Skip to main content

View Diary: Hell, No! Social Security Contributes Nothing To Deficit (119 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I never thought I would see the day when I quoted (18+ / 0-)

    Ronald Reagan, but it has come.  Reagan said, "Social Security, let's lay it to rest once and for all... Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit, Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee.  If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the general fund or reduce the deficit.  It would go into the Social Security Trust Fund.  So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing a budget, or lowering the deficit."  You would think that Obama would know this, even if the republicans don't know it.  However, I think is absolutely wrong for Obama to use Social Security reductions, via the chained CPI, as a bargaining chip. Whose side is he on anyway!
     

    •  Someone forward that to Obama. (12+ / 0-)

      Even though he's a big fan of St. Ronnie, he seems to have missed one of the few correct things Ronnie ever said.

      What's the point of letting neoliberals into the tent when neoliberalism is burning down the campground?
      Since elections will never change the ownership of government, why does our strategy rely entirely upon them?

      by Words In Action on Mon Apr 08, 2013 at 03:51:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  But above Bruce Webb shows that this is not true (0+ / 0-)

      This wikipedia link lays it out in pretty to easy terms.

      http://en.m.wikipedia.org/...

      Here's a direct quote from that link:

      When program revenues exceed payments (i.e., the program is in surplus) the extra funds are borrowed and used by the government for other purposes, but a legal obligation to program recipients is created to the extent this occurs.
      So what is going on is that the government is using the SS surplus to pay for other purposes (defense, education, etc.) and it therefore reduces the need for increased borrowing to do the same thing.  Hence, SS surpluses reduce the deficit.

      So, the question is does the DKOS community trust Reagan more than Wikipedia?  And, more importantly, who is right?

      It is my understanding that Wikipedia is right on this.

      We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Albert Einstein

      by theotherside on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 11:24:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The headline deficit only (0+ / 0-)

        The change in debt, not one cent.

        The two are different because SS surpluses have been counted towards the headline deficit in years past.

        If you add up the history of headline deficits (and occasional surpluses), roughly speaking you'll get the total debt to the public (it was LBJ who started counting the SS surplus as income while not counting the exactly equal increase in debt to SS).

        Combined budgeting was misleading then, it's misleading now, and it'll be misleading in the future.  See my comment below "I for one don't care for the combined budget" for FY2006 as an example of this.

        Fake candidates nominated by the GOP for the recalls: 6 out of 7. Fake signatures on the recall petitions: 4 out of 1,860,283.

        by GeoffT on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 06:40:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (144)
  • Community (62)
  • Baltimore (46)
  • Bernie Sanders (37)
  • Civil Rights (35)
  • Culture (28)
  • Freddie Gray (22)
  • Elections (22)
  • Economy (21)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Education (20)
  • Racism (20)
  • Law (20)
  • Hillary Clinton (19)
  • Labor (18)
  • Politics (17)
  • Texas (16)
  • Media (16)
  • Environment (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site