How many times will Social Security be . . .

[whell]

Originally Posted by merrylander

The governmment here does not need to sieze private pension funds since non of them are fully funded in any case.

That's only government and union pension funds.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by merrylander

The governmment here does not need to sieze private pension funds since non of them are fully funded in any case.

Private pension funds???????????

There are private sector employees in this country who still have a "pension"? Anyone under the age of sixty, that is?

Dave

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by merrylander

The governmment here does not need to sieze private pension funds since non of them are fully funded in any case.

Again, It's because few in the private sector here, in the US, even HAVE a pension fund to begin with. Most of that was quietly stripped away a couple or three decades ago, along with the vast majority of unionized private sector jobs.

I can remember having a company funded pension and a 401k in the 1980s. Now, I have to put a much bigger part of my paycheck into my 401k, (10%, at present.), and I fear that it still may not be enough to actually retire on.
I know a whole lot of people who put NOTHING into retirement savings. NOTHING. Because, with wages being what they are, (And, to be honest taxes, at the working class level.), they claim they can't afford it. They are banking on SS and Medicare to save their ass, and then, ironically, voting for Republicans because they think it will get them lower taxes...........Let's see. What was that? .9%? Whew! We can afford that that retirement home in the Bahamas now! Thank ya, Jesus!

So, what is our big plan?

Why cutting, and eventually eliminating SS and Medicare, of course. "But, Dave, then we can give them a tax break and they can save more." No, we never give "them" a substantial tax break. When was the last time THAT happened? No, the only people who get substantial tax cuts in this country ARE THE PEOPLE WHO DON'T NEED THEM! And even if we did, do you think it would go into retirement savings? Oh, hell no. It would go into bigger boats and Chinese made junk.

No. What it will get them in the end is no pension, no savings, no SS and no medical insurance, (At the time they need it the most. Old age.)

But, hey, at least they can have satisfaction of knowing they didn't "steal" any money from the billionaires. They did the "moral" thing........Or maybe they're just a bunch of gullible tools?

Maybe by giving the cuts to the wealthy, they'll invest more and create jobs. Yes they will---elsewhere. Because you are still way more expensive than a Chinaman. "Well, then we'll work even harder for even less, and we'll do away with all of these pesky safety and environmental regulations. That'll make the businessmen happy!"

Where does THAT road lead? And would you really want to pass THAT polluted, low wage shithole of a world on to your kids?

"Oh, you're just a whiney little liberal loser! Ha, ha, ha, ha................."

No, I'm just looking ahead twenty years and trying to put up a sign-post;

"Warning! Disaster ahead!"

Some of us try to look beyond the next (empty) promise of tax cuts and our own self-interest.

Have a nice Day!

Dave

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by whell

The government's power, on both sides of the pond, to take control of the funds, or manipulate the system to gain control of those funds, make any differences irrelevant.

huh?

sorry whell, that made no sense

that's just fear mongering, very GOP of you

[whell]

Originally Posted by noonereal

huh?

sorry whell, that made no sense

that's just fear mongering, very GOP of you

Tell that to the folks in Europe who stand to get screwed in retirement.

[CarlV]

I have to go with the smokescreen. This year's baby boomer flood turning 65 will have to live to 97 to be a "problem". Not likely imo.
Also, the money ain't going anywhere, we just finance it like everything else.

Does Social Security earn interest?
Sunday, November 22, 2009 5:50 AM
By Stephen Ohlemacher
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Q: How much money does the federal government owe the Social Security trust funds? And how much interest does the federal government pay on the money it has borrowed every year?
- Jim Durham Chillicothe, Mo.
A: The Social Security trust funds have a balance of about $2.5 trillion. Over the years, the federal government has borrowed all of that money to spend on other government programs. In return, the Treasury Department has issued Social Security special bonds - think of them as IOUs, backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government.
Twice a year, the Treasury Department makes interest payments to the trust funds, although it is little more than an accounting exercise. No money changes hands, but the interest payments are added to the balance of the trust funds. In 2008, the trust funds earned $116.3 billion in interest, according to the 2009 annual report by the Social Security trustees.
http://www.dispatch.com/live/content...s&cat=&sid=101

And pay the Chinese 50 billion interest to do so lol.

The Chinese own more U.S. government debt than any other nation - about $800 billion worth. And the U.S. pays China $50 billion a year just in interest.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n5660868.shtml

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

"The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that the Social Security trust funds will be exhausted in 2043.1

I wish the rest of our government outlay programs had an equally rosy future.

[mossbacked]

Originally Posted by whell

If the current profligate spending habits of our friends inside the beltway do not change, SS doesn't stand a chance. The blue print for hijacking SS funds is being laid out across the pond right now:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Th...ivate-pensions

Even our friends at the CBO are less than optimistic. From their 2009 report:

"The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that the Social Security trust funds will be exhausted in 2043.1 (Unless otherwise stated, the years referred to in this report are calendar years.) Thus, if the law remains unchanged, CBO projects that 34 years from now, the Social Security Administration (SSA) will not have the legal authority to pay full benefits."

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/104xx/doc...ity_Update.pdf

Well paid boomers continue to retire, and corporate gains in "efficiency" suggest that fewer workers are coming in behind to replace the retirees. Sooner or later, the math catches up. The only difference is that when the government does it, its legal. When Bernie Madoff does it, its a crime.

Good summation. And further, even though SS is not to be touched by other than SS spending, for years they have somehow seemed to intermingle SS with the General Fund. They simply cast another vote to increase the debt ceiling and continue on their spending spree. and it been that way for a long, long time and not limited to the spenders there today.

The problem is that the ratio of borrowing to GDP/tax receipts/net worth/productivity/whatever metric you choose continues to worsen. We've never been so close to a tipping point where the capacity (and propensity) to create debt has overwhelmed the capacity to repay in a sensible fashion. And there are no controls in sight. The just vote to borrow more every time it comes up.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by mossbacked

Good summation. And further, even though SS is not to be touched by other than SS spending, for years they have somehow seemed to intermingle SS with the General Fund. They simply cast another vote to increase the debt ceiling and continue on their spending spree. and it been that way for a long, long time and not limited to the spenders there today.

The problem is that the ratio of borrowing to GDP/tax receipts/net worth/productivity/whatever metric you choose continues to worsen. We've never been so close to a tipping point where the capacity (and propensity) to create debt has overwhelmed the capacity to repay in a sensible fashion. And there are no controls in sight. The just vote to borrow more every time it comes up.

We could always repay with another tax cut and an expansion of the military budget.

Dave

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by mossbacked

for years they have somehow seemed to intermingle SS with the General Fund.

no we have not inter mingled anything we have stolen SS monies

now lets put it back

that would be the military and wealthy primarily