A friend called this afternoon. He wanted to know if we were having real fun yet. I asked him what was wrong. He started with the stock market and went from there. “Stock market?”, I said. “What’s wrong with it?” I went on like this for a few minutes. He was stunned that I had no idea what was going on. I just couldn’t resist. LOL.
What an exhausting roller coaster week. I guess I will get used to everything. This might be the new normal for a while.
Yeah, I reduced my positions in the market long ago. I am just watching everything unfold. Pretty wild right now.
The EU and ECB are in real trouble, obviously. The Euro probably won’t survive. Looks like the PIIGS may have piglets. Perhaps around the world.
It appears that the masks are being ripped off the main players. None will have any clothes at this rate. Wonder what comes next.
Global trade policy (WTO) isn’t all it was cranked up to be. We’re edging closer to changes on that front. The advanced economies probably won’t pull the trigger until after the next major global implosion. Looks like we may see it unfold. Everything is on fast forward right now. Pop…boom…wham. Street fight coming to a neighborhood near all of us.
corev–if people start benefits at 62 and live until 80+, they get more in benefits w colas than they do if they start later and pay lrss fica/icome tax too. one way or another. depends on how you live, cheaply and well is possible, you know, if you don’t need to vacation outside your back yard. would say more but broke my arm and can’t type much. nancyo
the pay outs are what you would expect from an annuity
There is a huge difference. When you buy and annuity or life insurance etc. the money is invested in something that provides the return on your money. SS is not invested, it is given to current retirees. That is why opponents compare it to a Ponzi scheme.
no. the money in SS is “invested.” it returns an pretty good interest rate for a zero risk (except for people like you) investment.
there are two aspects of this you cannot understand.
first is that ANY investment that eventually pays out is not “growing” the money it pays out. if you take a cross section in time, the money paid out of one of your “real investments” is exactly the same as the money paid out “pay as you go” by Social Security. only the NET of money paid in less money paid out “grows.” SS nicely short circuits that by only collecting the money it pays out.
this will require some thinking on your part to understand. thinking i am sure you will give it.
second is that when you pay in your SS “tax” you are buying a claim on future payment. that claim grows in value exactly the way an investment grows in value… but the increased value of the underlying enterprise. in the case of SS the underlying enterprise is the United States of America, and as long as ‘average wages’ grow in real value (plus inflation) benefits paid out of “current wages” will have a higher real value that the “taxes” paid in over the previous thirty or forty years.
again, you’d have to think about this to understand it. but you don’t want to understand it.
but here is a hint for you: in principle i could start a private enterprise retirement insurance company and collect premiums and pay out benefits and have a perfectly respectable business model… run exactly the way SS is run. the only difference is that SS is not voluntary. and sadly, it has to be that way because a very large percent of the population is as foolish as you are and would not make their payments until it was too late to accumulate enough money to provide them with a pension that would keep them out of dumpsters in their retirement years.
the country really cannot afford to put up with that kind of foolishness. old people dying in doorways are not good for the economy.
not much of a penalty cause bebefit is recomputed at 65 and reduction factors are dropped for months no checks received. result–higher benefit than with work deductions compd for age 62. system set up to ameliorate age reduction for working benes. nancyo
My reading comprehension sucks. My mental capacity is on the same trajectory as Obama’s popularity. I smoked California’s forbiddin flower, while a helecopter was spraying an orchard up wind this morning. My eyeballs are wearing out. For me Hubris is a bridge to far.
What matters is that we can continue to bugger the Mohammedans unabated. But it’s not good enough to bugger only the religious, it’s the secular rulers in the middle east who deserve not just our opprobrium, but our bombs. I was worried that hate mongers like Buff might reilize that loose cannons like Norway’s Breivik took some of what was being said to heart.
Back before GM was aquired by the government they built crappy cars. One of them was the impala. GM’s position is now that GM has been reorganized GM is excused from having to fix the design flaw on the Impala. So Government Moters has just established the principle that it can and will reputate a liabilty when it is convenient. I draw ominous implications when I juxtapose this priciple with Social Security.
as long as ‘average wages’ grow in real value (plus inflation) benefits paid out of “current wages” will have a higher real value that the “taxes” paid in over the previous thirty or forty years. So a corollary would be that if average wages fall in value then the FICA taxes paid out of current wages will have a lesser real value the the taxes paid.
Blue coller wages have been falling sense Carter. This is not a good arguement
you create confusion for yourself by talking about SS and Medicare in the same mouthful. the benefits from, for, SS represent a real interest rate of at least 2%, considerably more for most people.
the “return” on Medicare depends on whether or not you get an expensive illness.
“average” doesn’t make a whole lot of sense when talking about these programs.
i don’t know what the “average return” on a fire insurance policy is, but i am pretty sure nobody gets it. of course from your point of view, the lucky ones have a fire and get a huge return on their investment.
SS contributions are not invested in anything. The taxes go to current retirees who spend it on healthcare, clappers, and whatever else they want or have to. The difference between the $700K contribution and the $900 K payout is paidby taxpayers, not investment earnings. Plain and simple. The Institute also credited the taxpayers account inflation +2%, so the gap is, in reality, even larger.
I believe people should get and keep what they earn. Anything over that is charity, or “welfare” if you prefer. So let’s just call it what it is and deal with it
i am not sure what the blue collar wages falling is based on, but i am fairly sure that the “real” value of benefits has been rising about as fast as the “real” wage reported by the Trustees, which has been around 2% for decades… don’t get MG on my tail, i am sure i don’t remember the number acurately… but it’s in that range, and it is increasing.
it could be that the wages counted are not “blue collar” but ALL wages less than 100k or so.
if the value of wages did fall, i am sure the value of pensions would have to fall. that might cause some howling, but it would be no different than the bad times our ancestors lived through, where the whole family, dad, mom, the kids, shared the bad times with the good.
there is no law of god, man, or economics that says even your “investments” on wall street have to increase in value, in fact…
you can call it what you like, but you will still be wrong. the SS principle is quite simple, even if you can’t understand it.
but tell you what…EVERYONE has gotten more back from SS than he put in, with a “return on investment” in the range of 2 to 5% depending on circumstance, and up to over 10% in some cases.
for 75 years.
now if some of those taxpayers you are so concerned about got LESS than they put in in order to pay those who got more… you’d have a case. but that has never happened. and there is no reason it ever should happen.
barring some real disaster… which would lead to widespread poverty whether we had SS or not. and in fact SS is the only protection future old people have that assures them they would get at least “enough” in the event of such a disaster.
