Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You really believe putting in an average of 100-150 dollars toward SS a month for 40 yrs will pay for you if you retire at 55 yrs old and collect say $1100.00+ a month for say 20-25 yrs...HMMM no!
You really believe putting in an average of 100-150 dollars toward SS a month for 40 yrs will pay for you if you retire at 55 yrs old and collect say $1100.00+ a month for say 20-25 yrs...HMMM no!
How can it be broke if it brings in more than it pays out???? Didn't you read the nice colorful big chart I laid out for you?
I'll explain it further, $865 - $701 = $164, see that's what people call a surplus
On paper, payroll taxes (which are horribly regressive, how liberals support a tax on LABOR I do not know) support social security.
In practice, when social security was "net" positive (putting net in quotation marks because payroll taxes are only linked to social security in theory, not in practice) the government spent the "extra" money on other things, than wrote itself debt from one department to another that has the same value as the IOU if you took money out of your joint bank account with your wife, spent it on coke and strippers, and then left an IOU note for the money in the dresser drawer.
Now social security is in "deficit" and we're paying money in from the general funds to cover it in addition to the payroll tax, those proverbial IOUs in the dresser drawer being of no value (how can you collect debt you owe yourself?).
Now, this doesn't necessarily mean we should cut social security. However, talking about it as if it is in "surplus", "deficit" or even has its own cashflow at all is ignorant at best (usually the case when your average joe talks about it) and outright lying for political reasons at worst (usually the case when politicians, of the right or left, do it).
How can it be broke if it brings in more than it pays out???? Didn't you read the nice colorful big chart I laid out for you?
I'll explain it further, $865 - $701 = $164, see that's what people call a surplus
Wrong.. the math goes
$865B - $701B = $164B - the $865B in IOU's payable to the Social Security administration + interest to cover future expenditures.
Social Security is BROKE.. Their only assets are US Treasuries debt, which continues to grow yearly thereby deflating the values of those securities.
Just like Clinton's surplus that never was. Why can't liberals comprehend basic math?
Liberals think very short sighted.. They live for today.. Clinton said they had a surplus, because Social Security is a "tax".. He did have a surplus, if and only if you ignore the future liabilities..
Clearly many have no problem not counting the IOU's that are due in the future.. They pretend they dont exist... Its all bout "now". If there is more in than out, then its a profit to many, ignoring the fact that you took out a mortgage to get the surplus..
You really believe putting in an average of 100-150 dollars toward SS a month for 40 yrs will pay for you if you retire at 55 yrs old and collect say $1100.00+ a month for say 20-25 yrs...HMMM no!
The Social Security Trust Fund has a SURPLUS of at LEAST>>>>>> 2,200,000,000,000.00 DOLLARS which our government borrows against yearly.....paying 110,000,000,000 in interest on money it borrows....Social Security NOT only pays for itself......it helps keep the rest of the government afloat!.
IF you DO NOT provide links to back up your rhetoric; than I assume you are simply furthering a political agenda that is not based in facts and/or reality!
PS.......apparently you know very little about investing, interest rates and how money can "grow" over a forty year investment timeline.
The Social Security Trust Fund has a SURPLUS of at LEAST>>>>>> 2,200,000,000,000.00 DOLLARS which our government borrows against yearly.....paying 110,000,000,000 in interest on money it borrows....Social Security NOT only pays for itself......it helps keep the rest of the government afloat!.
IF you DO NOT provide links to back up your rhetoric; than I assume you are simply furthering a political agenda that is not based in facts and/or reality!
PS.......apparently you know very little about investing, interest rates and how money can "grow" over a forty year investment timeline.
A question then:
If you take a reverse-mortgage on your own house out from yourself for $5,000 a year for 20 years, with $2500 taken out each 6 months, paid at 7% nominal annual interest compounded quarterly, with payments at the end of each 6-month period, when it comes time for you to repay your mortgage to yourself, how much money do you get?
Here's a clue: it's zero. Since you can't collect a paper loan from yourself!
edit: nice appeal to authority logical fallacy you have going there with the whole links or GTFO thing. 2+2 =4, the sky is blue, and an IOU to yourself has no value, and no, none of those statements require links.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just like Clinton's surplus that never was. Why can't liberals comprehend basic math?
