Social Security adds NOTHING to our debt ... it neither increases it nor decreases it ....

[defendandprotect]

Just want to be sure that everyone knows that cause it's the basis of

right wing propaganda --

Social Security is based on FICA payments which are made by employees and employers --

and SOCIAL SECURITY COSTS THE GOVERNMENT NOTHING --

The Government merely administers the Social Security program -- at .03% administrative cost.


Social Security is intended to be a pay-as-you-go system NOT INTENDED TO RUN SUPRLUSSES.

However, the "baby boomer" scam was used to engineer a surplus by large increases in FICA

payments whereby the burden of Social Security was placed largely on the shoulders of the

poor and the middle class.


Social Security has now run surplusses for decades -- currently $250 million a year or more!

The surplus was created as a SLUSH FUND to be used by right wing for wars, tax cuts for

rich, etal.


Since Social Security doesn't cost government anything it was not intended to be included

in the General Budget -- but it is included now to hide our monstrous MIC budget, weapons

production, warmaking.


Again -- Social Security costs the government nothing and does not contribute to the debt!!


Meanwhile, you might also find this interesting --

It’s hard to get your head around how rich Peterson is, and how many rich people there are in this country. But here’s how to put their money in perspective, in relation to Social Security. If Congress decides to extend those tax cuts, for households making $250,000 or more (the top 2 percent of earners), the money the Treasury will lose would be enough to put Social Security in the black for 75 years--and raise benefits by 2 percent.

I would just change one word there .... instead of into the "black" I would state it as

permanently solvent because Social Security is solvent now and into the year 2038 -- and more.


http://labornotes.org/blogs/2010/11/billionaire-launches-campaign-slash-social-security




---------------

As an aside, if we truly want to cut the budget most other nations have MERGED their

military -- army, navy, marines, air force -- which would immediately save us 28% on

the MIC budget!!!

And then there's that new Embassy addition costing $513 million --

on and on --

[Skink]

1. Don't get technical.

[dkf]

2. I thought the tax on the top 2% is only $700 billion compared to the $4 trillion for the entire bush

Cut. It doesn't seem to me that the top 2% does much when under Clinton the entire Amount was needed to simply balance the budget.

[Greyhound]

3. I see the reich-wing has already found this, though none have the fortitude to back up their

derision with any reason, or even identification.

I've been advocating the complete dissolution of the Air Force for years. Even if we can't/don't want to unify all the armed forces, eliminating this one useless anachronism would save tens of billion$ and eliminate quite a bit of unproductive duplication.

[arcane1]

4. But it makes for one hell of a slush fund

Imagine how much money would be in SS now if no president had ever used its surplus for other means.

[Canuckistanian]

5. I believe merging the armed forces was suggested before

And roundly panned by all parties.

But it works.

Canada did it in the '70s and it worked. It saved us a lot of money, DESPITE grumbling from members and the usual kvetching by officers.

[hughee99]

6. Social Security OWNS our debt

The social security trust fund invests in government bonds, it only "increases government debt" in that the government borrowed money from it, and that money has to be paid back. I haven't heard any of the repukes suggest that the government should not pay off it's bonds, so how is the SS debt any different than some financial institution that buys government bonds?

Now I remember how it's different, SS money belongs to regular people and is used to help them with living expenses in their retirement years, rather than belonging to some Wall St. bank and used to pay huge bonuses to a small number of very wealthy people who spend their days trying to screw the same "regular people" out of their money.

[madrchsod]

7. oh gee, you spoiled the the talking point...

the big problem is the lack of people paying in now that will show up years later. if we made things we could pay in but since we don`t......

[defendandprotect]

8. I imagine that there is a tremendous HOLD on the economy ....

and that we would spiral out into a tremendous boom again if

the money being held was released. Iow, I think this is purposeful right wing

insanity for their own profit!

Sen. Bernie Sanders was relating a while back that when FED was doling out the

bail out funds, no one knows what corporations were being charged on the money.

Sanders said essentially nothing was being charged 0% to .005% -- but that they

were turning around and putting this money into Treasury securities at 3.5% and

4% ...!!

No end to the rw criminality!!