How and why the right lies about Social Security - and the media repeat it

[nobodyknows]

All reasonable questions. My personal plan would be to convert from a current pay-as-you-go system, to one where payroll tax withholdings are used to purchase Treasury Bills which are personally owned by the future retiree and held in a government escrow account. At least this way the beneficiaries have an actual ownership interest in the system, whereas now they have nothing but a promise from Congress (which to me is worth less than nothing). Also, it provides everyone with an incentive to not blow up the federal budget (since it might impact the ability of the Feds to pay off the bonds in their account).

So if you get killed what happens to your kids?


What you propose is basiacally already available with a 401k so it seems to me your only worried about one thing.... YOU, but I knew that already.

 

[Jhhnn]

Do not attempt to discuss SS with the raving right wing twits on this forum. They don't think- they believe what they want because it's what they want to believe, because it's convenient, because it fits in neatly with all of the rest of the lies they believe in so fervently. What they already believe in precludes making sense of it, at all.

If they had their way, most would likely freeze to death behind a dumpster some winter when they get old.

It's like casting pearls before swine, or explaining the workings of a nuclear reactor to the ants living nearby. Hopeless.

 

[her209]

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html

By law, income to the trust funds must be invested, on a daily basis, in securities guaranteed as to both principal and interest by the Federal government. All securities held by the trust funds are "special issues" of the United States Treasury. Such securities are available only to the trust funds.

I.e., its a slush fund for Congress.

 

[ProfJohn]

Good luck in getting SS privatized right now with the decade long market stagnation and recent drops. But I'm sure that someone will jump in behind me and tell me that over the long term, people with be getting huge gains...guaranteed.

Guy works for 40 years.

Averages $50,000 per year and pays $200,000 in SS taxes.

He dies on his 60th birthday. What happens to that money?

Even at zero intrest he would be better off with the money in a private account that way it can be passed to his kids/wife after he dies.

 

[trenchfoot]

Guy works for 40 years.

Averages $50,000 per year and pays $200,000 in SS taxes.

He dies on his 60th birthday. What happens to that money?

Even at zero intrest he would be better off with the money in a private account that way it can be passed to his kids/wife after he dies.

SS survivor benefits.

 

[ProfJohn]

There is a trust fund or are you going to say our Debt is at 12.1 Trillion instead of 14.6 Trillion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt

Our debt is $12.1 trillion. The other $2.5 trillion is money we owe to ourselves.

 

[her209]

SS survivor benefits.

Yep. OASDI = Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance

 

[matt0611]

Yep. OASDI = Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance

Right, but you could only pass that on to your wife (if shes still alive).
Other than that, its gone.
If I understand how the system works.

 

[her209]

Right, but you could only pass that on to your wife (if shes still alive).
Other than that, its gone.
If I understand how the system works.

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/FACTS/

 

[ProfJohn]

Yep. OASDI = Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance

What happens to single people like me?

No kids or wife, but I have nieces and nephews who would get my private retirement funds if I die tomorrow. But all that money I have paid into SS is gone, and the government won't even send me flowers for giving them all that money...

 

[matt0611]

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/FACTS/

Right, ok, I was right, like I said, if you die at 60 your wife will get your benefits (if you had one and she is alive). Pretty much no one has kids under 18 when your in your 60s so thats out.

But it is an "insurance" program supposedly so it makes sense I guess. But an advantage of private system is that it would be your money to give to who you wish when you die.

 

[her209]

What happens to single people like me?

No kids or wife, but I have nieces and nephews who would get my private retirement funds if I die tomorrow. But all that money I have paid into SS is gone, and the government won't even send me flowers for giving them all that money...

You changed the parameters of your original question.

 

[Thump553]

Guy works for 40 years.

Averages $50,000 per year and pays $200,000 in SS taxes.

He dies on his 60th birthday. What happens to that money?

Even at zero intrest he would be better off with the money in a private account that way it can be passed to his kids/wife after he dies.

That's pretty much the way any annuity works. As others mentioned there are survivior benefits. And if you die single without beneficiaries, why would you care? SS is to provide a social benefit, retirement income for working society at large-it was never meant to or designed to be an individual account.

As to the OP-good post but way too much on the wall of text again, would be better if you just raised one or two points at a time.

This thread is an especially good illustration of the power of the lie that SS is going broke. If only I had a dime in my IRA for everytime someone said "SS will be broke when I retire" I could retire as rich as PJ.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

Sorry, to be clear, the commentary is partly describing the video and partly my own.

SS will never be "bankrupt". It will not be able to pay 100% if nothing is done - maybe 80%.

But nothing won't be done (that's a tricky phrasing, I should just say but something will be done.) The scare tactics are just for the reasons I mentioned - and are corrupt.

And thanks for watching the video. Any other reaction?

Craig, what do you call a person who's income allows them to pay 80% of their bills?

 

[Craig234]

Craig, what do you call a person who's income allows them to pay 80% of their bills?

80% is not the amount of their bills. It's the amount Social Security will pay when it hits the problem period in decades if nothing is done. And something will be done, there are decent options.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

One name for them:

Participant in a false analogy between people and the government's finances.

By your definition a government can never be bankrupt because they can always change the rules, so why don't you just say that. Social security is insolvent in the sense that the present value of its obligations exceed the present value of the its revenues by a significant amount. That's the only way I can think of to define solvency for a government run system.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

Furthermore by removing the cap or means testing it you are just turning it SS into a straight tax for some people. So it's not bankrupt as long as you create a tax to subsidize it. What would the situation have to look like for you to agree it was bankrupt?

 

[nick1985]

Craig, what do you call a person who's income allows them to pay 80% of their bills?

An Obama supporter

 

[Craig234]

By your definition a government can never be bankrupt because they can always change the rules, so why don't you just say that. Social security is insolvent in the sense that the present value of its obligations exceed the present value of the its revenues by a significant amount. That's the only way I can think of to define solvency for a government run system.

See my edited post, I misread it at first, you quoted the original.

That's not what I'm saying. Government going bankrupt and Social Security going bankrupt are two different issues. Social Security will never go bankrupt because there are always incomes paying in. When there's a big problem of a bubble of recipient and fewer paying, that might leave it with partial payments. It won't hit that for decades.

 

[a777pilot]

3 Is definitely False. It should be abolished before it is privatized. I could see it being a TSP like fund where everyone's money is separate but that is a far cry from private.

EDIT I watched the video nowhere in the video and no where does it present facts to dispute it #1 it just says since the Koch's funded it than it is automatically false no where does it present its case for 1, 2 or 3?

SS will be bankrupt by 2035-2040ish at its current rate if nothing is done so #1 and #2 are true its just not as dire as people say it is. The earlier we do do something about it though the easier and more fair it will be for everyone so that the burden is no unfairly shifted toward any one generation.

3 Is definitely False. It should be abolished before it is privatized. I could see it being a TSP like fund where everyone's money is separate but that is a far cry from private.

Even better. That is the best solution. Great Idea.

 

[Jhhnn]

By your definition a government can never be bankrupt because they can always change the rules, so why don't you just say that. Social security is insolvent in the sense that the present value of its obligations exceed the present value of the its revenues by a significant amount. That's the only way I can think of to define solvency for a government run system.

That's not what the semi-mythical hero of the Right, Ronnie Ray-Guns, told us when SS deductions were raised in 1983 to create the trust fund as it exists today, which is a tabulation of all the excess contributions between then & now, plus 3% interest.

Or were he and Greenspan lying all along?

It was just as obvious then as it is now that the trust would necessarily need to be drawn down to cover the demographic bulge of boomers, and that funds would need to come from somewhere else to do that. Boomers have paid it forward for nearly 30 years, and now the same political faction that suckered us then is trying to disavow their own commitments and that sacrifice.

I suppose things would be different if we hadn't kept cutting rich people's taxes & corporate taxes, borrowing to fund the military buildup against the already crumbling evil empire, two invasions of Iraq, the invasion of Afghanistan, the repeated bailout of the financial system and a few other minor policy shibboleths of Republican governance...

 

[the DRIZZLE]

That's not what the semi-mythical hero of the Right, Ronnie Ray-Guns, told us when SS deductions were raised in 1983 to create the trust fund as it exists today, which is a tabulation of all the excess contributions between then & now, plus 3% interest.

Or were he and Greenspan lying all along?

It was just as obvious then as it is now that the trust would necessarily need to be drawn down to cover the demographic bulge of boomers, and that funds would need to come from somewhere else to do that. Boomers have paid it forward for nearly 30 years, and now the same political faction that suckered us then is trying to disavow their own commitments and that sacrifice.

I suppose things would be different if we hadn't kept cutting rich people's taxes & corporate taxes, borrowing to fund the military buildup against the already crumbling evil empire, two invasions of Iraq, the invasion of Afghanistan, the repeated bailout of the financial system and a few other minor policy shibboleths of Republican governance...

There are two separate issues with SS. One is that the trust fund is not enough to cover future outlays for SS so we will need to do one or more of the things Craig discussed. The second is that the trust fund doesn't really exist and government will have to issue new bonds on the public market when it wants to draw down the trust fund. IIRC LBJ was the first president to start counting annual SS surpluses toward the general budget. So even Clinton's balanced budget wasn't actually balanced.

The boomers have paid their SS taxes, but they are going to get more back on average then they put in. Even if the trust fund actually existed they would still have not paid enough in.

 

[Ausm]

Social security is bullshit. Get rid of it along with medicare. That will make it cheaper for employers to hire empolyees.

LMAO what a f'in moron...I take it you don't have a job?

 

[Engineer]

LMAO what a f'in moron...I take it you don't have a job?

He steals stuff (like expensive ice cream) from his roommate and then replaces it with cheap crap. Not to mention, he was soliciting ATOT for advise on how to get on food stamps and other government cheese.

 

[Engineer]

LMAO what a f'in moron...I take it you don't have a job?

He steals stuff (like expensive ice cream) from his roommate and then replaces it with cheap crap. Not to mention, he was soliciting ATOT for advise on how to get on food stamps and other government cheese.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2137726

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2097982