Stupid article.
"Raiding" the trust fund is better than letting it sit full of dollars doing nothing but losing their value.
Do you really think it's a good idea to let your money sit in a back without collecting interest? Maybe we should stuff SS money under a matress so it will be nice and safe from those raiders.
I think we're using the wrong language when discussing Social Security. We can start by calling "raiding" what it really is: the purchase of government bonds that earn interest.
Yes. The government is already investing social security money by buying bonds.
ROFLLLLL!!
hey, I have a bridge in Alaska I would like to sell you...
really....
Can I ask where the interest comes from on those bonds?
I'd feel better if the "surplus" were invested in the private sector. Silly me.
You really are misguided!!!!. They are buying bonds that will never be redeemed because they aren't worth the paper they are printed on. This is just robbing Peter to pay Paul and you know it.
It's not as if there were any "real" money there. The "lock Box" is full of gov't IOU"s.
They don't actually, just take the money, They "borrow" it, and give gov't Bonds or certificates to replace it.
Anyhow, the actual money winds up in the General Pork Barrel Fund, which is why SS reform is unpopular with our politicians.
This is also why they have a vested interest in inflation. Since the money is replaceed on a dollar for dollar basis, dollars from as long 50 years ago are replaced with dollars of present value.
Early last year, after having recieved one of the anti- reform letters from AARP, I wrote and urged my Rep (D) Henry Cuellar, Tx. to support SS reform. I recieved in reply a letter, adhering to the "Lock Box" myth.
I know he is smarter than his former opponent, Zero Rodriquez, But, I am still not sure whether he is parroting Dem Policy or really believes there is actual money in the "lock BOX".
Stupid article.
"Raiding" the trust fund is better than letting it sit full of dollars doing nothing but losing their value. (Wrong!! Raiding the trust fund-which doesn't exist because Social Security is lock, stock and barrel part of the general fund-doesn't cause the dollars to lose their value. It just means that there is no extra money to fund the Syestem. It is never paid back. The System operates on a dollar in and dollar out basis. That is why the politicians are always saying the System will go broke in this year or that year in the future. They always want to raise your contribution to make sure there is a surplus to 'raid'.)
Do you really think it's a good idea to let your money sit in a back without collecting interest? Maybe we should stuff SS money under a matress so it will be nice and safe from those raiders. (What interest? If all that money borrowed-'raided'-over the past thirty years was collecting interest do you think there would be a problem with the System? I think not. That is why letting the younger people in this country have their own 'savings account' would be a good idea.)
I think we're using the wrong language when discussing Social Security. We can start by calling "raiding" what it really is: the purchase of government bonds that earn interest. (Wrong, again! If bonds were purchased they would have maturity dates and the principal would be paid back. That has never been done. Once the Social Security surplus is 'raided', it is gone, forever.)
Yes. The government is already investing social security money by buying bonds. (No! No! No!)
That we raised the debt to 9 trillion in order not to defualt on them! Great plan!
Oh......my.......God.......
(shaking head at the unbelievable stupidity of such a statement....)
L
Yes. The government is already investing social security money by buying bonds.
You would be correct, except for one minor thing: They're not investing it, they're spending it.
And, yes, that makes "raiding" accurate.