Social Security has no bearing on the deficit. In view of that, why is it on the agenda for ......

[Stinky The Clown]

..... the Deficit Commission?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

1. SS is off-budget?

That's news to congress.

[EFerrari]

2. Can SS contribute to the deficit? I don't think so. n/t

[Nuclear Unicorn]

7. Except when congress hijacks the funds for who-knows-what

and then they have to pay back the money via who-knows-how.

I'm not saying it's OK. SS *should* be off-budget and have absolutely ZERO impact on the deficit but to pretend congress hasn't been raiding it for decades would be the height of self-delusion.

You are absolutely correct SS should not contribute to the deficit but we've been snookered.

[EFerrari]

10. If it is illegal for SS to contribute to the deficit

(which I believe is the case) then it's not SS's problem if Congress has been raiding it. That's their problem. :shrug:

[Fumesucker]

12. Congress doesn't have problems..

Congress _makes_ problems...

[Nuclear Unicorn]

22. laws? LOLZ!

When have laws ever mattered to that bunch?

It's our problem because it was our money and they took it and spent it. When we ask for it back they are going to borrow money to do it...which means we pay twice--plus interest--for what we should have only paid for once.

It's like your uncle spending the money your dad left you for an inheritence then when you turn legal age and demand what is yours the courts ask him where the money went so he uses a cash advance on your credit card to fill-up the bank account.

It's a big shell game with those jokers.

[Kingofalldems]

3. Wall Street wants it

[HoraceX]

4. Social Security benefits grow on trees?

Look at your Social Security check. Who is the drawer? There is no lockbox.

[mmonk]

14. What other spending has a dedicated tax and sales of bonds?

We are running deficits due to our tax structure and when you add in a recession, you get even less tax revenue. If we cut something, it should be defense.

[Warren Stupidity]

20. the highway trust fund? nt.

[Enthusiast]

24. So what would you do, privatize it?

Tell us.

[lumberjack_jeff]

5. Because defaulting is a really good way to reduce your debt.

If you can, and if your creditworthiness is unimportant to you.

Look at it this way, borrowing money from people you don't intend to repay isn't really borrowing, so it doesn't count as deficit. Presto!

[DJ13]

6. Exec A gives $$ to politician B who has to repay A by stealing our $$

[bluerum]

8. The pukoids are looking to dole it out to Wall St. so they can mind it for us.

After all - we are too stupid to invest our own money.

[iamtechus]

9. Republicans keep repeating the same myths. See the link.

By law, Social Security’s funds are separate from the budget, and it must pay its own way. That means that Social Security can’t add one penny to the deficit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://delmontpda.wordpress.com/2010/08/15/top-5-social-security-myths-debunked/

[Little Star]

11. Good Question!

[TBF]

13. Because the 401K raid was so successful that they want to repeat it? nt

[bvar22]

15. Cenk had it right yesterday.

The PLAN is to use the Social Security Funds to pay for the Bush Tax Break for Millionaires.

BTW: Another K&R for Stinky.
I am coming to love your talent and courage for telling the plain truth.

[econoclast]

16. SS doesn't impact the deficit but DOES impact government borrowing needs

Ok. Here is the history. Since the inception of SS in the thirties the rules have ALWAYS been thus :

if SS has excess funds - a surplus - those funds are required by law to be invested in US treasury securities.

Let's suppose that in some year the US govt budget deficit is 100 billion dollars. And SS collected 25 billion more in taxes than it paid out in benefits. The SSTF buys 25 billion in US treasuries. This means that the government only has to go to the market to sell 75 billion dollars in treaasury securities. The deficit is 100 billion, but they only had to raise 75 billion in the market. The rest comes from selling 25 billion to the SSTF. This is how it was designed. Really. You can go to the SS website and search for the official historian. They have one. There you can see for yourself that it has been like this sinse the 30's.

Fine. But what happens if SS doesn't collect more in taxes than it pays in benefits? I think this is the first year that will happen. Then, the process works in reverse.

Suppose the government deficit is 100 billion dollars. But suppose SS has to pay out 20 billion in benefits in excess of what they collected on taxes. Where do they get the money? They redeem 20 billion of their treasuries. Ok. Where dies the treasury get the money from if the government already has a deficit. They borrow it in the market. So, the budget deficit is 100 billion but they have to go to the market to raise 120 billion dollars. 100 to finance that year's budget deficit and 20 to pay off SS

So, SS doesn't impact the budget deficit, but does impact how much the government has to raise inthe market.

[Warren Stupidity]

19. SS has gone revenue negative many times in the past

it does so almost every time there is a major downturn. As soon as employment, and thus fica revenue, picks up, it goes back into surplus. The problem of course is that the boomers will push a relatively long period of negative revenue, and thus the gravey train for billionaires comes to screeching halt. The choices are:

1) add more brackets and progressitivity to income tax and raise the rates on the rich;
2) cut benefits (cat food commission)
3) increase the regressive payroll tax (cat food part two.)

Of course (1) is not even under discussion.

[Faryn Balyncd]

17. Because it's the only program with a $2.5 trillion surplus that they can steal from.

(K&R)




:kick:

[Poboy]

18. k&R

[xchrom]

21. Recommend

[peopleb4money]

23. because our goernment is run by fascist, pro-corporate fucks