In an interest toward fairness, I posted when the F-35 was grounded and I promised buff, I would post when the program office safety guys decided to release it to fly again.
It was only grounded 16 days, the F-22 however, has been grounded since 3 May.
your SS “tax” is an “investment” in something called “Social Security” which is a system whereby your money buys you a claim on future money.
You are describing a Ponzi scheme perfectly.
An example of an “investment” is a loan to a company that builds a new plant. The profits generated by that new plant are what pays back the loan, plus interest. It is in this way that the investor “earns” his return.
Social security does not work this way. Nothing of productive value to pay back the contributions is generated, just a promise that new taxpayers will be cajoled into paying for your retirement.
EVERYONE has gotten more back from SS than he put in.
Yes they have. That’s why it is charity or welfare, and not “earned.”
just like you hope to get back from your investments.
you are a little like the savage who saw a car for the first time. it was black. then when he saw a red car he didn’t realize it was the same as the black car, because it was red, you see.
in order for SS to be charity or welfare.. someone would have to be giving money to someone else and ending up with less themselves. that does not happen. “EVERYONE has gotten more back from SS than he put in.” Sammy says so. Remember?
And always will. Unlike General Motors, SS cannot go broke. Unless you break it.
if you try very hard, i am sure even you can think of an investment in a company that does not build a new plant. A bank perhaps.
You invest in their business model because it can “make money.” It can make money because it attracts customers who are willing to pay for the service.
Social Security makes money. It makes money because the economy grows. It can always attract customers because the customers want the same deal you are getting: they put their money in, and it comes back to them, guaranteed, with interest. Social Security is in fact the only “business” ordinary workers can invest in where their money is kept perfectly safe from inflation, market losses and other losses that cash is heir to. Including sickness and death and failure to thrive.
And if that isn’t enough to bring the customers in, the government has the power to tax. Which is the ONLY reason that Government Securities are considered a safe investment.
SS money is even protected from the government itself… unlike welfare… the government can’t just spend the Social Security tax on anything it likes, it is required by law to spend it on Social Security benefits.
Granted Congress can change the law… but it’s a big deal if it tries to. Hasn’t suceeded in spite of 75 years of efforts by the Big LIars and their dupes to do it.
But I have to say, I go to bed worried myself.
But your argument amounts to “we are all going to die, so we might as well kill ourselves.”
coberly says: Social Security makes money. It makes money because the economy grows. It can always attract customers because the customers want the same deal you are getting: they put their money in, and it comes back to them, guaranteed, with interest. Social Security is in fact the only “business” ordinary workers can invest in where their money is kept perfectly safe from inflation, market losses and other losses that cash is heir to. Including sickness and death and failure to thrive.
Wikipedia says:
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors, not from any actual profit earned by the organization, but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors. The Ponzi scheme usually entices new investors by offering returns other investments cannot guarantee, in the form of short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent. The perpetuation of the returns that a Ponzi scheme advertises and pays requires an ever-increasing flow of money from investors to keep the scheme going. The system is destined to collapse because the earnings, if any, are less than the payments to investors.
“ in the form of short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent.”
SS offers returns that are neither short-term nor abnormally high. Therefore, the analogy between SS and a Ponzi scheme, by your own citation, is a false one.
i will repeat this on the next thread for your further contemplation, but it bears so well on your comment here, i will try, try, again.
The essence of superstitious thinking is that the simple mind notices a “feature” of one thing that is similar to a “feature” of another thing and concludes that therefore the two things are identical and can be treated as identical in all respects.
a somewhat more complex, or mature, brain can recognize that many things share similar features in some respects and are different in others and cannot be treated as identical.
unfortunately you are trapped in superstitious thinking.
I think you are referring to Sammy’s ideologically driven description.
SS is NOT designed to collapse. There is no reason it can’t keep paying for itself forever. Not with “other people’s money” but because each generation wants the same good deal as the last: a place to put a part of their savings that will protect it from losses due to inflation or bad days on the market, or death, disability, or some kinds of rather common personal bad luck.
For the record, again, I am talking about Social Security, not whatever you mean by “entitlements.”
And just one more for the record… “entitlements” however you mean them, were not the drivers of the current debt… those were “defense” spending, wars, tax cuts, and the economic catastrophe that resulted from unregulated banking.
I realize none of this will help you. You have a good chant to chant and it keeps you safe from having to think about anything.
there is nothing ideologically driven about me. i am mathematically driven. i had no opinions about Social Security whatsoever until i noticed a mathematical absurdity being proclaimed by the non partisan experts on national public radio. i am rather conservative by nature, but i hate liars.
unfortunately corev employes one of the standard ploys of the committed liar: he accuses his accusers of his own crime. This is the pederast priest preaching against sex from the pulpit. There is no one on this blog more ideologically driven than CoRev.
The essential characteristic of a Ponzi scheme is that “it pays returns to separate investors, not from any actual profit earned by the organization, but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors.” Therefore SS is a Ponzi scheme.
SS can compel new investors, so that is different, but face it, if Bernie Madoff had the same power it would have allowed him to continue for quite a while longer, but it wouldn’t make his any less of a Ponzi scheme.
I agree with the rest of you that there is a need for old age and medical insurance for the elderly, and a role for government in providing it. It can even be financed wholy or in part by a Ponzi scheme. This will work until, as Co Rev, said, we run out of other peoples money. When will we run out? Probably not for a long time. However, if left unchecked SS and Medicare will climb to about 80% of the total Federal Budget by 2040, so we will run out of money to do anything else.
Coberly’s (btw not a disinterested party) constant parroting that “they paid for it” and “SS contributions are investments” are totally false. Which makes him what he calls everybody else “a liar.”
Let’s just quit the mischaracterizations, and recognize SS and Medicare for what they are – a type of welfare, and deal with it. That would mean not handing everyone who turns 65 a check for a million dollars.
the “rate of return” on SS is at least 2% REAL, more than that for most people, somewhere around 5% nominal.
the “interest” is “earned”.. you are “lending” the time value of your money to the current retirees… who “paid it back” actually before they retired. no they didn’t have a time machine… but by lending the time value of their money they earned their return, just the way you are earning yours.
