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

To: Principled

Any tax cut would thereby be a “funding cut” for Social Security that would deteriorate our ability to pay benefits, using that calculus.

There is not a Social Security “trust fund”. All payroll taxes go directly into the general fund and are then spent - with 3 dollars spent for every 2 dollars going in overall.

How can you “short the trust fund further” when... wait for it.... THERE IS NO TRUST FUND.

Trust fund = lock box. There isn’t either one.


50 posted on 12/21/2011 8:59:29 AM PST by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]


To: allmendream

The funds do not go into the general fund without a debt swap first being made. The debt and any remaining funds stay in this place that we have different names for... while the dollars then go to the general fund.

Do you see that by shorting the funds that are intended to be used to pay SS benefits requires that an increased amount will be required to be pulled from other source [ie our income taxes]?

Do you see that income taxes are having to be taken from income tax payers at an accelerated pace due to this cut in SS funding?

And for the last time, THERE IS NO LOCK BOX!


53 posted on 12/21/2011 9:07:56 AM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

To: allmendream
“There is not a Social Security “trust fund”. All payroll taxes go directly into the general fund and are then spent - with 3 dollars spent for every 2 dollars going in overall.”

Payroll taxes contain both Medicare and Social Security payments. The Social Security portion is used to pay current retirees. Any excess is “invested” in special nonnegotiable US Treasuries and becomes part of the National Debt. This amount is tracked and has been referred to as the “Trust Fund”.

Whenever the amounts paid out are more than what is paid in, the Treasuries are “transferred/cashed” to cover the shortfall thus reducing the debt, as well as the amount of money left in these treasuries to cover the baby-boom retirees.

Social Security is totally financed from the current and past payroll deductions period, not from the general fund.

The Pubbies got suckered into agreeing to this payroll cut last year. They should have taken a page from the Dems playbook:

After stripping billions from Medicare to award to the Insurance Companies through millions of new customers thereby hurting the elderly, The Democrats are now trying to help those earning $100,000 at the expense of the elderly who depend entirely on Social Security and are practically living in poverty.

Payroll taxes will not be enough to cover all the checks that need to be sent out(Oh the Horror). When Granny starves it will all be the fault of the Democrats throwing the elderly under the bus.

Or simply OH MY GOD, the Democrats are trying to make sure that the elderly don't get their Social Security checks. The are trying to starve Granny in an effort to make sure that she doesn't live to see those last 5 years of life(they are the most expensive you know).

Surely sarcasm tag is not needed?

Anyway they lost the opportunity to steal the title of protector of Social Security from the Dems. The elderly vote - and they are a rapidly growing segment of the population as the baby boomers retire.

97 posted on 12/21/2011 5:29:54 PM PST by greeneyes (Moderation in defense of your country is NO virtue. Let Freedom Ring.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | 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