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.
We need a Supreme Court that will rule that "entitlements" are unconstitutional federal spending and have them all abolished or sent back to the states where they can be unwound.
People would sh_t a brick! But it would take something that drastic.
You should be sick, because what you're looking at is a great example of propaganda.
I'm guessing neither you nor the propaganda artists at Heritage know the difference between "on-budget" and "off-budget," and that neither of you are aware that Republicans Gramm-Rudman-Hollings took Social Security off-budget and put it back where was from the beginning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kramer68
These graphs do make me sick, but I would like to know how much of the entitlement increase in spending is funded vs. unfunded. It would be nice to know how much of the increase is due to unemployment, welfare, food stamps etc...
Well, you're not going learn that information from those very Nazi-style graphs, which are designed to elicit the typical knee-jerk reaction.
Social Security is an wholly self-contained operation. The SSA collects FICA/SECA payroll taxes and then disburses them in accordance with public laws relating to Social Security.
With the exception of the idiotic FICA tax holiday approved by The Boy Kingâ„¢ monies from the General Fund do not fund Social Security. Neither federal personal income taxes, nor federal corporate income taxes, nor the Capital Gains Tax nor the Estate Tax nor any imposts (tariffs, user fees, duties etc) fund Social Security.
It is true that the government will be forced to either use monies from the General Fund to convert the special securities --- the IOUs --- to cash, or issue marketable securities, but that is something that will happen over the course of the next 11 years as the OASDI Trust Fund is exhausted (assuming no action is taken to raise the FICA/SECA tax rates to an appropriate level to prevent total exhaustion).
In other words, the government will have to spend an average of $200 Billion per year out of the General Fund to convert the IOUs, or will have to sell $200 Billion in Treasury notes to cover it.
Medicare is a different story. Part of Medicare funding does come from the General Fund, but that is only because the government has refused to do what the Medicare Trustees have asked repeatedly over the last 6 years, and this to either raise the HI Tax Rate, cut federal spending or a combination of both.
Medicaid is 100% part of the federal budget.
The claim made by the OP/Heritage thing is a false claim.
62% of the federal budget does not go to entitlements.
To correctly determine the amount of the federal budget that does go to entitlement, you will need to exclude 100% of Social Security, include 100% of Medicaid, and include that part of Medicare that is paid out of the General Fund, but exclude that part paid by HI Taxes and the HI (Medicare) Trust Fund.
You should be sick, because what you're looking at is a great example of propaganda.
I'm guessing neither you nor the propaganda artists at Heritage know the difference between "on-budget" and "off-budget," and that neither of you are aware that Republicans Gramm-Rudman-Hollings took Social Security off-budget and put it back where was from the beginning.
Well, you're not going learn that information from those very Nazi-style graphs, which are designed to elicit the typical knee-jerk reaction.
Social Security is an wholly self-contained operation. The SSA collects FICA/SECA payroll taxes and then disburses them in accordance with public laws relating to Social Security.
With the exception of the idiotic FICA tax holiday approved by The Boy King™ monies from the General Fund do not fund Social Security. Neither federal personal income taxes, nor federal corporate income taxes, nor the Capital Gains Tax nor the Estate Tax nor any imposts (tariffs, user fees, duties etc) fund Social Security.
It is true that the government will be forced to either use monies from the General Fund to convert the special securities --- the IOUs --- to cash, or issue marketable securities, but that is something that will happen over the course of the next 11 years as the OASDI Trust Fund is exhausted (assuming no action is taken to raise the FICA/SECA tax rates to an appropriate level to prevent total exhaustion).
In other words, the government will have to spend an average of $200 Billion per year out of the General Fund to convert the IOUs, or will have to sell $200 Billion in Treasury notes to cover it.
Medicare is a different story. Part of Medicare funding does come from the General Fund, but that is only because the government has refused to do what the Medicare Trustees have asked repeatedly over the last 6 years, and this to either raise the HI Tax Rate, cut federal spending or a combination of both.
Medicaid is 100% part of the federal budget.
The claim made by the OP/Heritage thing is a false claim.
62% of the federal budget does not go to entitlements.
To correctly determine the amount of the federal budget that does go to entitlement, you will need to exclude 100% of Social Security, include 100% of Medicaid, and include that part of Medicare that is paid out of the General Fund, but exclude that part paid by HI Taxes and the HI (Medicare) Trust Fund.
