Head In Sand: Treasury Secretary Lew Warns Of Debt Ceiling, Not Rising Debt Or Entitlements

U.S. Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew warned Congress that “uncertainty” over the debt limit is starting to stress financial markets and trying to time an increase to the last minute “could be very dangerous.” Lew was speaking in testimony prepared for a hearing before the Senate Finance Committee today.

But not the growth rate in debt or entitlements? Obamacare and other entitlements will lead to even more explosive debt growth in the US.

The US and much of the world has already been experiencing explosive debt in both the public and private sectors. See this link for a chart showing the growth over time.

All this makes the initial jobless claims spike look trivial. The 2nd worst print during 2013.

Speaker Boehner is seeking a “kick the can down the road” strategy that Democrats should like. That is, ignore that appalling growth in entitlements and debt and keep hoping nobody notices.

Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew warned Congress that uncertainty over the debt limit is stressing financial markets out.

Oct. 10 (Bloomberg) — U.S. Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew warned Congress that “uncertainty” over the debt limit is starting to stress financial markets and trying to time an increase to the last minute “could be very dangerous.” Lew was speaking in testimony prepared for a hearing before the Senate Finance Committee today.

But not the growth rate in debt or entitlements? Obamacare and other entitlements will lead to even more explosive debt growth in the US.

The US and much of the world has already been experiencing explosive debt in both the public and private sectors. See this link for a chart showing the growth over time.

1 month repos and reverses are jumping on the possibility of default.

Similarly, 1 month Ted spreads have spiked as well.

All this makes the initial jobless claims spike look trivial. The 2nd worst print during 2013.

Speaker Boehner is seeking a “kick the can down the road” strategy that Democrats should like. That is, ignore that appalling growth in entitlements and debt and keep hoping nobody notices.

If Lew was speaking from the point of view of the Treasury, he would be wanting to preserve the so-called “credit rating” of the US government.

If that was his intention, he would only be advocating for lower government spending, since that would be all that a real “banker” would want to see since the debt pile is so high. A real bank would not be lending more when so much is owed relative to annual revenue without a plan to reduce spending.

Social Security and Medicare are the only areas that politicians want to cut, since that is cash going back to the sheeple, not to Federal vendors, contracting companies and employees.

Social Security and Medicare, however, were set up as separate trust funds with separate payroll deductions.

But we can all see now how the utterly corrupt and morally bankrupt financial elites and their servants, Congress, seek to lump those trust fund withholdings in with Federal income tax withholdings in the minds of the sheeple.

“Social Security and Medicare, however, were set up as separate trust funds”

Bush proposed personal accounts, which would be your own property, but the idea went no where

sorry my friend, but that is simply not the reality. the so-called “trust funds” are a fiction. the only “assets” in the funds are IOUs from the Treasury, a promise from the State to pay itself. these are pay-as-you-go programs (with your taxes paying the benefits of current retirees, and you dependent on future taxpayers for your benefits) and can be cut at will by washington

That's right; there are some key points...

From paycheck withholdings for SS, there were annual surpluses all along. More cash came in every year than was paid out in benefits.

This was, by the laws they set up, only invested by the funds in Treasury debt, purportedly so it would be in a "safe" investment.

But follow the cash: this means that SS cash was exchanged for Treasury (special non-marketable) bonds. The Treasury then successfully "borrowed" all that CASH from the "funds".

So there is a pile of paper in the fund that purports to be worth a few trillion, but it can't be sold for cash. It can only be redeemed by the Treasury (cash goes from Treasury back to the fund). And YET - Treasury lives hand to mouth on taxes and borrowing - it has no "stash" of cash. Money goes out of the Treasury faster than it comes in.

Up until recently, the fund cash surpluses always meant that the funds "reinvested" what Treasury redeemed, so Treasury really did not have to redeem - and the funds were always coming with extra new cash to buy even more bonds.

The only way there ever was to redeem the "investments" for cash was to go hat in hand to the Treasury/Congress looking for cash - the funds just never had to. Now they're starting to have small deficits, paying out more than they take in, and this will continue for a few decades, getting more significant each year until a peak in a couple decades.

Yes, the trust funds were always a fiction. Really, a crime. Because Congress and key officials who were proponents knowingly represented as an "investment" a fund that was merely a new tax for Congress to spend part of. If a private concern created such an investment the officers would be prosecuted and jailed (if they weren't connected to the corrupto-bankers).

It's a swindle on such a grand scale that the perpetrators should be jailed for life after being stripped of all their assets.

The Federally-forced-at-the-point-of-a-gun employee and employer contributions into the SS is running at 12.4% of every working individuals pay, up to $113,700 per year - even if they pay zero Federal Income Tax.

If people earning say $25,000 per year put $3,100 away per year and kept reinvesting it at even modest gains, having contributed over $150,000 just in principal, they'd have some kind of nest egg at least - one that I'm SURE most people at that earning level would never dream of having.

Instead, having $3,100 per year sent in to the gubmint in exchange for being able only to accept a below-subsistence level payout when they reach a retirement age, and being convinced to think they could rely on that and that it would be "impossible" for them to save anything on their own at their pay level after all taxes are withheld, we see a large part of the elderly population have no financial gain at all to show for a lifetime, just a near-helpless dependence on an increasingly totalitarian state which operates as a front for international finance.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.