They really don't want to pay back the Social Security funds they borrowed.

[kentuck]

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/04/10/us/10debt-gfc.html?ref=politics

[originalpckelly]

1. Of course they don't, and as it stands the current benefit is skipping out on the bill.

They stole people's pensions, and then expected them to live off of that small amount most people get from Social Security.
Now they're coming for your Social Security, what little you get.

[Change Happens]

2. The money will never EVER be put back in - GONE!

Our country/economy does not make enough money to pay anything back, we need to have surpluses, very large surpluses, to pay things back - to anyone...

[fasttense]

4. All that needs be done is make the corporate elite and the uber rich pay their fair share of taxes.

And Social Security does not add anything to the debt. It has it's own revenue stream. It is self funded.

This is just playing with numbers and statistics.

[Change Happens]

12. Yes going forward, but the 2.6 trillion has been spent, so the new increased taxes

will have to be increased to pay current and (during the process) future retirees, AND pay back the money...Remember, the rich and powerful are now too strong to "make them" pay more...etc.

PLUS, not sure where I heard this, someone cited a very interesting statistic indicating that no matter what our tax rates are, the federal government only manages to collect around 18-19% of GDP in taxes, meaning, no matter what we do, those with money find ways to pay less!!!

[HysteryDiagnosis]

3. If your retirement was a country with lots of brown people they would put the

money back into it, you might like the form it comes in though.

[bemildred]

5. Yep. nt

[kentuck]

6. The question is:

Should they pay it back? What other debt should have priority over the Social Security debt? Maybe it is finally time to take it out of the budget and put it in a lock box so they cannot borrow it anymore?

[SoCalDem]

7. They can't... they spent it all and gave most of it to campaign contributors

via sweetheart deals for their corporations & lowered taxes & boodles of loopholes..and of course throughout the years these same pols have gone to the well of money..over and over and over for more handouts..

[Mist]

8. I've been saying for years that Soc. Security has had so much "borrowed" from it that

pols are desperate to avoid trying to pay it back. Which also explains the endless talk of Soc. Sec. privatization. They're hoping to avoid having the full extent of their "borrowings" remain hidden.

[Demeter]

9. Too Bad. Pay Up

[OnionPatch]

11. + 1000

[JackRiddler]

13. That's the right attitude, but look at what the Democratic leadership & admin are saying:

Most of them also see a "crisis" in Social Security, and are blind to the Pentagon.

[90-percent]

10. How about a cartoon?

The conventional wisdom about S.S. is utterly muddied. Even for a DU'er like me, who tries to be well informed.

i could really use a cartoon to explain the history of S.S. funds - where they come from, how much their is, when the government started borrowing from it, etc?

Same with Progressive Taxation - which would be the cure for a lot of our unjust distribution of wealth.

School me, please.

-90% jimmy

What especially irks me is the Republicans stance:

Yeah, sure, we spent it. It's gone. Tough shit. That means we have to take even more from you to make up for it.

Like Animal House; You made a mistake. You trusted us.

[center_left]

14. SS Funds

In a nutshell, the funds all came from payroll taxes paid 50-50 by working people and their employers (over many decades) who thought they were paying into the US retirement system. The funds (supposedly bankrupt) have run a two and half trillion dollar surplus that the government borrowed to pay for other things (this money is now part of the national debt). I say if you're going to dismantle the system, then you have to give back to these workers every penny they paid in plus interest compounded.

[90-percent]

16. Thank you

So, they borrowed the money in the same way our government borrows money from China?

Why doesn't the government simply default on the China Debt and then pay back the SS Fund?

I know why, of course.

It does seem like their message is that they are perfectly fine with screwing the employers and workers who contributed the billions over many decades, but not so much for defaulting on China.

It has a screw the American worker and kiss Chinese butt patina to it all. Steal from the guy that's easiest to steal from.

Thanks again for your explanation.

-90% jimmy

[pa28]

15. Paying back SS funds is not the problem.

They just don't want to pay you.

Privatizing the system, as Republicans wanted to do in 2005, would have required making good on the "worthless IOU's" in the trust fund. When it came to moving those assets to financial institutions suddenly the "IOU's" were no longer "worthless".

If you'll recall Dick Cheney made the rounds on Sunday shows referring to this money as a "transition cost" instead.