that are mailed could have been readied well before now, along with mailing labels and stuffing of envelopes. (I have no idea how that is done, but, if it isn't mechanized, shame on our government.) He had plenty of notice this might be coming.

Failing use of a modicum of foresight and advance planning, he could ask for volunteers.

It's easy not to be able to guaranty something you have less than no desire to be able to guaranty.

[Devil_Fish]

80. But he sure as hell can guarantee more drone strikes against brown people. NT

[unkachuck]

82. "...can't guarantee Social Security checks will go out Aug. 3rd..."

....as far as I know, in the seventy five years of the Social Security program there has never been a missed payment....

....any president associated with Social Security failing to pay beneficiaries won't be president for very long....can you say, one-term? All an opponent would have to do is promise he/she would never let Social Security default and they would have our votes, 88 million votes....

[Odin2005]

83. OMG, does that include SSI?

:scared:

[harvey007]

86. Obama gives Social Security warning in debt debate

Source: LA Times


President Obama said he "cannot guarantee" that millions of Social Security beneficiaries would get their checks as scheduled next month unless he and congressional leaders agreed to raise the nation's debt limit by Aug. 2, a warning that came as both sides ratcheted up the tension over the monthlong standoff.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-debt-talks-20110713,0,3527529.story

---

But military spending can continue as usual.

[emilyg]

87. Fear ploy.

[Skittles]

88. an unneccessary and SICKENING ploy

[cstanleytech]

90. True enough though you got to admit its a little funny to see the same tool (fear)

that the republicans have used so well themselves now being wielded against them it's almost...............karmic.

[Skittles]

91. it's alarming SS recipients far more than REPUKES

[cstanleytech]

92. I think thats the point kinda

Right now the republicans havent really felt the heat but getting dozens if not hundreds of phone calls from concerned voting seniors will worry the gop fast enough especially since alot of those same seniors helped so many republicans into office when the republicans attacked obamas health plan.

[No Elephants]

143. Used against Rethugs? Why would they fear? They'll get their checks AND

hang this on Obama. It's the elderly and disabled who are being put into fear and anxiety.

[cstanleytech]

160. Why should they fear it? Because of the power the senior voters wield and its a power the

GOP knows full well because they used it to win alot of seats in the 2010 election themselves by getting the seniors afraid and angry at Obamas healthcare plan.

[CakeGrrl]

109. Not a ploy. It's a FACT. -nt

[Downwinder]

89. I expected this. I'm good for three months.

[RebelOne]

154. Well, if worse comes to worse, I'm good for a year. n/t

[Downwinder]

161. After three months, I'll have to go to jail.

[alarimer]

93. This should also apply to soldiers' pay.

Or any other government employee (Congress, the President, etc). All the pay will be reduced if the debt ceiling is not raised.

Note: this will never actually happen but the threat may be enough. Who knows.

[cstanleytech]

95. Maybe but many of those in congress and the senate

are wealthy already or well off so they probably will be ok unlike alot of the military or those who depend on social security who live check to check.

[No Elephants]

144. I disagree as to troops. Pentagon salaries and military contractors, I'm right there with you,

though.

Constitution puts some restraints on what can legally be done with salaries of members of Congress--not that most of them are living hand to mouth (and if they are, they ought to cut expenses) anyway.

Congressional staffers, gophers, etc., however, are not Constitutionally protected. Neither is the President and his staffers or WH staff, from those who cook and clean in the WH to his Chicago corporatist Chief of Staff.

Do I expect to see Michelle in an apron, alone in the WH kitchen cooking and baking, though? Not really.

[bkkyosemite]

94. I think Obama

should have said I'm afraid I cannot promise Congress and the Senate will get their pay for next month and also I cannot promise their perks or their medical, dental etc benefits..instead of saying SS...If he only had .....

[cstanleytech]

96. Ya but that wouldnt have s much of the same potential to get the seniors

to start calling their representatives to stop digging in their heels.

