Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

SS Funds In Simple Terms

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 09:41 PM
Original message
SS Funds In Simple Terms
SS has collected, over the years, about $2.5 trillion more than has been paid out. That money could not just sit in a bank somewhere, I suppose, so it lent it to the feds via treasury bond. Lord knows the deficit ridden govt. needed the money.

So, the SS reserves were lent to the US govt.

The government has spent the reserves (and more) which they borrowed via the bonds. The govt. sells bonds all the time, and each time that increased debt adds to the deficit.

The SS is not causing the deficit, the selling of bonds in general IS causing the deficit. And the selling (lending) of the 2.5 trillion in bonds to the SS is a part of the deficit.

When the SS needs extra money it redeems some bonds. So the govt., in order to pay back SS has to sell other bonds to say, China, which further increases the debt and adds to the deficit.

If for some reason SS needed a trillion, the govt. would have to sell an EXTRA trillion in bonds, to say, China, or Japan, or whoever, because the govt. is broke.

That is the only way SS can tap the SS reserves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 09:45 PM
Response to Original message
1. Borrowed with no intention of ever paying it back
Still Social Security turns surplus.

Those of us working today are paying the Social Security benefits of those who are receiving today. When we are retired, there should be younger workers paying our benefits.

One of the myths of the right is they will never see the money they put it, this is why they can say that. They ignore the fact above.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Like a Ponzi scheme
Social Security has stayed afloat only because there is a larger group of contributors (the baby boomers) who saw their taxes jacked sky high under both Carter and Reagan to pay for the smaller generations before them.

Where's the larger generation behind the boomers who will pay them? It not only doesn't exist, it doesn't have the decent paying union jobs that at least many of the boomers had. It will be a retirement financed by burger flippers and Starbucks baristas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. WOW?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. What wows you
the fact that I compared SS to a Ponzi scheme, even though I didn't say it was one?

Tell me where I'm wrong on the math of the baby boom generation's effect on the solvency of the Social Security Administration over the course of the last 30 years or so. Tell me where I'm wrong on the baby bust that followed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texastoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. So what if we remove the cap?
What do you think about that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I say only partially
If you lift the cap, you lift the maximum Social Security benefit, the well-off get to grab even more of it for the few years they choose to keep working.

Here's a better idea: Lift the cap slowly and gradually on the worker's tax, let the sky be the limit on the employer's tax. No preciptuous rise in maximum benefits, and if stupid corporations want to pay some dimwit $10 million bucks to play golf, then they can finance some of the Social Security problem.

Also, where is it written in stone that employer and employee shares should be the same? Rate employers on profitability, and some could afford to pay 1, 2, or even 3 percent more than their employees are paying. Again, no raise in the earnings that would give rise to higher benefits, but a way to get more money into the system to shore it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
14. The boomers paid for both the older generation and part of our own.
As far as a retirement of flipping burgers, 25% of baby boomers have no retirement and 25% have inadequate funds for retirement.

Join the club.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 06:16 AM
Response to Reply #14
19. I was referring to those who would be paying FICA taxes
as the burger flippers, and of course, you can't support a retiree with Social Security taxes from two low-paid jobs. However, it seems like these younger workers will indeed be joined by some older ones who will still have to work.

My plan is to perform some computer repair services on the side for my fellow baby boomer retirees who did a better job of planning for it than I did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoNothing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. Social Security is not in surplus
As of this year. It was in the news, you must have missed it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. Actually it was news in march, as of today it's not true. nt
Edited on Mon Aug-30-10 10:49 PM by ipaint
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikehiggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 09:50 PM
Response to Original message
2. That seems to wrap it up pretty fairly.
The problem is that the Cat Food folks tell us that if we redeem those bonds we become a de facto part of the deficit because they will have to borrow money to pay back the money they borrowed (some might prefer the term "stole" but let's be nice)

In a sense that is correct but in another sense it is bull. The motivation for taking the SS funds in the first place was to fund government programs (like 2 unjustified wars and huge tax cuts mostly aimed at the rich) without having to raise taxes, and take the risk of folks waking up to the con game that was being foisted on them by the GOPuks and their Dino friends.

The taking of the SS funds ( which are made up of taxes paid by average Joes and Jills working at lower paid jobs) is probably a crime but since GW got a pass on starting two wars a little matter like 2.5 trillion dollars probably won't even show up on the radar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Who pays the borrowed money
is the question.

Workers?

Or the rich?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. It will be the workers, of course. The rich owns Congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. The kids
Edited on Mon Aug-30-10 10:42 PM by BeFree
And maybe they should? We spent a ton of money on schools, roads, govt. buildings... the list goes on and on. They will get to use all those things.

Our generation did a hell of a lot and people in the US today have got it pretty damned easy. And we deserve it. If not us, now, then who, when? Here we are. We did this. Now it belongs to the kids. Here ya go, kids.

Sure, we screwed things up too, but this thread is about SS and spending.

Our generation borrowed massive amounts of money. More than has ever been borrowed before. Some of that was from SS, the rest from from rich people. Rich people buy bonds, because putting money in bonds is better, sometimes, than putting money in a bank.

Only thing is....the bonds the rich buy actually produce some interest, whereas SS bonds don't. Otherwise SS would be rolling in the dough, eh?

But paying yourself interest on money you borrow from yourself hasn't been invented yet. It may never be invented, for obvious reasons. So, SS funds don't collect interest, because it's all our money.

SS is the largest banking loan office, ever. SS money was handed out interest free, and payments back into SS are due, like, well, whenever.

In fact, SS was used as a great free ride for deficit mongers like Ronald Reagan, et al.

And now kids, it's all yours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamtechus Donating Member (868 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #9
18. SS funds DO collect interest
The reason Social Security holds only treasury bonds is the same reason many Americans do: The federal government has never missed a single interest payment on its debts. President Bush wanted to put Social Security funds in the stock market—which would have been disastrous—but luckily, he failed. So the trillions of dollars in the Social Security Trust Fund, which are separate from the regular budget, are as safe as can be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. Ok
So how much are the t-bills worth?

And why don't we turn those bonds into cash? And hand the SS back it's money?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoNothing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. It definitely is not a crime
Because that is how it is supposed to work, "motivation" never entered into it.

After all, what would YOU have them do with the money?

Ironically, Bush actually would have had them do something different, by diverting some of that money from purchasing government bonds to purchasing corporate stocks and bonds. Of any recent president, he was the closest to actually changing that arrangement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 10:37 PM
Response to Original message
12. Actually the SS bonds are not negotiable. They cannot be bought nor sold
And have no secondary market. They do not pay interest in cash but in more bonds. They do not mature. These are not normal US bonds
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. I read that somewhere,
... and being as I never heard one iota of evidence to the contrary, I take that as being true. And it makes sense... like I wrote above, paying interest to yourself on money you lent yourself, will never happen.

We, the people, borrow our money from SS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-10 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Linky.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC