Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-02-2011, 04:22 PM
dellinger63's Avatar
dellinger63 dellinger63 is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 10,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
Social Security is fully funded for disbursements through 2037, and at 78% after that for years, if we do nothing to it. A minor tweek, such as raising the cap to $150,00 or $200,000, would fund it virtually forever at current benefit levels. And yes, SS is safely kept in US Treasury bonds. We have no anticipated trouble paying ourselves back as we need it. SS has never, ever missed a payment, and there is no indication or reason it ever should.

As long as the Tea Party never gains a majority in Congress, the full faith and credit of the US should be okay. .
The Treasury held $70 billion in its account prior to borrowing $2 trillion so it could in part make this month's SS payments. The fact the SS fund holds nothing but IOU's from the Treasury should be a huge wake up call and seniors should never be concerned about receiving a check while SS is funded, especially when its balance is supposedly $3 trillion. The Fed government is sadly incapable of surviving all its giveaways w/o diverting 40% of tax money but it should certainly make an effort to start trying.

I think it prudent in the future to start funding SS with cash. The government should not be allowed to touch SS taxes for anything (including Cash for Clunkers) but for making SS payments period! Shame on Washington for 'borrowing' the seniors' retirement accounts on a promise. And this is as much the fault of republicans as it is the dems.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-02-2011, 04:36 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dellinger63 View Post
The Treasury held $70 billion in its account prior to borrowing $2 trillion so it could in part make this month's SS payments. The fact the SS fund holds nothing but IOU's from the Treasury should be a huge wake up call and seniors should never be concerned about receiving a check while SS is funded, especially when its balance is supposedly $3 trillion.
Nonsense. No Senior has to worry about receiving anything less than full payment through 2037. And 78% after that. But we'll fix it. We've made multiple adjustments over the years, just need another.

And it's been that way for some time. Strange the sudden fixation on Social Security when none is needed.

The only reason to worry about making tomorrows payment was the ridiculous kabuki of "oh noes, don't borrow for the cash flow!"

Fortunately for this country, Joey's "ostriches" had alot more than a pea-brain, and prevailed.

When we need money, we sell some of those Treasuries off. You realize that's how Social Security earns additional interest money while sitting there, right? We will not put that money into a dangerous, volitile stock market market. It's against the law to risk it that way (good thing, as it would have lost 1/3 of it's value in the past decade!) It's safe in the safest bonds in the world.

And you do realize, that if Social Security were indeed "cash" in a lockbox, it would be immediately loaned to us in bonds to earn that interest, right? It really wouldn't - could not - remain "cash" sitting in a safe somewheres? Social Security monies by law have to earn interest?

I'm not saying it's right Congress raided it in the past, it was not. But it's certainly not a disaster or non-payment threat as you falsely imply.

Quote:
The Fed government is sadly incapable of surviving all its giveaways w/o diverting 40% of tax money but it should certainly make an effort to start trying.
I agree. And getting our income back up to full-time is the first thing we should do. Trying to hang back and work at 70%, while spending at greater than 100% these past 10 years, obviously doesn't work.

We've been worse off before, and been able to financially do just fine. We'll do it again - if adults who can do math prevail. It's easy: 14% GDP income, 25% GDP spending: raise the first, lower the second, make them both about 20%

I think it's prudent in the future to start funding SS with cash, yes. But remember that we do not have any trouble cashing in our bonds and paying ourselves back at all, and don't anticipate a problem for over 25 years.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-02-2011, 05:01 PM
dellinger63's Avatar
dellinger63 dellinger63 is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 10,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
When we need money, we sell some of those Treasuries off. You realize that's how Social Security earns additional interest money while sitting there, right? We will not put that money into a dangerous, volitile stock market market. It's against the law to risk it that way (good thing, as it would have lost 1/3 of it's value in the past decade!) It's safe in the safest bonds in the world.
.
If the SS fund held actual treasury bills they would have easily been able to sell them on the market and send checks out. Sadly they don't but rather have Treasury credits. That's my point.

Wish we could all pay our ss tax in credits but the government only takes cash. Also wish the SS fund received the same interest rate the IRS charges a late tax payer.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-02-2011, 05:13 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dellinger63 View Post
If the SS fund held actual treasury bills they would have easily been able to sell them on the market and send checks out. Sadly they don't but rather have Treasury credits. That's my point.
Pssst ... it's okay, because we're the ones that would hand ourselves a Treasury Bill to sell ... it doesn't have to be a literal hard copy in a safe somewhere. The Treasury can sell a T-bill and credit the appropriate accounts

Quote:
Also wish the SS fund received the same interest rate the IRS charges a late tax payer.
I wish I had a golden pony that snorted nickles :-)
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-02-2011, 05:21 PM
Antitrust32 Antitrust32 is offline
Jerome Park
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Ft Lauderdale
Posts: 9,413
Default

78% in 2038 MAY be enough to cover an electric bill. maybe.

In 2038, I'll still be decades away from being able to recieve my electric bill payment. I'm scared to think of what the fund will look like in 2050 when it will be my time to collect.

but hey, who cares about the future. SPEND NOW!!!!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
Can I start just making stuff up out of thin air, too?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-02-2011, 05:27 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 View Post
78% in 2038 MAY be enough to cover an electric bill. maybe.

In 2038, I'll still be decades away from being able to recieve my electric bill payment. I'm scared to think of what the fund will look like in 2050 when it will be my time to collect.

but hey, who cares about the future. SPEND NOW!!!!
But we do care about the future. That's why the SS fund will have to be addressed, in the exact same manner it has been in the past. But it's no danger-emergency!

The Social Security fund isn't part of any budget deficit, other than we owe it 3.4 Trillion, which we can get in a couple years from expired tax cuts and cash in readily over a few years. It doesn't contribute to the deficit, it doesn't contribute to long-term debt other than mentioned.

Who tells you guys this stuff? Rush? Hannity? Breitbart? RedState? Geesh, check the sources <g>
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-02-2011, 05:33 PM
dellinger63's Avatar
dellinger63 dellinger63 is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 10,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
Pssst ... it's okay, because we're the ones that would hand ourselves a Treasury Bill to sell ... it doesn't have to be a literal hard copy in a safe somewhere. The Treasury can sell a T-bill and credit the appropriate accounts :-)
That's all and fine but when the treasury has 70 billion on hand while owing $3.6 trillion it's gotten out of hand. Tell you what offer $3.6 trillion in t-bills tomorrow and see how fast you can't sell them. Ponzi's been caught! Those $3.6 trillion dollars are long gone! Unless new tax money is paid in there is no money to pay out! We got ripped off for $3.6 trillion and generations to come will suffer because of it. We can at least stop the madness and lock up SS funds in the future whether they be in actual issued t-bills or in some sort of other investment. Anything beats getting ripped off.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-02-2011, 05:40 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dellinger63 View Post
That's all and fine but when the treasury has 70 billion on hand while owing $3.6 trillion it's gotten out of hand.
Where have you been the past 20 years?

Cash flow? We borrow, we sell, we work the books? You know, as the Treasury hasn't been permitted to borrow since we hit the debt ceiling limit in May? And has been "working it" while Congress was stupid? And that's why we only have a few billion on hand?

Quote:
Tell you what offer $3.6 trillion in t-bills tomorrow and see how fast you can't sell them.
Really? You don't watch interest rates, huh?

Quote:
Ponzi's been caught! Those $3.6 trillion dollars are long gone! Unless new tax money is paid in there is no money to pay out! We got ripped off for $3.6 trillion and generations to come will suffer because of it.
OHMYGAWD, OH ... wait, no, we have not been "ripped off"

Quote:
We can at least stop the madness and lock up SS funds in the future whether they be in actual issued t-bills or in some sort of other investment.
That's what we do now Which investments are covered by law, always have been.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-02-2011, 09:35 PM
dellinger63's Avatar
dellinger63 dellinger63 is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 10,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
Where have you been the past 20 years?

Cash flow? We borrow, we sell, we work the books? You know, as the Treasury hasn't been permitted to borrow since we hit the debt ceiling limit in May? And has been "working it" while Congress was stupid? And that's why we only have a few billion on hand?



Really? You don't watch interest rates, huh?



OHMYGAWD, OH ... wait, no, we have not been "ripped off"



That's what we do now Which investments are covered by law, always have been.
When $3.6 trillion in cash is in a fund and there's nothing but credits, no actual PURCHASED/PAID FOR T-bills we've been ripped off!

You think or make believe the flooding the market with $3.6 trillion in new issue bonds wouldn't reduce the interest rate given and would be gobbled up?

One thing we can agree on is we have been working the books. So did Ponzi. Let Obama fund the SS fully, not with credits but with actual paid for bonds (on the books) and I promise he has my vote.

You just can't understand that granny's cash is long gone, paving a road, bailing Freddie/Frannie, Iraq. What we do know is not a cent will be taken because of FAA furloughs and in fact will save money. If this 'cash' was used to purchase 'actual' bills there wouldn't have been the wasted $3.6 Trillion.

Simple the SS tax should not be mixed with the general fund. It's the people's; who contributed in the form of SS tax money, not anyone else's!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.