Social Security is not part of the federal budget. and Medicare isn’t either. or wasn’t, until some very smart people decided to make part of it part of the budget and make it impossible for me to say “Medicare is not part of the budget” without a long explanation that makes your eyes glaze over.
the point is Medicare should NOT be part of the budget. it should be paid for directly by the people who get the benefits… just like Social Security. Then the people could pay for their own retirements and their own medical care. And the rest of the country could continue to play with itsel… its war toys and not try to scare everybody with “SS… wil be 80%of the budget…”
as a matter of fact i don’t know where sammy gets that number… meaningless as it is… but Sammy is not a reliable source. if he comes back with a “source” watch out for the fingers crossed behind the back trick.
Sammy, SS will only run out of other people’s money in this country when there are no more taxpayers in the United States of America. Until then, SS cannot run out of money. If you believe differently, you don’t know how SS works.
Let’s just quit the mischaracterizations, and recognize SS for what it is – a type of retirement income insurance, and deal with it.
i know you know this, but Sammy doesn’t, and never will..
Those taxpayers are not just paying taxes, they are collecting benefits. They are in fact paying for their own benefits. May have to explain “time value of money” again to help some people understand why the people have “earned” the benefits that they get that are more than they paid in…. and say again… and again until they understand it… that this can continue infinitely.. everyone gets more than they paid in because each generation is richer than the last.
if it every happens that the next generation is poorer than the last… SS will still be the best way to insure your retirement. you just won’t be making as much interest is all.. kind of like stocks and bonds.
Dale: “Social Security is not part of the federal budget.” Next time I hear/see another comment about the SSTF excesses being spent in the general fund, or that any difference in any of the SS trust funds will be made up from tax revenues, then I will just refer them to Dale and his misbegotten belief.
Dan, saying this, “The program works and sammy and corev can’t abide it.” and then seeing Dale’s bat sh$t lies are what we can not abide. In 2017 the OASDI TF will go negative. Where will that difference be made up without changes in revenues before then?
Not true. SS surplus is invested in Treasury notes or bills. You are wrong. These are still the safest investments globally.
“That worries Rep. David Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, and a member of the House-Senate supercommittee tasked with finding new deficit cuts. Tax reductions, “no matter how well-intended,” will push the deficit higher, making the panel’s task that much harder, Camp’s office said.”
The moron believes SS withholding taxes are meant to balance the budget. Gee Sammy, are SS withholding taxes meant to balance the budget or meant for retirees?
The trust fund was always intended to “go negative.” Indeed, it was always intended to disappear entirely. The purpose of the trust fund was never to sustain SS in perpetuity. It was intended to bridge the baby boom generation. Much as it may surprise you to hear, the baby boomers are all doomed. They (we) will die. Every last one. Then there well be no more need of a “trust fund.”
by all means refer them to me. if they are more intelligent or more honest than you i think i can explain it to them. the Trust Fund has no excesses… it IS the excess of payroll taxes over benefits. and it wasn’t spent, it was lent. it is being paid back as we speak.
god knows what you mean by “any difference… will be made up…” i think you made that up.
don’t be afraid to say bat shit when you’ve got it on your teeth.
what the hell do you think the Trust Fund was for… it stored cash and collected interest against the da when the money would be needed. that day is what you call “goes negative.” long planned for. not the end of the world.
it’s like when you finally get to spend your Christmas fund. or have to spend your kids college fund. it’s what it’s for.
sammy –“However, if left unchecked SS and Medicare will climb to about 80% of the total Federal Budget by 2040, so we will run out of money to do anything else.”
coberly – “and note, please that “80% of the federal budget” is NOT 80% of your income. so stop confusing yourself with meaningless scare words.”
Plenty of individuals have their heads buried in the mud on this critical issue.
Sammy is correct if his intention was to include Medicaid expenditures. I assume that was his intention based on previous statements at Angry Bear. He has a good working knowledge of federal budget projections.
Former Comptroller General David M. Walker explained the situation differently in May 2005, three years prior to the recession: “The only thing the United States is able to do a little after 2040 is pay interest on massive and growing federal debt. The model blows up in the mid-2040s. What does that mean? Argentina.”
The federal budget model will blow up based on our present fiscal course absent further corrections. Many Members of Congress understand this point all too well.
AB readers should check out the following CBO graphs that support Sammy’s statement.
Note that the CBO graphs do not include federal interest payment obligations. Imagine what that means…
Compare the CBO Extended-Baseline Scenario vs. Alternative Fiscal Scenario graphs:
Note that the 2009 graphs do not include expenditures for CHIP and the healthcare bill exchange subsidies. The graphs also do not include federal interest payment obligations; that point is explained in the graphs.
Or read this:
The Long-Term Budget Outlook in the United States and the Role of Health Care Entitlements Joyce Manchester, Congressional Budget Office and Jonathan A. Schwabish, Congressional Budget Office Prepared for the USC Conference on the Long-Term Fiscal Crisis, sponsored by the […]
CoRev – “Dan, saying this, “The program works and sammy and corev can’t abide it.” and then seeing Dale’s bat sh$t lies are what we can not abide. In 2017 the OASDI TF will go negative. Where will that difference be made up without changes in revenues before then?”
Joel – “Uh, CoRev, The trust fund was always intended to “go negative.” Indeed, it was always intended to disappear entirely. The purpose of the trust fund was never to sustain SS in perpetuity. It was intended to bridge the baby boom generation. Much as it may surprise you to hear, the baby boomers are all doomed. They (we) will die. Every last one. Then there well be no more need of a “trust fund.” Now run along and play. Grownups are talking.”
AB Readers,
CoRev was talking about the media broadcasts and news stories released on Sunday regarding the projected 2017 insolvency of the SSA Disability Insurance trust fund. The AP ran a story that popped across the nation.
If coberly and Joel paid attention to the news both of them would have known this. Instead, they’re too busy acting like arrogant know-it-all fools on Angry Bear.
no. i am trying to use the words the way the lying bastards in washington use them. they are out to kill social security. so they talk about “entitlements.” whatever definition you can find in a book, it is still necessary for people to be talking about the same thing.. as well as they can.
CoRev may have been talking about the DI trust fund but he said OASDI.
he sows confusion.
The DI Trust Fund is indeed projected to be exhausted by 2017 or so. It cannot “go negative.” It will most likely borrow from the OASI Trust Fund, but it would be better if the payroll tax was raised about 3 tenths of a percent right now. that would be about $2.40 per week, and it would be insurance for you in case you became one of those disable people.
you are sowing confusion. deliberately it appears. it is your facts that are wrong, because you can’t keep straight in your head what you are talking about. it’s hard for the rest of us to read your mind. the print is too small and the spelling too awful.
if the subject was the DI trust fund you should not have said the OASDI trust fund. but confusion is what cockroaches live on.
whatever is the case with medicaid, Social Security pays for itself. it is not part of the budget. it will not borrow from the budger. it has nothing to do with the deficit.
coberly – 10:13:05 AM – “CoRev may have been talking about the DI trust fund but he said OASDI.”
