I cannot guarantee that those checks go out on August 3

[Riftaxe]

President Barack Obama told CBS News' Scott Pelley Tuesday that he cannot guarantee that Social Security checks will go out as planned if Democrats and Republicans fail to reach a deal to raise the debt ceiling by August 2.

"I cannot guarantee that those checks go out on August 3 if we haven't resolved this issue, because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it," Obama said in an interview on the CBS Evening News Tuesday evening. - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/12/obama-social-security-checks-debt-ceiling_n_895831.html">7/12/11

Federal Government collects $128.179 billion in tax revenue per month.
Federal Government Expends $57.92 billion on social security per month.

If you graduated a High School civics class you already know how and who controls expenditures.

on edit: fixed horrible spelling, hopefully....also to clarify that the reason for this poll is after a discussion with my neighbor who only heard the part of the clip that after the 3rd, SS would be cut off.

[Why Syzygy]

1. Those funds have

already been appropriated... paid for. You cannot refuse checks just because more money to pay the deficit is needed.

edit: I mean; we all know that all that money 'they'/'we' are borrowing goes straight to pay interest? To the banksters?
It isn't for the Treasury at all!

[Riftaxe]

2. Technically the SS fund has special issue bonds

for, and i lack the knowledge of a better term...collateral.

If and i do not know if it is possible the Fed would have to sell assets to fulfill, but the cash flow is more then strong enough to currently fulfill over twice the SS debt.

I can think of one huge slice of the federal budget that could certainly sustain a huge slice that would not inhibit seniors well being.

I voted for less then truthful myself.

[Why Syzygy]

24. This is my source ...

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=189943


To the peanut gallery that don't "get it": There is zero risk of Social Security and Medicare checks not going out if the debt ceiling is not raised for the next three years.

Got it? Zero.

How? Here's how: (...)

(...)

Let's make sure you understand this:

THERE IS NO SHORTAGE OF FUNDS TO PAY SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE UNDER THE EXISTING DEBT CEILING. IN FACT, TREASURY COULD PAY THOSE BENEFITS EVEN IF THERE WAS ZERO TAX COLLECTED FROM ANYONE IN THIS COUNTRY FOR SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE - SUCH AS IF UNEMPLOYMENT WAS 100% - FOR A PERIOD OF MORE THAN THREE YEARS, AND NOT VIOLATE THE DEBT CEILING.

(...)

eta: another source
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

[Igel]

3. "Correct."

But that's one of the worst insults I've laid at Obama's feet (and those of his administration) in a very, very long time.

The only way not to have the cash to pay SS on 8/3 is to have spent it all beforehand *knowing* that an SS disbursement was looming. Money doesn't come in evenly. It lumps up with the monthly and quarterly filings that businesses submit. They submit them around the 15th.

Now, this may have assumed that there'd be a nice solution reached before 8/3. On the other hand, the utterance was made a week or two ago, and that was *before* the monthly filing for July. Which happens to be a quarterly filing. In other words, a pile of money was received in the last week. If Obama seriously believed that SS was more important than other things that the Federal government spends money on it would have been possible to sequester enough of the cash for the 8/3 mailing. Yes, that would probably mean cutting some service somewhere--either a small number deeply or a large number slightly.

So assuming he wasn't engaging in the SS version of "Mediscare," lying to try to instill terror into the elderly for political reasons, either to make himself look good or the GOP look bad (or both at once)--something that wouldn't earn him grown-up points and may well get him sent to bed early *before* his peas are dished out to him--it means that he let the money for the elderly go to other, apparently more important causes.

One could assume he honestly believed that there'd be a compromise already worked out by 8/3--and I personally think there will be, to be truthful. However if there isn't, it means that he and his probably will be seen to have failed to actually live up to the fiduciary responsibility placed upon him. If he believed there *would* be a deal reached, then the appropriate response would have been to say that he believed that a deal would be reached.

One could also point out that the debt ceiling deal could be reached easily. If the 8/3 SS disbursement were really one of these things "we must do everything possible to make happen," there's always a compromise. That holds for at least two sides in the debate.

In other words, there's no saving the situation: He lied or engaged is superfluous hyperbole in order to scare those dependent on the government for food, electricity, and rent; or he allowed the allocation of money to things more important that the elderly retired and the disabled receiving disability checks, realizing that there was the possibility of no debt ceiling increase; or he wasn't fiscally prudent, not sufficiently "grown up" and "responsible," to plan to salvage some money for SS.

[Riftaxe]

6. An excellent and succint answer

about the cash flow at least thank you.

[PoliticAverse]

4. How much cash will the Government have in its account on August 3rd ? n/t

[Riftaxe]

8. totally a few hundred billion

from what i can find. Admittedly it does kind of pale when the discussions involve trillions.

[PoliticAverse]

9. Here is a differing analysis that suggests the government won't have enough cash...

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/29/257003/debt-ceiling-social-security-cuts/

[Riftaxe]

12. Presumably that is a daily cash flow

or everything i have looked at as far as .gov sources is incorrect.

On edit: I cannot reconcile the numbers in anyway and the article fails to source the data, any clue on that?

