If SS runs a deficit for a few decades, it will STILL be the most FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE program....

[Faryn Balyncd]

...in U.S. history.


In contrast to every other federal department, all of which require annual subsidies from the federal Treasury, the Social Security Trust Fund has run a surplus for decades, and has loaned $2.2 trillion to the Treasury, in the form of U. S.Treasury bonds.

These loans have financed multiple simultaneous wars, as well as corporate welfare. All of these expenses should have been paid by our (modestly progressive) income tax. Instead, we have had years of unprecedented, artificially low income tax rates for the wealthiest 1% of the population.....financed by the accumulated surpluses of a harshly regressive Payroll and Self-Employment taxes (15.3% from the first dollar, and exempting all earned income over $106,000, and exempting 100% of all capital gains $ interest income).

The bonds held by the SS Trust Fund, just as ALL U.S. bonds, from those held by American children to those held by Saudi sheiks, to those held by the Chinese government, are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States.





To put things in perspective, if the SS Trust Fund runs annual deficits until 2037, it will, doing this entire 27 year period, STILL be a CREDITOR of the Treasury, and doing this entire period be a CREDITOR whose loans to the Treasury artificially low income tax rates for plutocrats than they would have without these loans from the SS Trust Fund.

During this entire 26 year period (from 2011 until 3037), the Social Security system will remain the ONLY federal program to be, not only fiscally responsible, but profitable.

If, after 2037, the S.S. Trust Fund then requires loans from the Treasury for a few decades until the expenses of the baby boomers have subsided, and it STILL have been the most successful, and most FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE program in United States history.





Paul Ryan likes to make snide remarks about "Safety Nets" and "Hammocks", and implies that Social Security benefits are undeserved.

To put things in perspective, Mr. Ryan, honest accounting shows that it is the "hammocks" of the plutocrats that have been, and continue to be, financed by borrowing the surpluses of the payroll taxes of working middle class Americans. Surpluses that have been accumulated through decades of sweaty contributions.

These benefits have been earned.

[grahamhgreen]

1. Raise the cap on SSand it's solvent forever. nt

[elocs]

2. In 26 years from now the boomers who are retiring now will be over 90.

In fact I would guess that a lot of boomers who will be retiring will be dying off during those years and it could well be me since I will be 84 in 26 years.

So is all this doom and gloom about SS have to do with the fantasy that boomers will live forever and collect SS all those years? :shrug:

[safeinOhio]

3. I think we could make it more progressive.

The right wants to raise the age limit. I think that could be done, looking at the life expectancy of the rich vs the poor. The rich live 5 years longer than the poor. So, those with the big tax breaks, earners over $250,000., could have their eligibility raise 5 or 10 years. Everyones else could stay the same.

[DirkGently]

4. Great articulation of upward wealth redistribution.

[Hannah Bell]

5. in 2037 the oldest boomers will be 92, the youngest 76, & most will be dead.

you won't even be talking about them anymore.

gen-xers will be the new boogeymen.