AB readers,
I know for a fact that this is what CoRev was talking about because we discussed it Sunday afternoon.
CBO released a new report on the SSA OASDI trust funds earlier this month. I am sure that coberly didn’t read it. Par for the course. But the news media caught up with it, hence the AP interview with a SSA commissioner and subsequent news story.
coberly and Joel don’t even keep up with the news let alone read new CBO reports. Yet they pretend to know everything.
coberly – 10:13:05 AM – “CoRev may have been talking about the DI trust fund but he said OASDI.”
coberly – 10:16:35 AM – “if the subject was the DI trust fund you should not have said the OASDI trust fund.”
AB readers,
I know for a fact that this is what CoRev was talking about because we discussed it Sunday afternoon.
CBO released a new report on the SSA OASDI trust funds earlier this month. I am sure that coberly didn’t read it. Par for the course. But the news media caught up with it, hence the AP interview with a SSA commissioner and subsequent news story.
coberly and Joel don’t even keep up with the news let alone read new CBO reports. Yet they pretend to know everything.
coberly – 10:13:05 AM – “CoRev may have been talking about the DI trust fund but he said OASDI.”
coberly – 10:16:35 AM – “if the subject was the DI trust fund you should not have said the OASDI trust fund.”
coberly – 10:17:38 – “if that is what CoRev was talking about, he should have said so.”
AB readers,
I know for a fact that this is what CoRev was talking about because we discussed it Sunday afternoon.
CBO released a new report on the SSA OASDI trust funds earlier this month. I am sure that coberly didn’t read it. Par for the course. But the news media caught up with it, hence the AP interview with a SSA commissioner and subsequent news story.
coberly and Joel don’t even keep up with the news let alone read new CBO reports. Yet they pretend to know everything.
Not true. SS surplus is invested in Treasury notes or bills
Only a small portion is invested in Treasuries for a short period of time – those reciepts in excess of payments. The majority of the money goes straight to retirees like sh*t through a goose.
So, ironically, the much maligned Trust Fund is really the only real assets that SS has, and the only way SS resembles a real pension plan. The rate of return on those Treasuries will not match the benefits to be paid, but still at least they are invested.
Wow…..I find this set of comments out of bounds. The new info on disability is not relevent to the post, nor is it relevent as new data except as a question to ask. The medicare data is new as well and I thank run for bringing it to our attention, will need to be followed since daya is often one to two years behind.
I really don’t think that a private conversation on Sunday adds to legitimacy of data describing ongoing directions programs are taking. And the deficit hysteria couched in ‘facts’ avoids the question of political decision making as it is playing out at the moment. These claims by corev and MG may need to be discussed but in some logical manner with appropriate context.
The tactic of appeals to AB readers saying this is true and that is true is out of bounds. MG…you scolded me for using a economic Marxist oriented publication as a way to describe a problem on labor as left wing nuttery a few months ago and yet Nouriel Roubini no less came out with some interpretation similar to mine…Roubini is pretty mainstream. I will post that.
What is happening in the deficit questions are political, values on where our money is to be spent.
To couch these arguments as technical and economic only while simultabeously making a political and moral choice on flow of funds serves no constructive purpose.
I see Dale relies on the “Big Lie” to continue his arrogant rants. I will not repeat the detailed data from MG’s sources showing the SS revenues and outlays in the “OFFICIAL” US Federal Budget, because will just claim we are lying. Again.
For the remaining AB readers, understand we are not attacking SS, but the misconceptions constantly being voiced here.
I dunno. What’s worse? Using the incorrect acronym or continuously lying about SS funding and outlays?
GOP’s Pledge to America, here: http://www.gop.gov/pledge/jobs
This pledge has been around since 2010, and it tracks GOP progress in its various areas.
Is there a Dem equivalent? Can we track the Dem version?
http://astrofibo.blogspot.com/2011/08/sp500-sell-rallies-until-summer-2013.html
A friend called this afternoon. He wanted to know if we were having real fun yet. I asked him what was wrong. He started with the stock market and went from there. “Stock market?”, I said. “What’s wrong with it?” I went on like this for a few minutes. He was stunned that I had no idea what was going on. I just couldn’t resist. LOL.
What an exhausting roller coaster week. I guess I will get used to everything. This might be the new normal for a while.
Are we having real fun yet?
MG,
Fun is a spectator sport.
You have been here for months. Are you not in cash?
Even if the fed and the treasury lose a couple of trillion in MBS’ the underlying stuff will deflate.
The gross negligence of the past 4 years is no one has set up a resolution process for all the farcical mortgages.
In a liquidity trap with Japan and China cutting thero margins inflation will not raise those stones.
Then there is the German Euro…………………………
co,
Jobs in China and India don’t count.
ilsm,
Yeah, I reduced my positions in the market long ago. I am just watching everything unfold. Pretty wild right now.
The EU and ECB are in real trouble, obviously. The Euro probably won’t survive. Looks like the PIIGS may have piglets. Perhaps around the world.
It appears that the masks are being ripped off the main players. None will have any clothes at this rate. Wonder what comes next.
Global trade policy (WTO) isn’t all it was cranked up to be. We’re edging closer to changes on that front. The advanced economies probably won’t pull the trigger until after the next major global implosion. Looks like we may see it unfold. Everything is on fast forward right now. Pop…boom…wham. Street fight coming to a neighborhood near all of us.
Remarkable times.
MG,
We are living in the “interesting times” of the old Chinese “blessing”.
I think, if I have not been clear that zombie banks need to be allowed to implode.
Anything else is kicking the can down the road.
Starting with the US Fed and its bundle of MBS.
Ha.
And a very high percentrage don’t wait til 66, but cash in SS at 62.
corev–if people start benefits at 62 and live until 80+, they get more in benefits w colas than they do if they start later and pay lrss fica/icome tax too. one way or another. depends on how you live, cheaply and well is possible, you know, if you don’t need to vacation outside your back yard. would say more but broke my arm and can’t type much. nancyo
Sore knee. Sore arm. I’m sorry to hear this. Keep trying to reason with Corev and you will have a sore head too.