[PoliticAverse]

16. Still trying to find an answer. Here's another article discussing the issue...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/can-president-obama-keep-paying-social-security-benefits-even-if-the-debt-ceiling-is-reached/2011/07/12/gIQA9myRBI_blog.html

[Riftaxe]

17. Interesting article, but i fear

it points out that we (assuming you also are not a lawyer as well :)) it pretty much comes down to lawyers in the end.

How did we as a country get to this point that we have to rely upon the lowest form of sentient life?

[indurancevile]

21. something wrong with those numbers.

[Kaleva]

5. The problem isn't the SS money itself; the problem is not having the money to send out the checks.

Or to process new claims and such.

[Riftaxe]

7. those were 2010 numbers

the CBO numbers are slightly higher, if you can call a few billion higher. The last shutdowns allowed the executive branch to direct which federal employees are essential. Never thought i would live through the days where that crappy situation came around again.

[mysuzuki2]

10. you guys do know, don't you that mist SS checks

do not go out on the 3rd of the month?

[grantcart]

11. Correct

Your OP is based on the premise that the SS Trust cash flow is entirely seperate from the cash flow of the federal government.

While the trust fund is seperate from the budget and has nothing to do with the deficit it is still tied to the cash flow and the debt ceiling of the federal government.

In other words the President can't simply segregate expenditures for Social Security outside of the total indebtedness or debt ceiling, all revenues and expenditures have to be reconciled under the debt ceiling.

In the nightmare scenario of no debt ceiling increase the President would have to either unilaterally increase the debt ceilling or prioritize expenditures. Even though Social Security revenues may currently be higher than expenditures the total debt ceiling could not be breached. Therefore the President would be forced in the position to decide where revenue dollars, both tax and other revenues (including SS revenues) would be needed most urgently after the outstanding treasury bonds were paid. IF the President decided that national security etc. required a higher priority of available cash available and no surplus dollars were available then a credit would have to be given to the SS fund.

Besides the funds for the payments are the funds required for federal employees to be paid to process the payments.

Your poll would likely fulfill the point you thought you were making if the revenues of SS were kept seperate from federal funds and not comingled as they have these many decades, ala Al Gore's 'lock box'. However the subtraction of these revenues from the government cash flow would increase dollar for dollar the need to further increase the debt ceiling.

So without any deception the President was speaking completely truthfully. Social Security revenues not withstanding on August 2nd the combined revenues and combined obligations of the federal budget, medicare, and social security will have to be reconciled under a single debt ceiling.

[Riftaxe]

14. I may very well be wrong,

The fact that revenue vastly out paces SS expenditure, just makes it the president's decision (by precedent, not constitutional convention) <think last time this garbage was pulled>.

But does not your interpretation even given a negative cash flow dismiss assets that could (not required to be liquidated) in order to fulfill the federal obligation?

Sort of a "I can gladly pay you tuesday, for a hamburger today" scenario?

[customerserviceguy]

13. FICA taxes are less than SS disbursements every month

and that has been the case for a year or two now, your scenario ignores that money would have to be transferred from the general fund to the SS account, and that other creditors of the US would not get paid.

This might have been a phony argument a few years ago, but ever since the recession/depression started, Social Security has been underfunded.

[Riftaxe]

15. My scenario is about total funding

the fact that FICA is capped, I do find offensive tho. As far as i can ascertain, SS has been funded at same levels, just some tricks played with special issue bonds.

How that came about could be politically divisive.

[customerserviceguy]

22. It's more than just tricks

Yes, when FICA taxes exceeded Social Security outflows, Congress managed to borrow the excess to fund its grand schemes, but that's not happening any more. The baby boom is now crashing against the shores of Social Security, and many folks 62-65 have started to take disability, because they can't find work.

The high-paying jobs that would always bounce back after every recession since Social Security was founded are just not there anymore. That starves the system of FICA tax dollars.

Social Security is just not sustainable in its present form, and while I agree that caps need to be raised, that's only going to be a short term solution when inflation comes roaring back, and it will take $200K a year just to live on.

[indurancevile]

18. In 2010, OASDI income from payroll taxes & benefit taxes was 661.1B. That's 55B/mo.

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/index.html

The idea that Obama would purposely imply that social security taxes are something other than a dedicated tax, and social security checks wouldn't be sent out because social security payroll taxes would be spent on something else -- disgusts me.

If it's going to be spent on something else, why should we pay it?

That means median earners are paying INCOME taxes at higher rates than the super-rich.

[Motown_Johnny]

19. a guarantee you can't enforce is a foolish move, he didn't make a foolish move

It was the correct statement and anything else would have been a mistake.

[blkmusclmachine]

20. LIE

[Riftaxe]

26. What part of it are lies

I can source the numbers easily enough? or do you take politics as a religion, i am not judging your desire to be a zealot (fascinating etymology behind that word)

[robcon]

23. The president's words were deplorable.... knowingly untrue.

Social security checks are not at risk.

[PoliticAverse]

25. Daily Treasury statements - see how much cash the government has...

http://www.fms.treas.gov/dts/index.html

[Riftaxe]

27. Now that is a fascinating link

thank you!