Projectile vomiting....
Mircea
These charts are sourced from the OBM (Office of Management and Budget - Government Agency).
Do you think we borrow money and raise the debt ceiling because we are sitting on a treasure trove of gold coins and benjamin franklins?
This is a great visual. I think wht yr seeing is the ageing baby boomer rat going through the budgetary snake. After the BBs die off things will re-balance perhaps. But that is a very long view.
So this run-up is, I bet, a mix of medical cost inflation and demand due to ageing pop. needing more medical care. Could also mean more people are becoming eligible for these programs, too...not just old, but old enough AND poor enough to qualify.
Medicaid is based on poverty/income qualifications, so as people get poorer due to the weak economy and income stagnation/downward mobility you'd also see an increase, since more people become eligible.
Defense is a BIG part of the discretionary budget and squeezes other discretionary programs, so for that side of the budget it does have to be controlled. But that is not going to address this entitlements crisis.
SS and Medicare are the two greatest anti-poverty programs within the U.S. Medicare, as designed has always relied on a subsidy from general revenues. That subsidy was about 25% at the start. It's now about 40% and by the end of this decade will reach 50%.
The baby boom put the WW2 generation through the benefits.
Greenspan/Reagan substantially increased Payroll taxes over two terms to ensure that there would be sufficient money 20+ years into the future for payouts. Then Reagan deficit spent all collected and left an IOU in the box. Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2 did the same.
In 2001, then Secretary of the Treasury let it slip there were no assets in the SS trust fund. Right then and there, Payroll taxes should have been substantially increased. Instead, we buried our heads, went to war and reduced federal income taxes. Insanity.
Every presidential admin inherits the baggage of all prior admins. Begining in 2011, 10,000 people a day began turning 65 and will continue to do so for the next 20 years. They will be drawing SS and using Medicare benefits. Many have and will continue to need SNAP benefits and Section 8 rent assistance, no different than the WW2 generation.
The biggest Medicare payouts are made in the last year of life, attempting to protract the inevitable. Many with fatal conditions would prefer to die with some dignity. Unfortunately, that is not possible in most states. This too will need to change, over time.
SS and Medicare are the two greatest anti-poverty programs within the U.S. Medicare, as designed has always relied on a subsidy from general revenues. That subsidy was about 25% at the start. It's now about 40% and by the end of this decade will reach 50%.
The baby boom put the WW2 generation through the benefits.
Greenspan/Reagan substantially increased Payroll taxes over two terms to ensure that there would be sufficient money 20+ years into the future for payouts. Then Reagan deficit spent all collected and left an IOU in the box. Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2 did the same.
In 2001, then Secretary of the Treasury let it slip there were no assets in the SS trust fund. Right then and there, Payroll taxes should have been substantially increased. Instead, we buried our heads, went to war and reduced federal income taxes. Insanity.
Every presidential admin inherits the baggage of all prior admins. Begining in 2011, 10,000 people a day began turning 65 and will continue to do so for the next 20 years. They will be drawing SS and using Medicare benefits. Many have and will continue to need SNAP benefits and Section 8 rent assistance, no different than the WW2 generation.
The biggest Medicare payouts are made in the last year of life, attempting to protract the inevitable. Many with fatal conditions would prefer to die with some dignity. Unfortunately, that is not possible in most states. This too will need to change, over time.
So killing off old people would be a budget proposal ?
I've noticed that many of your posts call for SS/medicare cuts and/or reform.
No other "entitlement" programs seem to get your ire up as do the old age programs which citizens actually pay into.
Not until the checks stop showing in our mailboxes up will the masses admit we have a problem. Why don't we address this looming disaster now while we still have time and overhaul entitlement spending? Most of us would prefer to bury our heads in the sand than admit the gravy train is headed towards a brick wall, a 'get what you can, while you can' mentality.
I've been harping on our out of control spending since halfway through the Bush Presidency, but nobody will take it seriously. Democrats think that the poor will be starving and dying in the streets if we reform welfare, food stamps, section 8 and Medicaid. Republicans think we'll be invaded by Iran if we cut defense spending. We've bought more government than we can afford and every moment we go further into a debt that's becoming a bigger burden on our budget. And yet, we continue to kick the can down the road. Very few in Washington have offered solutions that attack overspending across the board and those who do are often portrayed as kooks.
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.
