Obama and Social Security

[mandym]

So Obama says that if we do not raise the debt ceiling he cannot promise that social security checks will go out August 3rd. So where did everyone's SS go that it cannot be paid? Is SS just a big ponzi scheme sanctioned by the government?

 

[InTheLight]

So Obama says that if we do not raise the debt ceiling he cannot promise that social security checks will go out August 3rd. So where did everyone's SS go that it cannot be paid? Is SS just a big ponzi scheme sanctioned by the government?

I think he means that the government workers that would print and distribute the checks won't be at work because the government will be shut down. Has nothing to do with the pot of money in social security.

As to the question, is SS a big ponzi scheme? It certainly resembles one.

 

[abcgrad94]

He's just using a strong-arm tactic to scare people into doing his bidding.

 

[Bob Alkire]

He's just using a strong-arm tactic to scare people into doing his bidding.

I see it as you do.

 

[targus]

I think he means that the government workers that would print and distribute the checks won't be at work because the government will be shut down.

Why would the government have to shut down?

The government doesn't run out of money at the strike of twelve.

Although there are plenty of areas of the government that could and should be shut down for good.

 

[Crabtownboy]

I think he means that the government workers that would print and distribute the checks won't be at work because the government will be shut down. Has nothing to do with the pot of money in social security.

As to the question, is SS a big ponzi scheme? It certainly resembles one.

When there is no money there is no money ... no paychecks, etc. They are living on borrowed money. So no debt limit raise, no money is there to cuts checks against. All gov. workers would probably be out of work and I suppose collecting unemployment checks. Now isn't that a kicker. That is happening in Minnesota.

ST. PAUL, Minn. — While Minnesota's political leaders haggle over how much the state should spend in the next two years, state coffers are bleeding millions of dollars as a result of the state's week-old government shutdown.

"It's going to be a slow force on the economy," said Tom Stinson, a University of Minnesota professor who is laid off from his job as state economist.

Minnesota stands to lose tens of millions of dollars in the nation's only state government shutdown, as lottery tickets go un-purchased, tax cheats go un-pursued and 22,000 laid-off state workers collect unemployment and health benefits.

The government interruption also threatens to slow an already sluggish economic recovery as the state employees in limbo and others who lose state-dependent jobs — including construction workers and nonprofit staffers — tighten their spending.

http://www.wclo.com/news/2011/jul/07/minn-shutdown-causes-added-pain-costs-millions/

 

[InTheLight]

Why would the government have to shut down?

The government doesn't run out of money at the strike of twelve.

No, but if the debt ceiling isn't raised they would have to prioritize payments. The government is not going to issue I.O.U.'s and tell people to keep coming to their government jobs.

 

[mandym]

He's just using a strong-arm tactic to scare people into doing his bidding.

So do you believe the money for SS payments is there and he is lying or is there some other possibility?

 

[mandym]

I think he means that the government workers that would print and distribute the checks won't be at work because the government will be shut down. Has nothing to do with the pot of money in social security.

As to the question, is SS a big ponzi scheme? It certainly resembles one.

That is not what he said.

 

[abcgrad94]

So do you believe the money for SS payments is there and he is lying or is there some other possibility?

Here's how I see it. There is no money for ANYTHING, not SS, not foreign aid, welfare, medicare, the military, O and his wife's travel, etc. We're already in debt up to our ears, so whatever money is being used is borrowed in the first place. O is blissfully ignoring that and instead of owning up to it, is trying to scare and/or bully people into raising the debt even more by diverting the attention to SS. Interesting how he didn't say we wouldn't have enough money to fund his own spending. Nope, that wouldn't get the desired reaction from us peasants.

It's kind of like me telling my kid if she's naughty I won't buy her a toy, all the while knowing I don't have the money for the toy in the first place.

 

[Arbo]

Does anyone here really believe it's possible the checks won't go out?

I don’t.

 

[InTheLight]

Originally Posted by InTheLight
I think he means that the government workers that would print and distribute the checks won't be at work because the government will be shut down. Has nothing to do with the pot of money in social security.

As to the question, is SS a big ponzi scheme? It certainly resembles one.

That is not what he said.

Yep, you're right. He said there might not be enough money in the coffers. I stand corrected.

 

[HankD]

Does anyone here really believe it's possible the checks won't go out?

I don’t.

Probably won't happen, but if it does happen it will cause GLOBAL HEADLINES with heads eventually rolling as far up as the presidency.

And indeed he has said he will sacrifice his presidency unless he gets his way.

In the meantime, he continues on his fundraising side jaunts with record shattering amounts being garnered.

HankD

 

[freeatlast]

So Obama says that if we do not raise the debt ceiling he cannot promise that social security checks will go out August 3rd. So where did everyone's SS go that it cannot be paid? Is SS just a big ponzi scheme sanctioned by the government?

Yes that is exactly what it has become even though that was never the intent or design. Most people do not understand that SS money does not have its own fund. Even though there is a separate deduction on our checks the money goes into the general fund and has a separate accounting for records keeping.

In fact on paper the SS accounting fund is VERY much in the black by about 2.4 trillion. However because congress could not keep their hands off the money designated for SS they took the money and spent it on just about everything else, but mostly wars. They then turned and bought bonds with IOU's (let me see you and me try that and stay out of prison) and are having to pay out of the general fund the interest on the bonds that are worthless because they are bought with IOU's and the interest is being paid for with borrowed money.
Now that the retirees are of a number that requires that the 2.4 trillion to help pay monthly payments to SS recipients the money is not there as the general fund is broke and cannot pay off the bonds because the bonds were bought with IOU's. So the general fund is broke and cannot pay towards its debt so it now needs to borrow against itself to pay up. Sort of like borrowing against your visa to pay your monthly visa payment.

The government is trying to make it seem like SS is in the red because of people living longer and the baby boomers. That is false. The fund would be fine for another 20 or 30 years if they had not robbed it. By then the baby boomers would be dying off and the fund would have remained in the black, but it is already in the red because they took the money and spent it. Every member who has voted to use the SS money should be in prison with "Bernie" Madoff and they know it so each side is trying to blame the other and both are working together to blame something other then what the real cause is.

So the president is using SS to scare the people into proding their reps to raise the debt so as to keep the cover up going.

 

[mandym]

Congress needs to put SS in a lock box but the dems will not like that anymore than they do a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. They do not like responsible money handling. It ties their hands to much.

 

[freeatlast]

Congress needs to put SS in a lock box but the dems will not like that anymore than they do a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. They do not like responsible money handling. It ties their hands to much.

The republicans are in the same boat. Thye had control of the congress and did nothing. Both parties are losers.

 

[HankD]

Congress needs to put SS in a lock box but the dems will not like that anymore than they do a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. They do not like responsible money handling. It ties their hands to much.

No known technology/legislature could make a "lock box" that our current politicos couldn't "break into".

No constitutional amendment could keep us in the black seeing we already broke the Constitution by printing "fiat" paper/fiber money.

Shut down the printing presses and go back to the gold/silver standard.

HankD

 

[mandym]

Shut down the printing presses and go back to the gold/silver standard.

HankD

Not that I am against it but I don't think that is possible in today's economy.

 

[billwald]

>Congress needs to put SS in a lock box

EXACTLY HOW? Fill Fort Knox with $100 bills?

 

[HankD]

Not that I am against it but I don't think that is possible in today's economy.

Yes, in today's economy, but when we come to the brink of the abyss anything is possible when it comes to a choice between financial destruction or survival.

Our global enemies don't realize that to take down America means their own destruction (including radical Islam) and a worldwide chaos.

HankD