Social Security to See Payout Exceed Pay-In This Year

[groovedaddy]

The bursting of the real estate bubble and the ensuing recession have hurt jobs, home prices and now Social Security.

This year, the system will pay out more in benefits than it receives in payroll taxes, an important threshold it was not expected to cross until at least 2016, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Stephen C. Goss, chief actuary of the Social Security Administration, said that while the Congressional projection would probably be borne out, the change would have no effect on benefits in 2010 and retirees would keep receiving their checks as usual.

The problem, he said, is that payments have risen more than expected during the downturn, because jobs disappeared and people applied for benefits sooner than they had planned. At the same time, the program’s revenue has fallen sharply, because there are fewer paychecks to tax.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/25/business/economy/25social.html?th&emc=th

[msongs]

1. US military to See Payout Exceed Pay-In This Year - yet nobody complains bout that nt

[Donnachaidh]

3. The military has people young enough and healthy enough to find work, yes?

Social Security recipients are the opposite. :eyes:

[babylonsister]

2. NYT Invents "Important Threshold" To Scare Readers About Social Security

http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_press_archive?month=03&year=2010&base_name=nyt_invents_important_threshol

NYT Invents "Important Threshold" To Scare Readers About Social Security


A front page NYT story noted that Social Security benefit payments this year exceed its tax collections. As both the experts cited in the article pointed out, this fact makes absolutely no difference for the program since it holds more than $2.5 trillion in government bonds.

In spite of the statements by the experts cited in the article, the second paragraph told readers that this event marked: "an important threshold it was not expected to cross until at least 2016, according to the Congressional Budget Office." Nothing in the article or in the structure of the program suggests that there is any importance whatsoever to this threshold.

--Dean Baker

[Vincardog]

4. Do you think that is a good enough reason to start some job creation activity in the USA? How about

a rational trade policy?

[tech9413]

5. Just more fear mongering

By its nature SS is a self funding program. There are many ways to adjust for income and outlay differences. First and foremost, create more jobs. There is virtually no one who doesn't want to work. I'd pick cotton if I got a decent wage for it. There is work to be done in this country and I think most of us are willing to do it.

Drop the cap on SS contributions. I'm pretty sure those making over $100K wouldn't even notice the change, but it would increase the contributions by a factor of 10, if not more.