Quote:
Originally Posted by Werone
Don't act like you know it all because I know you don't.
|
When it comes to Social Security/Medicare I do.
I started studying the Social Security/Medicare problem in 2004 at university, so it isn't like I just started yesterday. There is a "Search" function on this forum, so it isn't like you can't find information on the issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Werone
I for one don't want to hear you bash anyone, you come across as the angry idiot.
|
I'll bet you're the blog writer.
Anyone who foists something called "
Social Security Facts" upon City-Data forum members and then holds it out to be factual when it contains nothing but gibberish and is devoid of relevant and pertinent facts deserves to be bashed.
As I recall, you said...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Werone
|
...and then you failed to do any fact-checking and failed to practice logic (as you demanded others do).
And then you made two more demands....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Werone
Where is the fact checking. Who in the government? Its just opinion without references.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Werone
So who's telling the truth? Where is the math.
|
....and still failed or refused to follow your own demands.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Werone
...and if your position has always been correct then you are a god.
|
My position with respect to Social Security/Medicare has always been correct;
I've never been wrong since I started in 2006.
In 2008, when SSA was claiming day-to-day operations were solvent through 2017, I called their bluff.
Why? Because I knew you were heading into a recession. And when I joined this forum in 2007, I said exactly when you'd be in a recession and I was right. And it was because you entered into a recession that Social Security became insolvent on their day-to-day operations.
I figured it out, years in advance, but for some reason your government tax-payer paid highly expensive "you-Harvard" idiots missed the boat.
Of course, I use raw numbers for everything, which gives me a look at reality, instead of using "seasonally adjusted" numbers which is someone's fantasy view of what should be happening.
Your idiot blogger flopped big-time.
All he had to do is read the June 2011 Social Security Actuarial Report (although a lot of good that would do -- he wouldn't understand any of it).
It states quite clearly in no uncertain terms that the Social Security Administration ("SSA") projects it will be making annual benefits payments in excess of $1 TRILLION per year by the year 2020.
SSA can make those benefit payments
if and only if it collects in excess of $1 TRILLION per year in FICA tax revenues.
Right? I mean, that is logic, which you demanded every (except your blogger) use.
The question then is can SSA collect $1+ TRILLION in FICA tax revenues for that year and every year thereafter.
The answer is a resounding "NO."
SSA believes that it will, but then SSA also believes the US economy will grow at an annual rate of 4.1% GDP to 6.4% GDP. For the reasons I previously stated, that is an impossibility.
If the average annual GDP rate has been 2.89% since 1961, and if the US GDP has never exceeded 4.0% since 1970, and if the only reason the GDP was ~4.0% in the 1960s was due to the fact that the US was still industrializing in the Agricultural Sector, then what moron would make a claim that the US GDP would grow at 4.1%?
That is an example of logic using facts (which your blogger knows nothing about).
So then how incompetent are the over-paid "you-Harvards" economists working for the government? Very incompetent. You'd have to be daft to come up with a GDP forecast like that.
In addition to the fact that SSA's revenue assumptions are predicated on GDP growth rates that are unattainable, there are several economic conditions which must exist in order to have even a small chance of meeting the revenue assumptions. Those conditions are:
1] An unemployment rate of ~5%;
and
2] A labor participation rate greater than 66.5%;
and
3] An underemployment rate of 6% or less.
It is not my fault that in 1994 during the Clinton Administration, the status of part-time employees was changed from "unemployed" to "employed."
That gives a false picture of the economy.
Your blogger should have been able to figure that out, assuming they had a clue as to what they were talking about.
So what happens when SSA has to pay out $1+ TRILLION on or around 2020 but is only collecting $750 Billion in FICA taxes?
Oooops.
You will have to pull that money from the OASI Trust Fund.
What happens when the OASI is depleted?
You're going to have to find $350 Billion lying about somewhere and if you cannot, then you will have to slash the benefits for Social Security beneficiaries.
A lot of people are under the mistaken and misguided impression that if only we tax the "rich" our troubles will end.
I'm not saying you should or shouldn't eliminate the cap, I'm just saying there are negative consequences for doing so.
Okay, so let's eliminate the cap. You get about $75 Billion extra.
Great, now you only need to find $275 Billion somewhere.
You can tax the "rich." Oh, wait, you're already taxing the "rich." Ooopps.
You have no choice but to raise the FICA payroll tax for all employees. The FICA tax needs to be at least 9.0%. For someone earning $45,000 per year, that means they'll lose $112 per month.
No big deal right?
Everyone can afford to lose $112/month and they won't miss it.
And the States? No big deal. The States can afford to lose $1.35 Billion in sales tax revenues (from the loss of $112 per worker), right? Well of course the States can afford to lose $Billions in sales tax revenues, and we know that, because every single State has slashed their sales taxes over the last several years, right? Wrong.
So let's not raise the FICA tax rate, but you still need $275 Billion. What programs are you going to cut to get the money? HUD? Education? Defense? Hometard Security? Food Stamps?
You can always "borrow" the money. At $275 Billion then every 4 years your National Debt will increase $1 TRILLION. What will the US credit rating be then? CCC+? Oh joy.
Maybe I should change my attitude to this:
The 6.3 Billion non-US citizens of Earth have a moral and ethical duty and obligation to fund the National Debt of the United States.
That will solve all problems.
I'll say it again, your blogger is an idiot, and it isn't my fault you didn't fact-check your blogger's idiotic comments before foisting them on people here.
People have no idea what is in store for them in the future. Most of them blissfully meander about and won't figure it out it smacks them right in the face. The last thing they need is stupid internet bloggers confusing the hell out of them.
Yes, Social Security
is going bankrupt and the cost to save it will ripple throughout the US, negatively impacting States, counties, cities and people, not to mention business and industry.
And that doesn't even address the issue of Medicare.
Laughing at the superior intellect...
Mircea
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.
