This is straight off the unbiased website factcheck.org. IM sure you all have heard of this. I am not trying to be a muckraker, just simply trying to start a discussion of social security. Anyone disagree with the numbers?
Yea, we should listen to the government groups who told us there was a $10 Trillion surplus in election 2000. I say by 2012 we are in the crapper. A heart bypass surgery cost 45k, SS is the least of our problems.
>>>Anyone disagree with the numbers?
I already pinged our resident expert.
Just come back to your thread when he responds. That will show if you are a muckraker(?) or not.
I really don't know. I can't read beyond the first few paragraphs that play gymnastics with the most basic of truths...the definition of bankruptcy and the historical truth of returns on investment. If they have to wiggle that quickly, why read on?
That's a GOOD one!!! Factcheck.org UNBIASED? That's a HOOT!
Now listen, factcheck.org is named in that ironic sense that sometimes a real fat person is nicknamed "slats" or a real tall guy is called "shorty".
There is NOTHIING unbiased about factcheck.org.
One issue alone proves this. TFactcheck.org never mentions that Social Security is broke NOW. Or, that there IS NO SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND, contrary to the propaganda. The money is all spent! Every cent! All that is left is unsecured IOUs that will have to be redeedmed with tax money or more borrowing.
Did factcheck.org think to mention that little tidbit?
Nope, they did not.
If you sincerely believe this crap you have posted, you need to do a whole lot of serious reading. Educate yourself, sir.
If you don't really believe this manure, but are just SPREADING it, then you are not really welcome 'round these parts.
In 1960, the federal courts ruled Social Security is a legislated entitlement. The arrangement between the government and the taxpayers is not a contract, even thought the Dems have used this term. The courts gave the government maximum flexibility to change Social Security based on the situation at hand. At worst, for the young people, Congress can force them to pay and deprive them of any benefits when they become old.
Anyone disagree with the numbers?
No need to. The numbers mean nothing. Social Security money is paid into the general govt fund. Social security checks are drawn on that same fund. The U.S. govt would have to go bankrupt for the SS system to go bankrupt. Eventually SS will have taken in less money that it pays out. What then? It just becomes another govt program that doesn't pay for itself.
These SS doomsayers rely on people dumb enough to believe that a congressman looking to be re-elected is going to cut SS benifits by a third. It would be political suicide.