Thread: Social Security

Got a notice from SSA yesterday,, gonna get a 5.8 raise this year from SSA and I get a raise of about that much on one other pension and I doubt that get any raise on one of em tho, They just seem to not have the know how to invest in the best.

Originally Posted by blackgang

Got a notice from SSA yesterday,, gonna get a 5.8 raise this year from SSA and I get a raise of about that much on one other pension and I doubt that get any raise on one of em tho, They just seem to not have the know how to invest in the best.

Yes, that 5.8% is a very large increase.

Add the coming (already on Jan. 1st, 2008) 77 million baby boomers, and you will see an insolvent US government.

Medicare will be worse.

Originally Posted by Milkman

Add the coming (already on Jan. 1st, 2008) 77 million baby boomers, and you will see an insolvent US government. Medicare will be worse.

I do not think that what happens Jan 1st will make the USA insolvent, it seems that the people who still work and pay SSA every week that will make it insolvent if they do not pay.
So as one of your elders, I beseech you to be sure and pay every dime that you can so that me and a few million others who have worked long and hard for this income will continue to receive it every 3rd day of the month for years to come, my doctor told me last week that I should live for 10 more years and I do need your money.
Never mind about Medicare, I get my medical care here, and I do not have to pay the $75.00 per month I did there.

BG, I wish you well in all areas of life.

Here is a brief video on SS:



Note: I am putting this youtube is also in the "Strongest Economy in the World" thread.

Talk about Social Security, but I am skeptical of any solutions: However....if Obama does address this "Third Rail" of politics I'll hold him in high regard.

Obama Says He Will Seek to Overhaul Retiree Spending Doug Mills/The New York Times
President-elect Barack Obama with Nancy Killefer, his appointee as White House chief performance officer, during a news conference in Washington on Wednesday. More Photos >


By JEFF ZELENY and JOHN HARWOOD
Published: January 7, 2009
WASHINGTON — President-elect Barack Obama said Wednesday that overhauling Social Security and Medicare would be “a central part” of his administration’s efforts to contain federal spending, signaling for the first time that he would wade into the thorny politics of entitlement programs.

As the Congressional Budget Office projected a record $1.2 trillion budget deficit for this year even before the costs of the nearly $800 billion economic stimulus package being taken up by the House and the Senate, Mr. Obama stepped up his effort to reassure lawmakers and the financial markets that he plans a vigorous effort to keep the government’s finances from deteriorating further.
Speaking at a news conference in Washington, he provided no details of his approach to rein in Social Security and Medicare, which are projected to consume a growing share of government spending as the baby boom generation ages into retirement over the next two decades. But he said he would have more to say about the issue when he unveiled a budget next month.

Should he follow through with a serious effort to cut back the rates of growth of the two programs, he would be opening up a potentially risky battle that neither party has shown much stomach for. The programs have proved almost sacrosanct in political terms, even as they threaten to grow so large as to be unsustainable in the long run. President Bush failed in his effort to overhaul Social Security, and Medicare only grew larger during his administration with the addition of prescription drug coverage for retirees.

Link & Entire: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/08/us...a.html?_r=1&hp

It looks like the US government will....borrow money from China to pay out Social Security soon - Not.

Recession Puts a Major Strain On Social Security Trust Fund

As Payroll Tax Revenue Falls, So Does Surplus

By Lori Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 31, 2009

The U.S. recession is wreaking havoc on yet another front: the Social Security trust fund.
This Story

With unemployment rising, the payroll tax revenue that finances Social Security benefits for nearly 51 million retirees and other recipients is falling, according to a report from the Congressional Budget Office. As a result, the trust fund's annual surplus is forecast to all but vanish next year -- nearly a decade ahead of schedule -- and deprive the government of billions of dollars it had been counting on to help balance the nation's books.

While the new numbers will not affect payments to current Social Security recipients, experts say, the disappearing surplus could have considerable implications for the government's already grim financial situation.