Not meaning to nit pick but I believe that the expression “may you live in interesting times” is actually a chinese curse.
NO,
Some people look at the NPV of the monthly receipts, while some look at the maximum monthly check.
The penalty for work income is the only reason to delay starting SS.
? No closing admonition that we should bugger the Mohammedans?
ilsm,
the pay outs are what you would expect from an annuity
There is a huge difference. When you buy and annuity or life insurance etc. the money is invested in something that provides the return on your money. SS is not invested, it is given to current retirees. That is why opponents compare it to a Ponzi scheme.
cursed
you are mixing up ilsm with buff. unless there was a buff post that got deleted.
cursed,
i think that was his point. note the “quotes”
sammy
the difference is that couple paid for their SS.
CoRev
nobody “cashes in” their SS. and the payments starting at 62 are actuarily identical to the payments that start at 65 or 67 or 70.
sammy
no. the money in SS is “invested.” it returns an pretty good interest rate for a zero risk (except for people like you) investment.
there are two aspects of this you cannot understand.
first is that ANY investment that eventually pays out is not “growing” the money it pays out. if you take a cross section in time, the money paid out of one of your “real investments” is exactly the same as the money paid out “pay as you go” by Social Security. only the NET of money paid in less money paid out “grows.” SS nicely short circuits that by only collecting the money it pays out.
this will require some thinking on your part to understand. thinking i am sure you will give it.
second is that when you pay in your SS “tax” you are buying a claim on future payment. that claim grows in value exactly the way an investment grows in value… but the increased value of the underlying enterprise. in the case of SS the underlying enterprise is the United States of America, and as long as ‘average wages’ grow in real value (plus inflation) benefits paid out of “current wages” will have a higher real value that the “taxes” paid in over the previous thirty or forty years.
again, you’d have to think about this to understand it. but you don’t want to understand it.
but here is a hint for you: in principle i could start a private enterprise retirement insurance company and collect premiums and pay out benefits and have a perfectly respectable business model… run exactly the way SS is run. the only difference is that SS is not voluntary. and sadly, it has to be that way because a very large percent of the population is as foolish as you are and would not make their payments until it was too late to accumulate enough money to provide them with a pension that would keep them out of dumpsters in their retirement years.
the country really cannot afford to put up with that kind of foolishness. old people dying in doorways are not good for the economy.
not much of a penalty cause bebefit is recomputed at 65 and reduction factors are dropped for months no checks received. result–higher benefit than with work deductions compd for age 62. system set up to ameliorate age reduction for working benes. nancyo
Coberly
My reading comprehension sucks. My mental capacity is on the same trajectory as Obama’s popularity. I smoked California’s forbiddin flower, while a helecopter was spraying an orchard up wind this morning. My eyeballs are wearing out. For me Hubris is a bridge to far.
What matters is that we can continue to bugger the Mohammedans unabated. But it’s not good enough to bugger only the religious, it’s the secular rulers in the middle east who deserve not just our opprobrium, but our bombs. I was worried that hate mongers like Buff might reilize that loose cannons like Norway’s Breivik took some of what was being said to heart.
Back before GM was aquired by the government they built crappy cars. One of them was the impala. GM’s position is now that GM has been reorganized GM is excused from having to fix the design flaw on the Impala. So Government Moters has just established the principle that it can and will reputate a liabilty when it is convenient. I draw ominous implications when I juxtapose this priciple with Social Security.
Doh!
sammy
apparently you don’t believe in earning interest on your savings. i did try to explain to you how this works… the economy grows over time.
but you don’t want to understand.
as long as ‘average wages’ grow in real value (plus inflation) benefits paid out of “current wages” will have a higher real value that the “taxes” paid in over the previous thirty or forty years.
So a corollary would be that if average wages fall in value then the FICA taxes paid out of current wages will have a lesser real value the the taxes paid.
Blue coller wages have been falling sense Carter. This is not a good arguement
cursed
i know how you feel.
back in the day, i realized the smoking that stuff produced exactly the same effect as senility.
so nowadays i don’t need it.
btw
you create confusion for yourself by talking about SS and Medicare in the same mouthful. the benefits from, for, SS represent a real interest rate of at least 2%, considerably more for most people.
the “return” on Medicare depends on whether or not you get an expensive illness.
“average” doesn’t make a whole lot of sense when talking about these programs.
i don’t know what the “average return” on a fire insurance policy is, but i am pretty sure nobody gets it. of course from your point of view, the lucky ones have a fire and get a huge return on their investment.
coberly,
SS contributions are not invested in anything. The taxes go to current retirees who spend it on healthcare, clappers, and whatever else they want or have to.
The difference between the $700K contribution and the $900 K payout is paid by taxpayers, not investment earnings. Plain and simple.
The Institute also credited the taxpayers account inflation +2%, so the gap is, in reality, even larger.
I believe people should get and keep what they earn. Anything over that is charity, or “welfare” if you prefer. So let’s just call it what it is and deal with it
cursed
i am not sure what the blue collar wages falling is based on, but i am fairly sure that the “real” value of benefits has been rising about as fast as the “real” wage reported by the Trustees, which has been around 2% for decades… don’t get MG on my tail, i am sure i don’t remember the number acurately… but it’s in that range, and it is increasing.
it could be that the wages counted are not “blue collar” but ALL wages less than 100k or so.
if the value of wages did fall, i am sure the value of pensions would have to fall. that might cause some howling, but it would be no different than the bad times our ancestors lived through, where the whole family, dad, mom, the kids, shared the bad times with the good.
there is no law of god, man, or economics that says even your “investments” on wall street have to increase in value, in fact…
sammy
you can call it what you like, but you will still be wrong. the SS principle is quite simple, even if you can’t understand it.
but tell you what…EVERYONE has gotten more back from SS than he put in, with a “return on investment” in the range of 2 to 5% depending on circumstance, and up to over 10% in some cases.
for 75 years.
now if some of those taxpayers you are so concerned about got LESS than they put in in order to pay those who got more… you’d have a case. but that has never happened. and there is no reason it ever should happen.
barring some real disaster… which would lead to widespread poverty whether we had SS or not. and in fact SS is the only protection future old people have that assures them they would get at least “enough” in the event of such a disaster.
cursed,
In an interest toward fairness, I posted when the F-35 was grounded and I promised buff, I would post when the program office safety guys decided to release it to fly again.
It was only grounded 16 days, the F-22 however, has been grounded since 3 May.
The SS receipts were invested but they were pillaged by copngress and the pentagon in war profits and tax cuts, both are a huge waste.
So………………..
Cut war by 80% to be about where the Briuts are and raise taxes.
The worst “investments” the US made is cutting taxes on the rich and eliminating tariffs.
Coberly,
your SS “tax” is an “investment” in something called “Social Security” which is a system whereby your money buys you a claim on future money.
You are describing a Ponzi scheme perfectly.
An example of an “investment” is a loan to a company that builds a new plant. The profits generated by that new plant are what pays back the loan, plus interest. It is in this way that the investor “earns” his return.
Social security does not work this way. Nothing of productive value to pay back the contributions is generated, just a promise that new taxpayers will be cajoled into paying for your retirement.
EVERYONE has gotten more back from SS than he put in.
Yes they have. That’s why it is charity or welfare, and not “earned.”
sammy,
EVERYONE got back more from SS than he put in.
just like you hope to get back from your investments.
you are a little like the savage who saw a car for the first time. it was black. then when he saw a red car he didn’t realize it was the same as the black car, because it was red, you see.
in order for SS to be charity or welfare.. someone would have to be giving money to someone else and ending up with less themselves. that does not happen. “EVERYONE has gotten more back from SS than he put in.” Sammy says so. Remember?
And always will. Unlike General Motors, SS cannot go broke. Unless you break it.
Sammy
if you try very hard, i am sure even you can think of an investment in a company that does not build a new plant. A bank perhaps.
You invest in their business model because it can “make money.” It can make money because it attracts customers who are willing to pay for the service.
Social Security makes money. It makes money because the economy grows. It can always attract customers because the customers want the same deal you are getting: they put their money in, and it comes back to them, guaranteed, with interest. Social Security is in fact the only “business” ordinary workers can invest in where their money is kept perfectly safe from inflation, market losses and other losses that cash is heir to. Including sickness and death and failure to thrive.
And if that isn’t enough to bring the customers in, the government has the power to tax. Which is the ONLY reason that Government Securities are considered a safe investment.
SS money is even protected from the government itself… unlike welfare… the government can’t just spend the Social Security tax on anything it likes, it is required by law to spend it on Social Security benefits.
Granted Congress can change the law… but it’s a big deal if it tries to. Hasn’t suceeded in spite of 75 years of efforts by the Big LIars and their dupes to do it.
But I have to say, I go to bed worried myself.
But your argument amounts to “we are all going to die, so we might as well kill ourselves.”
coberly says:
Social Security makes money. It makes money because the economy grows. It can always attract customers because the customers want the same deal you are getting: they put their money in, and it comes back to them, guaranteed, with interest. Social Security is in fact the only “business” ordinary workers can invest in where their money is kept perfectly safe from inflation, market losses and other losses that cash is heir to. Including sickness and death and failure to thrive.
Wikipedia says:
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors, not from any actual profit earned by the organization, but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors. The Ponzi scheme usually entices new investors by offering returns other investments cannot guarantee, in the form of short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent. The perpetuation of the returns that a Ponzi scheme advertises and pays requires an ever-increasing flow of money from investors to keep the scheme going.
The system is destined to collapse because the earnings, if any, are less than the payments to investors.
“ in the form of short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent.”
SS offers returns that are neither short-term nor abnormally high. Therefore, the analogy between SS and a Ponzi scheme, by your own citation, is a false one.
Thank you Joel. The program works and sammy and corev can’t abide it.
sammy
i will repeat this on the next thread for your further contemplation, but it bears so well on your comment here, i will try, try, again.
The essence of superstitious thinking is that the simple mind notices a “feature” of one thing that is similar to a “feature” of another thing and concludes that therefore the two things are identical and can be treated as identical in all respects.
a somewhat more complex, or mature, brain can recognize that many things share similar features in some respects and are different in others and cannot be treated as identical.
unfortunately you are trapped in superstitious thinking.
CoRev
I think you are referring to Sammy’s ideologically driven description.
SS is NOT designed to collapse. There is no reason it can’t keep paying for itself forever. Not with “other people’s money” but because each generation wants the same good deal as the last: a place to put a part of their savings that will protect it from losses due to inflation or bad days on the market, or death, disability, or some kinds of rather common personal bad luck.
For the record, again, I am talking about Social Security, not whatever you mean by “entitlements.”
And just one more for the record… “entitlements” however you mean them, were not the drivers of the current debt… those were “defense” spending, wars, tax cuts, and the economic catastrophe that resulted from unregulated banking.
I realize none of this will help you. You have a good chant to chant and it keeps you safe from having to think about anything.
btw
there is nothing ideologically driven about me. i am mathematically driven. i had no opinions about Social Security whatsoever until i noticed a mathematical absurdity being proclaimed by the non partisan experts on national public radio. i am rather conservative by nature, but i hate liars.
unfortunately corev employes one of the standard ploys of the committed liar: he accuses his accusers of his own crime. This is the pederast priest preaching against sex from the pulpit. There is no one on this blog more ideologically driven than CoRev.
coberly/joel/rdan,
The essential characteristic of a Ponzi scheme is that “it pays returns to separate investors, not from any actual profit earned by the organization, but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors.” Therefore SS is a Ponzi scheme.
SS can compel new investors, so that is different, but face it, if Bernie Madoff had the same power it would have allowed him to continue for quite a while longer, but it wouldn’t make his any less of a Ponzi scheme.
I agree with the rest of you that there is a need for old age and medical insurance for the elderly, and a role for government in providing it. It can even be financed wholy or in part by a Ponzi scheme. This will work until, as Co Rev, said, we run out of other peoples money. When will we run out? Probably not for a long time. However, if left unchecked SS and Medicare will climb to about 80% of the total Federal Budget by 2040, so we will run out of money to do anything else.
Coberly’s (btw not a disinterested party) constant parroting that “they paid for it” and “SS contributions are investments” are totally false. Which makes him what he calls everybody else “a liar.”
Let’s just quit the mischaracterizations, and recognize SS and Medicare for what they are – a type of welfare, and deal with it. That would mean not handing everyone who turns 65 a check for a million dollars.
the “rate of return” on SS is at least 2% REAL, more than that for most people, somewhere around 5% nominal.
the “interest” is “earned”.. you are “lending” the time value of your money to the current retirees… who “paid it back” actually before they retired. no they didn’t have a time machine… but by lending the time value of their money they earned their return, just the way you are earning yours.
sammy can’t understand that, but you can.
80% of the federal budget.
Social Security is not part of the federal budget. and Medicare isn’t either. or wasn’t, until some very smart people decided to make part of it part of the budget and make it impossible for me to say “Medicare is not part of the budget” without a long explanation that makes your eyes glaze over.
the point is Medicare should NOT be part of the budget. it should be paid for directly by the people who get the benefits… just like Social Security. Then the people could pay for their own retirements and their own medical care. And the rest of the country could continue to play with itsel… its war toys and not try to scare everybody with “SS… wil be 80%of the budget…”
as a matter of fact i don’t know where sammy gets that number… meaningless as it is… but Sammy is not a reliable source. if he comes back with a “source” watch out for the fingers crossed behind the back trick.
Sammy, SS will only run out of other people’s money in this country when there are no more taxpayers in the United States of America. Until then, SS cannot run out of money. If you believe differently, you don’t know how SS works.
Let’s just quit the mischaracterizations, and recognize SS for what it is – a type of retirement income insurance, and deal with it.
Joel
i know you know this, but Sammy doesn’t, and never will..
Those taxpayers are not just paying taxes, they are collecting benefits. They are in fact paying for their own benefits. May have to explain “time value of money” again to help some people understand why the people have “earned” the benefits that they get that are more than they paid in…. and say again… and again until they understand it… that this can continue infinitely.. everyone gets more than they paid in because each generation is richer than the last.
if it every happens that the next generation is poorer than the last… SS will still be the best way to insure your retirement. you just won’t be making as much interest is all.. kind of like stocks and bonds.
Dale: “Social Security is not part of the federal budget.” Next time I hear/see another comment about the SSTF excesses being spent in the general fund, or that any difference in any of the SS trust funds will be made up from tax revenues, then I will just refer them to Dale and his misbegotten belief.
Dan, saying this, “The program works and sammy and corev can’t abide it.” and then seeing Dale’s bat sh$t lies are what we can not abide. In 2017 the OASDI TF will go negative. Where will that difference be made up without changes in revenues before then?
sammy:
Not true. SS surplus is invested in Treasury notes or bills. You are wrong. These are still the safest investments globally.
“That worries Rep. David Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, and a member of the House-Senate supercommittee tasked with finding new deficit cuts. Tax reductions, “no matter how well-intended,” will push the deficit higher, making the panel’s task that much harder, Camp’s office said.”
The moron believes SS withholding taxes are meant to balance the budget. Gee Sammy, are SS withholding taxes meant to balance the budget or meant for retirees?
Dale, we agree. At least about Social Security and Medicare.
Sammy and CoRev are trolls. Not particularly bright ones at that.
Uh, CoRev,
The trust fund was always intended to “go negative.” Indeed, it was always intended to disappear entirely. The purpose of the trust fund was never to sustain SS in perpetuity. It was intended to bridge the baby boom generation. Much as it may surprise you to hear, the baby boomers are all doomed. They (we) will die. Every last one. Then there well be no more need of a “trust fund.”
Now run along and play. Grownups are talking.
thanks joel
CoRev
by all means refer them to me. if they are more intelligent or more honest than you i think i can explain it to them. the Trust Fund has no excesses… it IS the excess of payroll taxes over benefits. and it wasn’t spent, it was lent. it is being paid back as we speak.
god knows what you mean by “any difference… will be made up…” i think you made that up.
don’t be afraid to say bat shit when you’ve got it on your teeth.
CoRev
what the hell do you think the Trust Fund was for… it stored cash and collected interest against the da when the money would be needed. that day is what you call “goes negative.” long planned for. not the end of the world.
it’s like when you finally get to spend your Christmas fund. or have to spend your kids college fund. it’s what it’s for.
sammy – “However, if left unchecked SS and Medicare will climb to about 80% of the total Federal Budget by 2040, so we will run out of money to do anything else.”
coberly – “and note, please that “80% of the federal budget” is NOT 80% of your income. so stop confusing yourself with meaningless scare words.”
Plenty of individuals have their heads buried in the mud on this critical issue.
Sammy is correct if his intention was to include Medicaid expenditures. I assume that was his intention based on previous statements at Angry Bear. He has a good working knowledge of federal budget projections.
Former Comptroller General David M. Walker explained the situation differently in May 2005, three years prior to the recession: “The only thing the United States is able to do a little after 2040 is pay interest on massive and growing federal debt. The model blows up in the mid-2040s. What does that mean? Argentina.”
The federal budget model will blow up based on our present fiscal course absent further corrections. Many Members of Congress understand this point all too well.
AB readers should check out the following CBO graphs that support Sammy’s statement.
Note that the CBO graphs do not include federal interest payment obligations. Imagine what that means…
Compare the CBO Extended-Baseline Scenario vs. Alternative Fiscal Scenario graphs:
CBO’s 2011 Long-Term Budget Outlook, June 2011
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/122xx/doc12212/06-21-Long-Term_Budget_Outlook.pdf
and
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=12212
Figure B-1. (pdf page 94)
Primary Spending and Revenues, by Category, Under CBO’s Long-Term Budget Scenarios Through 2085
If AB readers want fast links to similar graphs, use the following direct graph links:
The Long-Term Budget Outlook
CBO
June 2009
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/102xx/doc10297/toc.html
Figure 1-1. Federal Revenues and Noninterest Spending, by Category, Under CBO’s Extended-Baseline Scenario
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/102xx/doc10297/Chapter1.4.1.shtml#1098017
Figure 1-2. Federal Revenues and Noninterest Spending, by Category, Under CBO’s Alternative Fiscal Scenario
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/102xx/doc10297/Chapter1.4.1.shtml#1093241
Note that the 2009 graphs do not include expenditures for CHIP and the healthcare bill exchange subsidies. The graphs also do not include federal interest payment obligations; that point is explained in the graphs.
Or read this:
The Long-Term Budget Outlook in the United States and the Role of Health Care Entitlements
Joyce Manchester, Congressional Budget Office and
Jonathan A. Schwabish, Congressional Budget Office
Prepared for the USC Conference on the Long-Term Fiscal Crisis, sponsored by the […]
CoRev – “Dan, saying this, “The program works and sammy and corev can’t abide it.” and then seeing Dale’s bat sh$t lies are what we can not abide. In 2017 the OASDI TF will go negative. Where will that difference be made up without changes in revenues before then?”
Joel – “Uh, CoRev, The trust fund was always intended to “go negative.” Indeed, it was always intended to disappear entirely. The purpose of the trust fund was never to sustain SS in perpetuity. It was intended to bridge the baby boom generation. Much as it may surprise you to hear, the baby boomers are all doomed. They (we) will die. Every last one. Then there well be no more need of a “trust fund.” Now run along and play. Grownups are talking.”
AB Readers,
CoRev was talking about the media broadcasts and news stories released on Sunday regarding the projected 2017 insolvency of the SSA Disability Insurance trust fund. The AP ran a story that popped across the nation.
If coberly and Joel paid attention to the news both of them would have known this. Instead, they’re too busy acting like arrogant know-it-all fools on Angry Bear.
http://www.suntimes.com/business/7203973-420/social-security-disability-on-verge-of-insolvency.html
http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2011/August/21/Social-Security-Disability-Payments-In-Peril-by-2017-Fiscal-Times.aspx
Skinny on the temporary “fix” to permit developmental test on highly sensored test airplane to go ahead.
http://www.jsf.mil/news/docs/20110818_FLIGHTOPS.pdf
Thanks MG.
These are important facts to get out.
MG
no. i am trying to use the words the way the lying bastards in washington use them. they are out to kill social security. so they talk about “entitlements.” whatever definition you can find in a book, it is still necessary for people to be talking about the same thing.. as well as they can.
CoRev sows confusion. MG lives in it.
CoRev may have been talking about the DI trust fund but he said OASDI.
he sows confusion.
The DI Trust Fund is indeed projected to be exhausted by 2017 or so. It cannot “go negative.” It will most likely borrow from the OASI Trust Fund, but it would be better if the payroll tax was raised about 3 tenths of a percent right now. that would be about $2.40 per week, and it would be insurance for you in case you became one of those disable people.
CoRev sows confusion.
MG lives in it.
CoRev
you are sowing confusion. deliberately it appears. it is your facts that are wrong, because you can’t keep straight in your head what you are talking about. it’s hard for the rest of us to read your mind. the print is too small and the spelling too awful.
if the subject was the DI trust fund you should not have said the OASDI trust fund. but confusion is what cockroaches live on.
if that is what CoRev was talking about, he should have said so.
CoREv sows confusion.
MG lives in it.
Thanks MG,
You always bring the facts.
And most people don’t want to join the real world of US Gov Spending anf inance…
Islam will chnage
whatever is the case with medicaid, Social Security pays for itself. it is not part of the budget. it will not borrow from the budger. it has nothing to do with the deficit.
MG and sammy and corev sow confusion.
coberly – 10:13:05 AM – “CoRev may have been talking about the DI trust fund but he said OASDI.”
AB readers,
I know for a fact that this is what CoRev was talking about because we discussed it Sunday afternoon.
CBO released a new report on the SSA OASDI trust funds earlier this month. I am sure that coberly didn’t read it. Par for the course. But the news media caught up with it, hence the AP interview with a SSA commissioner and subsequent news story.
coberly and Joel don’t even keep up with the news let alone read new CBO reports. Yet they pretend to know everything.
coberly – 10:13:05 AM – “CoRev may have been talking about the DI trust fund but he said OASDI.”
coberly – 10:16:35 AM – “if the subject was the DI trust fund you should not have said the OASDI trust fund.”
AB readers,
I know for a fact that this is what CoRev was talking about because we discussed it Sunday afternoon.
CBO released a new report on the SSA OASDI trust funds earlier this month. I am sure that coberly didn’t read it. Par for the course. But the news media caught up with it, hence the AP interview with a SSA commissioner and subsequent news story.
coberly and Joel don’t even keep up with the news let alone read new CBO reports. Yet they pretend to know everything.
coberly – 10:13:05 AM – “CoRev may have been talking about the DI trust fund but he said OASDI.”
coberly – 10:16:35 AM – “if the subject was the DI trust fund you should not have said the OASDI trust fund.”
coberly – 10:17:38 – “if that is what CoRev was talking about, he should have said so.”
AB readers,
I know for a fact that this is what CoRev was talking about because we discussed it Sunday afternoon.
CBO released a new report on the SSA OASDI trust funds earlier this month. I am sure that coberly didn’t read it. Par for the course. But the news media caught up with it, hence the AP interview with a SSA commissioner and subsequent news story.
coberly and Joel don’t even keep up with the news let alone read new CBO reports. Yet they pretend to know everything.
run,
Not true. SS surplus is invested in Treasury notes or bills
Only a small portion is invested in Treasuries for a short period of time – those reciepts in excess of payments. The majority of the money goes straight to retirees like sh*t through a goose.
So, ironically, the much maligned Trust Fund is really the only real assets that SS has, and the only way SS resembles a real pension plan. The rate of return on those Treasuries will not match the benefits to be paid, but still at least they are invested.
YUP! I messed up by not using the correct acronym. Big enough to admit it too! It should have been SSDI.
Now, if we can get Dale, Joel, Jack and the many others who misspeak to correct their errors, then we might be able to have a conversation.
Wow…..I find this set of comments out of bounds. The new info on disability is not relevent to the post, nor is it relevent as new data except as a question to ask. The medicare data is new as well and I thank run for bringing it to our attention, will need to be followed since daya is often one to two years behind.
I really don’t think that a private conversation on Sunday adds to legitimacy of data describing ongoing directions programs are taking. And the deficit hysteria couched in ‘facts’ avoids the question of political decision making as it is playing out at the moment. These claims by corev and MG may need to be discussed but in some logical manner with appropriate context.
The tactic of appeals to AB readers saying this is true and that is true is out of bounds. MG…you scolded me for using a economic Marxist oriented publication as a way to describe a problem on labor as left wing nuttery a few months ago and yet Nouriel Roubini no less came out with some interpretation similar to mine…Roubini is pretty mainstream. I will post that.
What is happening in the deficit questions are political, values on where our money is to be spent.
To couch these arguments as technical and economic only while simultabeously making a political and moral choice on flow of funds serves no constructive purpose.
Joel,
Now run along and play. Grownups are talking.
When Joel starts to lose an argument, which happens pretty much instantaneously, he resorts to insults.
I see Dale relies on the “Big Lie” to continue his arrogant rants. I will not repeat the detailed data from MG’s sources showing the SS revenues and outlays in the “OFFICIAL” US Federal Budget, because will just claim we are lying. Again.
For the remaining AB readers, understand we are not attacking SS, but the misconceptions constantly being voiced here.
I dunno. What’s worse? Using the incorrect acronym or continuously lying about SS funding and outlays?