Posted on 10/30/2011 4:58:03 AM PDT by Stajack
Now, Social Security is sucking money out of the Treasury. This year, it will add a projected $46 billion to the nation’s budget problems, according to projections by system trustees. Replacing cash lost to a one-year payroll tax holiday will require an additional $105 billion. If the payroll tax break is expanded next year, as President Obama has proposed, Social Security will need an extra $267 billion to pay promised benefits.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Agree mostly but the money would have to been invested in something that could have been traded for foreign goods like gold or foreign bonds otherwise it all ends up being too few young Americans giving to many elderly Americans their money.
Nearly two months ago, while STILL a candidate for the Republican nomination for President, Michigan Congressman Thaddeus McCotter introduced the SAVE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT (HR 2889)at a conference held at the Heritage Foundation. The plan SAVES Social Security WITHOUT raising the payroll tax, WITHOUT raising the retirement age, WITHOUT reducing benefits, and WITHOUT privatizing the system. The plan, formulated by Cong. McCotter and Peter J. Ferrara, was scored by the Social Security actuary, who stated that it would save the Government $8.3 trillion over the next three decades, the largest reduction of government spending in the history of government.
The reaction? NONE! A total media blackout which not only kept the public in the dark regarding the plan, but forced McCotter to withdraw his candidacy.
Please do some research on HR 2889 and explain to me why it was and is being ignored by the media.
I'm not a Rick Perry fan, but he was right on point with respect to Social Security being a Ponzi scheme. But unlike most Ponzi schemes, this one is being held up by the Feds AND it has a powerful constituency behind it, so it remains to be seen if it will collapse of its own weight.
Top of the morning to you.
It’s going broke now because of the payroll tax cuts.
With 50 million seniors and 60 million total, it’s staying broke because of the increased seniors. There doesn’t have to be any commingling of funds to make SS broke. It’s broke on it’s own.
Bingo!!! Sadly, many of my customers at my store have been laid off and are in their 40s. And not one of them has savings. I was stunned.
It is amazing the mentality people in this country have that everything will be rosy and they don't need a back up plan.
Any historian or economist can tell you the economy is cyclical. Recessions / Depressions occur usually on a 20 year basis.
But I don't understand why so many think they don't need to have savings! I've been struck by deaths in the family and many other unforeseen events requiring money. I just don't understand how people don't save money, life isn't going to be a perfect journey that is predictable. There will always be bumps in the road and you never know when they will occur.
Let's just say that I haven't depended on Social Security for my...well...for anything.
(And I'm not trusting in a government rescue!)
(Is anybody stupid enough to think that those thugs in Washington are looking out for anybody's interests but their own?) (Obviously millions are. They're called Democrats.)
("Don't trust yo' soul to no backwoods country lawyer," but if you have to make a choice it would be a better bet than a slick Washington politician!)
Thanks
Minute 1:13: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acGKor6OFxQ
He reduces spending in other areas to pay for SS. So to tide the SS fund until “Fifty year olds” start drawing from their own “personal accounts” he pays for the SS deficit out of the general fund.
It never EVER did!
Rock on Dengar01, good for you.
Social Security will need an extra $267 billion to pay promised benefits?
Keep Michelle at home. That should do it.
Agree - I could see these clowns investing the SS funds in FAIL opportunities, if not outright scams like Solyndra, et al.
Yep.
For all the years SS was bringing in all that extra cash the politicians saw those dollars and used them to buy votes (what's new?). There are so many things paid out under SS that has nothing to do with retirement that it makes me sick.
I do not know the numbers but I wonder how solvent SS would be if the crooks in Congress did not spend any of the SS money, throughout history, except to pay out for retirees?
With the monetary policy we’ve had during the past decade, people are literally punished for saving. Interest rates are next to nothing, and money sitting in an account at the bank is literally eaten away by inflation and higher costs of living. There would be much more saving if people were rewarded for forming capital.
Couple the above with lower to stagnant wages, and you have some real problems....
Wait and see.
..and brought to you by the same people that said privatization wouldn't work. That should be the talking point; they said private accounts don't work so therefore they should NOT be used to fix Social Security.
10 years ago an idea was put forth to help alleviate this day, and who stopped it, demagogued it? That's right, the stupid Democrats--just like another poster mentioned it should be DEMOCRATS, and DEMOCRATS only that should pay for this.
Private accounts don't work, remember that Democrats.
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.