The Treasury Department has for decades borrowed money from the Social Security trust fund to finance government operations. If it is no longer able to do so, it could be forced to borrow an additional $700 billion over the next decade from China, Japan and other investors. And at some point, perhaps as early as 2017, according to the CBO, the Treasury would have to start repaying the billions it has borrowed from the trust fund over the past 25 years, driving the nation further into debt or forcing Congress to raise taxes.

Link & Entire: washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines

...I would say the US Govt will TRY to borrow money from China for this.

Social Security: the biggest scam ever created.

Social Security: There Is No Trust; There Is No Fund



Social Security is back in the limelight where once again its problems will no doubt be ignored.

Please consider Recession Puts a Major Strain On Social Security Trust Fund.

The U.S. recession is wreaking havoc on yet another front: the Social Security trust fund.

With unemployment rising, the payroll tax revenue that finances Social Security benefits for nearly 51 million retirees and other recipients is falling, according to a report from the Congressional Budget Office. As a result, the trust fund's annual surplus is forecast to all but vanish next year -- nearly a decade ahead of schedule -- and deprive the government of billions of dollars it had been counting on to help balance the nation's books.

The Treasury Department has for decades borrowed money from the Social Security trust fund to finance government operations. If it is no longer able to do so, it could be forced to borrow an additional $700 billion over the next decade from China, Japan and other investors. And at some point, perhaps as early as 2017, according to the CBO, the Treasury would have to start repaying the billions it has borrowed from the trust fund over the past 25 years, driving the nation further into debt or forcing Congress to raise taxes.
My Comment: Therein lies the rub. There is no fund per se. It's all been spent, and then some.

"It suggests we better get working on Social Security and stop burying our heads in the sand," said Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.), the senior Republican on the Senate Budget Committee. "The Social Security trust fund, though technically in balance, is going to put huge pressures on taxpayers very soon."
My Comment: There is negative money in the fund so it's complete nonsense to claim it is "technically in balance".

Many liberal analysts reject the notion that Social Security needs fixing, arguing that the system is projected to fully support payments to beneficiaries through 2041 -- so long as the Treasury repays its debts.

My Comment: "...So long as the Treasury repays its debt" And exactly how likely is that? Has anyone looked at Obama's budget?

The trust fund has long taken in more in revenue from payroll taxes and other sources than it pays out in benefits. Last August, the CBO predicted that surplus would exceed $80 billion this year and next, then rise to around $90 billion before slowly evaporating by 2020. But the rapidly deteriorating economy -- particularly the loss of more than 4 million jobs -- has driven those numbers much lower much faster, with the surplus expected to hit $16 billion this year and only $3 billion next year, then vanish entirely by 2017.

In his budget, Obama predicted that the trust fund surplus would hit $30 billion this year, according to Mark Lassiter, a spokesman for the Social Security Administration.

But that number, too, is far less than the $80 billion the trustees had forecast for 2009. In addition to declining revenues, Lassiter said the system is likely to incur higher expenses due to big jumps in new retirement and disability claims. Both are expected to rise by at least 12 percent this year compared with 2008.
My Comment: Can we stop with the nonsense? Revenues exceed payouts but that does not mean there is a fund. Every penny and then some has been borrowed and spent. And even the so called surplus is falling like a rock, a decade faster than expected.

Obama's $9.3 Trillion Budget Deficit

Inquiring minds are pondering Obama budget could bring $9.3 trillion in deficits.

President Barack Obama's budget would produce $9.3 trillion in deficits over the next decade, more than four times the deficits of Republican George W. Bush's presidency, congressional auditors said Friday.

The new Congressional Budget Office figures offered a far more dire outlook for Obama's budget than the new administration predicted just last month — a deficit $2.3 trillion worse. It's a prospect even the president's own budget director called unsustainable.

The dismal deficit figures, if they prove to be accurate, inevitably raise the prospect that Obama and his Democratic allies controlling Congress would have to consider raising taxes after the recession ends or else pare back his agenda.

By CBO's calculation, Obama's budget would generate deficits averaging almost $1 trillion a year of red ink over 2010-2019.

Worst of all, CBO says the deficit under Obama's policies would never go below 4 percent of the size of the economy, figures that economists agree are unsustainable. By the end of the decade, the deficit would exceed 5 percent of gross domestic product, a dangerously high level.

Most disturbing to Obama allies like Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., are the longer term projections, which climb above $1 trillion again by the end of the next decade and approach 6 percent of GDP by 2019.

The worsening economy is responsible for the even deeper fiscal mess inherited by Obama. As an illustration, CBO says the deficit for the current budget year, which began Oct. 1, will top $1.8 trillion, $93 billion more than foreseen by the White House. That would equal 13 percent of GDP, a level not seen since World War II.

Let's return to the ridiculous claim made by analysts: Many liberal analysts reject the notion that Social Security needs fixing, arguing that the system is projected to fully support payments to beneficiaries through 2041 -- so long as the Treasury repays its debts.

For starters it is clear to see the 2041 figure is nonsense. And given that every cent of the fund has been spent, exactly how is the treasury supposed to repay that fund in light of $9.3 trillion (with a T) budget deficits when the "surplus" is a mere $16 Billion (with a B)?

Finally, why does everyone continue the charade of calling Social Security a "trust fund" when it's clearly not a fund and there cannot possibly be any trust in it?

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogsp...ust-there.html

Interesting, not surprising, but also disturbing: earlier INSOLVENCY for the US government.

In 2008, the Treasury Department issued the “Intragovernmental Holdings” account $254 billion in bonds (IOU’s), and in the first half of fiscal 2009 this account actually became a net seller of bonds. Because the account is not broken down by individual trust fund, it is difficult to see which specific trust fund liquidated their bonds, but we suspect it was Medicare. The benefits currently being paid out of Medicare are already running higher than its inflows, so the difference must have been made up by sales of its IOU bonds.

Obviously this is a very troubling development for the US, and unfortunately it is likely to get worse. This year’s Social Security fund is only expected to balance, which is bad news for the government. Along with Social Security, Medicare is one of the trust funds that should be posting surpluses right now in anticipation of the massive future commitments the retiring Baby Boomers will require.

As it stands, Medicare is in an operating deficit in 2009 with premiums coming in at $14 billion and outlays totaling $348 billion.

8 The difference will be supplemented by sales of its IOU bonds, which will ultimately add to the amount of new government debt that must be sold in fiscal 2009. We won’t speculate on what would happen to the Social Security program if new buyers for US debt disappeared, but we should all bear in mind that in that scenario the special-issue ‘IOU’s’ in the “Intragovernmental Holdings” account would be rendered worthless, and the US Government’s social ‘safety net’ would vanish.

8 Daily Treasury statement, June 17th. Retrieved on June 17, 2009 from:

Link: http://www.sprott.com/Docs/Marketsat.../June_2009.pdf

I knew that was gonna happen when you guys gave the keys to the vault to that nigger and he started throwing money around and running out from under it.
Can't say I didn't TELL YA SO!

OK, It is going faster than was figured, but it will last til 2037 and that is longer than I will last.

Social Security Trustees: Economic Downturn Leads to Worsening of Long-Range Financing Outlook

(May 2009)The Social Security Board of Trustees today released its annual report on the financial health of the Social Security Trust Funds. The Trustees project that program costs will exceed tax revenues in 2016, one year sooner than projected in last year’s report. The combined assets of the Old-Age and Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) Trust Funds will be exhausted in 2037, four years sooner than projected last year. The report is available in both text and portable document format.

I dont understand why they have make it a 'social security payment'. It is just another tax.

Cant they just tax people two or three percent more and then give everyone a pension when they are too old to work?

That does work in some countries.

I dont understand why they have make it a 'social security payment'. It is just another tax.

I bypass IGNORE on this one because I couldn't see anywqy that you would ram your rabid femanist shit to far here.
SSA is not a tax but a set % of your gross each payday and did not increase with increased income like tax [on a good week the tax on me was sometimes 67% of gross] and was only taken out for a set amount of income for the year [1964 was cutoff at $4800 gross]
Income Tax is increased % depending on how much you make in a short period, one week will be 38% and a short week might be 3%.

Originally Posted by blackgang

I dont understand why they have make it a 'social security payment'. It is just another tax.

I bypass IGNORE on this one because I couldn't see anywqy that you would ram your rabid femanist shit to far here.
SSA is not a tax but a set % of your gross each payday and did not increase with increased income like tax [on a good week the tax on me was sometimes 67% of gross] and was only taken out for a set amount of income for the year [1964 was cutoff at $4800 gross]
Income Tax is increased % depending on how much you make in a short period, one week will be 38% and a short week might be 3%.

SS payments are TAX.

Period.

You are full of shit milky, they are not a tax. period.
You can pay the SSA yourself, if you worked for some business's then they were not taken, and even if you are tax exempt the SSA is still taken and is not figured as a tax.
Railroad has it's own pension and SSA was not payed by those people. but they do pay Income tax.
You never reach a dollar limit where taxes are not taken out anymore, but if you make the right amount of money in a year then there are no more SSA donations taken out, I do not know what it is today, pobly $120,000 and thats it.
I rarely worked for just one company a year, but when I filed taxes at years end then anything I had payed over on SSA was returned, and when I reached a certain amount then SSA was not taken any longer as long as you were with that co.
In 1964 I had hit max by mid Feb. I remember because I was in the office and the time keeper told me that I had made it that week.

Originally Posted by blackgang

In 1964 I had hit max by mid Feb. I remember because I was in the office and the time keeper told me that I had made it that week.

Now a days you would have to make anout $100,000 by mid Feb to repeat that feat .... very rare I think. Seems like the old buggers did not pay in enough back then and now the youngins have to carry the load. Of course the niggers never paid in a dime, just got all the welfare freebies and reproduced like rats

Originally Posted by jim1176

Seems like the old buggers did not pay in enough back then and now the youngins have to carry the load.

I paid in for damn near 50 years, I had over 45 points, can't remember what it was, and I did retire in 1991 and signed for SSA in 96 at 62.
But the Demos have given our money to the beaners and other illegals, Pelosi is having a fit to make sure all illegals even get it, and they have SSA officers at the consulates along the Mex border to be sure they can get the fucking money.

didn't know illegals can get SS, probably be nothing left for a hard working patriot like myself

Originally Posted by blackgang

You are full of shit milky, they are not a tax. period.

SS is a tax. Period.

The government refers to SS withdrawals as a tax as as well the Congressman who discuss "raising the social security taxes."

If you have an SSN number, you have to pay it by law.

You note hitting the max. This is true for higher income people who also get screwed on SS.

Well it don't make no difference as you ain't gonna get any of it anyway.

Originally Posted by blackgang

Well it don't make no difference as you ain't gonna get any of it anyway.

And why is that?

Because I don't pay into it?

Or, because SS is becoming insolvent sooner than expected?

You'll get your blackgang, but hopefully the rest of those won't get any.


And the way things are going, it may turn out that way. Bad, bad, things happening right now, as we speak.

SS is going the way of Medicare and Medicaid, innit?

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

SS is going the way of Medicare and Medicaid, innit?

Unfortunately, yes.

Medicare is to be insovent in less than 7 years.

Social Securit's insolvency has been moved closer because of the bad economy and less taxes coming in.

The article/link I posted by the Asset Management country from Canada believes (but cannot prove, IMO) that some of the US borrowing via T-bills is being put into SS under one of the accounting terms. Meaning, there is a problem now.

This really is about: insolvency.