Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

I have a small question. After just listing to Rush, and Rush talking about Bush's social security plan to avoid a crisis, is The US House and Senate currently under restraint to keep their handles off of the social security trust fund?

Basically within 13 years (2018 according to Bush and Rush), dollar outflows will exceed inflows. So, are those numbers correct with the trust fund off limits inspite of budget defecits?

If not, the phones need to ringing off the hook with our representatives.

1 posted on 02/18/2005 11:30:15 AM PST by RSmithOpt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: RSmithOpt
is The US House and Senate currently under restraint to keep their handles off of the social security trust fund

Bwahahahahahaha! The trust fund is a bunch of government bonds. That means that Congress has already grabbed the cash, spent it, and left behind an IOU.

2 posted on 02/18/2005 11:33:56 AM PST by KarlInOhio (Blackwell for Governor 2006: hated by the 'Rats, feared by the RINOs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RSmithOpt

You're a few decades too late.


3 posted on 02/18/2005 11:34:34 AM PST by IMRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RSmithOpt

Let me be the first.

THERE IS NO TRUST FUND!!

Social Security has been going into the General Fund for years now,

The Congress already got their hands on it.


4 posted on 02/18/2005 11:34:46 AM PST by Al Gator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RSmithOpt

I was gonna say it, but they beat me to it. The trust fund is a (unkept) promise.


5 posted on 02/18/2005 11:36:05 AM PST by ManHunter (You can run, but you'll only die tired...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RSmithOpt
1) There is no trust fund
2) Yes, by 2018 outflows will exceed inflows meaning the Treasury/budget will have to make up the difference.
6 posted on 02/18/2005 11:36:53 AM PST by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RSmithOpt
Yes they are accurate, and there IS NO TRUSTFUND!

it is just a accounting gimmick. The general fund must begin pouring money into SS in 2018, or maybe a bit earlier.

They left a marker when they spent the money on general budget items, and SS will be cashing in those markers.

The unfortunate disaster that is coming, is due to the fact that Medicare will be asking for 10 times what it needs now during the same period of time.

It is a financial cliff!

8 posted on 02/18/2005 11:42:56 AM PST by Cold Heat (What are fears but voices awry?Whispering harm where harm is not and deluding the unwary. Wordsworth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RSmithOpt

The SSTF does not represent an asset to the USG, rather it is an unfunded liability. Anytime you hear a politican using the "solvency" of the SSTF to describe the state of SS, you know that it is a bunch of BS.


16 posted on 02/18/2005 12:44:59 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RSmithOpt
is The US House and Senate currently under restraint to keep their handles off of the social security trust fund?

THERE IS NO TRUST FUND!

The so called "trust fund" is nothing more than IOU's because congress has spent EVERY PENNY that has ever been collected in SS taxes.

19 posted on 02/18/2005 12:53:28 PM PST by Phantom Lord (Advantages are taken, not handed out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RSmithOpt

Here is an easy summation of how you are getting screwed:

Right now, for every three people that pay into the system, one person gets benefits. The system has been set to this 3:1 ratio since about 1950.

For the past 55 years, the system should have been gaining in revenue since the money contributed by the other two people was not going out to beneficiaries. Instead of this money going into the so-called lockbox, the money was spent. There's no money! The system stays solvent because there are more people paying into the system than beneficiaries.

At some point, because of the Baby Boom, the number of beneficiaries will surpass the number of contributors. At that point, the government will have to make up the difference.


21 posted on 02/18/2005 12:56:59 PM PST by Eagle of Liberty ("Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." —Albert Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RSmithOpt

Proof that there is no trust fund:

In order to have a trust fund, there has to be money in it to draw from, right? Okay, that settled, the first social security recipient - Ida Mae Fuller - contributed $24.75 and withdrew $22,889. (Only the lunatic Federal government could allow something as idiotic as this.) Assuming there were thousands of other Americans who began withdrawing at that same time, how could there have been a "trust fund"? It was - and still is - a "pay as you go" Ponzi scheme.


35 posted on 02/20/2005 9:01:14 AM PST by DennisR (Look around - there are countless observable clues that God exists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson