Bush acknowledges looting the secial security fund...

[oecher3]

WINTER HAVEN, Fla., Feb. 12 /PRNewswire/ -- "President Bush has finally acknowledged what I have been saying throughout his entire presidency," says economist and author Allen W. Smith. "The $1.6 trillion of Social Security surplus money, that is supposed to be in the trust fund waiting for the retirement of the baby boomers has all been spent on other government programs and replaced with worthless non-marketable government IOU's." Smith, the author of "The Looting of Social Security: How The Government Is Draining America's Retirement Account," (Carroll and Graf, 2004) has been waging an uphill battle to alert the public to the fact that Bush and his predecessors have been spending Social Security money as if it were general fund revenue, in violation of federal law. Smith also charges that President Bush is continuing to illegally spend approximately $400 million of Social Security money each and every day.

Smith was shocked when Bush on Wednesday said, "The money-payroll taxes going into the Social Security are spent. They're spent on benefits and they're spent on government programs. There is no trust." Smith thought that the truth had just accidentally slipped out when the president let down his guard and strayed from the script. But when Bush made similar statements on Thursday in both North Carolina and Pennsylvania, Smith concluded that the administration was going to begin using the empty trust fund as part of the effort to convince the public that Social Security is in crisis.

In the Pennsylvania speech, Bush said, "Every dime that goes in from payroll taxes is spent. It's spent on retirees, and if there's excess, it's spent on government programs. The only thing that Social Security has is a pile of IOUs from one part of the government to the next."

Smith said, "I have been doing everything in my power over the past four years to convince the public that Bush was illegally spending every dollar of Social Security surplus in direct violation of his many promises during the 2000 presidential campaign not to touch the Social Security money, and his solemn pledge during his State of the Union Address on February 27, 2001 'To make sure the retirement savings of America's seniors are not diverted in any other program.'"

"From my perspective," Smith continued, "President Bush clearly admitted to looting the Social Security trust fund in three separate speeches this week. I suspect that he and his advisers took a calculated risk that by revealing the ongoing looting that has taken place over the past 20 years he would have more ammunition for his current campaign to undermine Social Security. But I think he made a big political mistake. When America's workers realize that they have been the victims of the greatest fraud ever perpetrated against the American people by their government, I think there will be an angry public outcry demanding that the looting be stopped and that the money already looted be paid back to the trust fund and invested in marketable Treasury bonds. If that is done, Social Security will then be able to pay full benefits until 2042."

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050212/nysa009_1.html

I know, this was clear common knowledge, but I haven't heard from this economist before. Paul Krugman has been the most vocal lately. So check out Alan Smith. What do you think?

[whistle]

1. That was the Bush tax refund to the rich, we just take it back

...by taxing the crap out of these people ASAP

[papau]

2. Correct - Bonds are paid back by future taxes - meaning FIT on the rich

The Bonds are not worthless - heck sell them on the open market if anyone wants to try to put the silly idea of worthless US Bonds into this discussion..

What Bush wants is to do is to avoid making the rich pay back the Tax Cut for the rich that was financed by the Social Security Trust Fund.

[whistle]

8. That is exactly why Bush got his Harvard MBA, to figure out...

...how best to accomplish that goal without having to be accountable.

[tk2kewl]

3. bush*Co == the Eron-ization of government

fuckwads! :grr:

[Colorado Blue]

4. Why isn't this a HIGH CRIME OR MISDEMEANOR???

Why isn't this an impeachable offense? Among many - this outfit should be in JAIL.

[dweller]

5. i read that article about a week ago

posted on Yahoo then, but no way of rating it. I followed the link to his site and read some of his articles.
I even went so far to repeat his claim that the trust fund was empty (although from another source).

was then asked accused of parroting Repug talking points (as in freeper accusation)... :shrug:

so i'm giving your post one vote, hopefully it will get another and some discussion will ensue.

dp

[papau]

6. what is there to discuss? Bush wants to default on Bonds owned by SS

so as to avoid increasing taxes on the rich to raise the money to pay back SS via retiring those bonds.

He has no problem taking cash out of the FIT to redeem bonds that Japan owns.

It just SocSec that has a "problem" owning "worthless government Bond IOU's"

By saying the bonds are worthless one does seem to be agreeing to discuss Social Security as framed/spun by Bush.

[dweller]

7. from the article above

"The $1.6 trillion of Social Security surplus money, that is supposed to be in the trust
fund waiting for the retirement of the baby boomers has all been spent on other government programs"

is this parroting Repug talking points? I don't think Smith is doing that. It's an accusation againt any administration that has done this.

"and replaced with worthless non-marketable government IOU's."

perhaps this is, according to your view. But Smith is advocating that the IOU's are non-marketable types and need to be replaced with marketable Treasury bonds.

dp

[papau]

9. They are non-marketable because Congress wanted the money and ordered SS

to only purchase those special gov bonds.

To make them marketable takes a wave of the GOP hand.

The "spent the money" refers to Congress not allowing the US to do anything with tax revenue except spend it or reduce the deficit - and with Bush the second option is not a problem.

"is this parroting Repug talking points?" YES

"It's an accusation againt any administration that has done this." - well the "assets" of the system have been good old Gov bonds since day one - and indeed that was one of the reasons that improvements in the benefits and coverage under SS came so quickly - The Dems did not want the payroll tax supporting general gov expenses.

The game plan was therefore to limit "assets" - surplus taxes collected - to 6 months to 12 months of claims (the old reports refers to number of months of claims that can be paid from the assets).

Reagan and Bush have demanded huge excess payroll taxes that build up assets that per Bush are not really there since he does not want to return the excess payroll cash.

Clinton's return of the surplus to workers via the addon acoount's Federal match to be taken from the payroll surplus was shot down in 98 - and required a Gore Presidency that did not happen.

Smith is NOT just suggesting "marketable bonds" - Smith is selling the idea of government bonds that the US can default on - or at least can not pay without the roof falling in - as in raising taxes on the rich.

By using his "worthless IOU's" one does indeed sell a GOP lie.

[Robert Oak]

10. he also gave illegal aliens from Mexico SS benefits

Did it in an internationalization treaty with terms that
are less than what an American needs to qualify.

I find that outrageous giving benefits to non-citizens plus the above while citizens are being told they have to have their benefits cut.

[rustydad]

11. Look

Social Security has been building a trust fund now for many years in order to have "money saved" in order to take up the slack when money coming in is not enough to pay the obligations due to a reduced wage force and a baby boom of retiree's. The government took the extra dollars from payroll taxes and invested it in the government, bonds..t bills, etc. Many other invest in the US like Japan, China, and other countries that run a trade surplus with the world. The US cannot default on any of these paper investments, not to SS or China or Japan or individuals. If it does it will be considered in default and essentially bankrupt. What Bush really wants to do is a defacto default whereby the commitment to SS benefits is greatly reduced thereby allowing the government to pay out far less if any at all from the general fund. That is the plan, reduced payments/benefits. bob