[No Elephants]

145. Please see Reply 144.

[man4allcats]

97. If those checks don't go out as scheduled,

he might as well start packing his stuff. If I come up short of cash and have to move, I'm sure as hell gonna do everything I can to make sure he has to as well. I will never vote for any Republican, but that doesn't mean I'll vote for him instead.

[Samantha]

98. I think he deliberately said this to provoke the constitutents of

the Republican party (well, and maybe a few others) to call their reps screaming, raise the cap, raise the cap....

It was a ploy.

Sam

[No Elephants]

146. Very cynical and callous.

[Samantha]

151. I don't think so -- it is simply pretty strategic to get the American

people who will be most devastated by a failure to raise the debt limit by August 2 motivated to lean on their representatives. Obama himself, with many in his base alienated, cannot act alone. He must have the support of the average citizen. Telling them directly how adversely impacted they could be by a failure to raise the debt ceiling is simply honest and candid. Letting businesses know how they too will be adversely impacted is a stroke of genius inasmuch as that is the true base of the Republican party. Today we learn many have once again written a letter begging, begging, begging for a deal to be reached.

Obama's comments are instilling a sense of urgency into all walkers in American life to demand a deal from the Republicans, and they cannot ignore this. After all, some of these now awake donate to their (Republicans') campaign coffers. So the choice has been made clear: Republicans must deal or face the possibility of going down in defeat in upcoming elections. Which alternative do you think they will choose?

Sam

[JDPriestly]

101. Cheap trick on Obama's part.

[CakeGrrl]

102. And whose fault is that?

This is a direct consequence of Republican bullshit in Congress. And as I write this, Republicans have blinked after POTUS put the implication out there.

[Mizmoon]

100. Maybe it's not a gambit

He's pointing out consequences, not playing games.

A few years ago our banking system almost collapsed. We have two wars we can't afford to stay in, and can't seem to get out of. Unemployment is at record highs. Over 10% of the population is on food stamps. Our infrastructure is falling apart. Revenue does not even come close to our expenses. And now there's real talk of our defaulting on our debt, the only way we can meet our expenses. Does anyone really thing that government direct payments could continue very long undisturbed if we defaulted, or can you see a fall-of-the-Soviet-Union style collapse?

This has been coming for decades.

[CakeGrrl]

107. Finally - someone who understands the plain reality.

Some around here are so invested in seeing a conspiracy in everything said and done by POTUS they don't know a basic statement of consequence when it's right in front of them.

That's pretty bad.

[Nossida]

110. actually

All this Political Theater is rather entertaining.
But does anyone actually believe Wall Street, and
the Corporate Oligarchs, will allow their Puppets
in the republican Party put the US into default?

The Thugs are simply pursuing their DO NOTHING
policy since the 2010 election. Let the Right
wing run their mouths, and dig their own grave.
Between Paul Ryan's utter nonsense, and this US
Debt Limit farce, their goose is already cooked
in 2012.

Now about that Rupert Murdoch/Fox scandal.....

[No Elephants]

147. Cynical, callous, and may backfire badly.

[robcon]

150. It's a kind of political theater. There's no reason why SS checks should be held up.

The Federal government has billions of dollars of bills due every day. It can stiff any of thousands of vendors. It doesn't
need to stiff SS recipients.

[rucky]

152. But payments to Wall Street investors will continue as scheduled. n/t

[buckrogers1965]

153. 100% congresses fault.

Congress says to spend "X". The president has to spend "X". Congress says to raise "Y" revenue. The president raises "Y" revenue. If "Y-X" is more money than we have, we have to borrow "Z" upto the limit that congress sets.

Congress said to spend over the limit. The president is violating the law if he spends or doesn't spend.

If we republicans actually cared about a balanced budget we would have done something about this when we had control of congress and the presidency for the better part of a decade.

This is a manufactured crisis and both "sides" are playing their parts just like any big time wrestling event.

[rayofreason]

157. So the whole "trust fund" thing was a lie? n/t

[Evasporque]

159. He just played the "GOP starving the seniors" card...hahahaha! nt