Government Spending

Social Security Will Be Insolvent in 12 Years

Without policy changes, beneficiaries will receive only 78 percent of what was promised starting in 2034.

|

The fiscal crisis looming over Social Security is no longer a distant threat. The national pension system will be insolvent by the time workers now in their mid-50s are ready to retire.

The annual report to Congress from the Social Security Trustees, released this week, paints a grim picture of an entitlement program that was already veering towards insolvency before the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated that trend. The Trustees now estimate that Social Security will be unable to pay the full amount of promised benefits by 2033, one year sooner than the same report estimated last year. Absent any policy changes, beneficiaries will receive just 78 percent of what they've been promised starting in 2034.

The pandemic caused a spike in retirements, but the underlying issues with Social Security remain the same as they've been for decades: the math simply doesn't add up.

Social Security will see negative cash flow of $147 billion this year, and the deficits will keep adding up as the population ages and there are fewer workers paying into the system relative to the number of retirees collecting benefits. Last year, there were 65 million Americans getting benefits from Social Security, while 175 million people paid into the system via payroll taxes, according to the Trustees' report. That's less than three workers for every beneficiary, a near-historic low.

Those deficits will eat up the Social Security Trust Fund over the next decade, and insolvency awaits. The trust fund itself is actually an accounting fiction—it contains nothing except IOUs that the government has written to itself over the years. In some ways, then, what the country is really facing is the evaporation of the pleasant fiction of the trust fund as a backstop for its largest entitlement program.

The big question also remains the same: when will Congress take this imminent crisis seriously?

The last time Social Security recorded a deficit, in 1982, it spurred lawmakers to make several changes, including an increase to the payroll tax that funds Social Security, to keep the program solvent for a few more decades. This time, however, there is almost no indication that either major party is prepared to act.

The bulk of Social Security's funding comes from a 12.4 percent payroll tax that's split 50/50 between employers and employees. Only the first $142,800 of income is subject to the tax. Lifting or removing the cap, or raising the tax rate, would generate more revenue for the system. Alternatively, reducing benefits for some or all beneficiaries—either by instituting across-the-board reductions or by means-testing in some way—could bring Social Security's liabilities in line with its assets.

Ensuring Social Security's solvency for the next 75 years would require hiking the payroll tax by 3.36 percentage points today, or making an across-the-board 21 percent cut in benefits.

The more time that passes, the heavier the lift will be. According to an analysis from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which advocates for low deficits and sustainable entitlement programs, delaying action until insolvency hits in 2034 will make the needed tax increases or benefit reductions about 25 percent larger than if Congress acted today. In either case, the changes will be seriously disruptive to Americans' retirement plans and financial security.

 

Inflation is also going to take a toll on Social Security. The Wall Street Journal reports that senior administration officials believe the program will automatically provide 6 percent cost-of-living adjustments next year. That's significantly higher than the 1.3 percent and 1.6 percent adjustments provided in the past two years.

When Social Security launched in 1935, the average life expectancy for Americans was 61. That means the average person died four years before qualifying for benefits. It was imagined as a safety net for the truly needy, not a conveyor belt to transfer wealth from the younger, working population to the older, relatively wealthier retired population.

Now, the average American lives to 78, more than a decade past the age (67) when they can start collecting Social Security benefits—and 16 years beyond the eligibility age (62) for early retirees to collect partial benefits.

Restoring Social Security to its proper place as an old-age entitlement program and not a national pension system would be a good place for Congress to start. That means raising the eligibility age for benefits. And given the federal government's track record of awful fiscal management, it also makes sense to empower individuals to control more of their retirement savings. Privatizing Social Security—or at least letting individuals opt-out of the program so they can escape the sinking ship—would be a huge win for younger workers who have time to save on their own.

Congress has mostly abandoned any pretense of fiscal sanity, but the math governing Social Security's decline is inexorable. Waiting any longer to take it seriously only invites a bigger mess.

NEXT: The Secret To Vaccinating Children: Off-Label Vaccinations

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. No problem. Just BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR up a few more trillion.

    1. And BRRRRRRRRRRRR up another % of the already 6% inflation stated. The Gov-Guns doesn’t print resources; it steals them.

      1. Seriously I don’t know why more people haven’t tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening…QWe And i get surly a check of $12600 what’s awesome is I m working from home so I get more time with my kids.

        Try it, you won’t regret it!…….. VISIT HERE

      2. I made over $700 per day using my mobile in part time. I recently got my 5th paycheck of $19,632 and all i was doing is to copy and paste work online. this home work makes me able to generate more cash daily easily.RGh simple to do work and regular income from this are just superb. Here what i am doing.

        Try now………………. VISIT HERE

    2. And keep making disability easier to get as democrats loves to do to bleed it more quickly.

      1. Start working from home! Great job for students, stay-at-home moms or anyone needing an extra income…You can work this job As part time or As A full time job.You only need a computer and a reliable internet connection… Make $90 hourly and up to $12000 a month by following link at the bottom… You can have your first check by the end of this week…Lifetime Opportunity

        This is what I do……………… VISIT HERE

    3. Money printer go brrrrr!

  2. Also need to analyze who really should be getting Social Security. I see a lot of “disabled” people getting it who aren’t unable to work.

    1. Also need to analyze why it even exists in the first place.
      Being UN-Constitutional and all.

    2. Social Security Disability Insurance is funded from a separate trust fund, which is solvent for at least the next 65 years

      1. There is some overlap in programs though. SSI, the supplemental security income program is funded out of the general fund. Those who qualify ssdi also qualify for ssi.

        1. And we all know how solvent the general fund is..

    3. Separate pot of money. Social Security for Disability is separate from Social Security for Old Age.

  3. Is this where I have to post articles written in the 1980s warning about this same thing? I did it for the Medicare article, I can sure as shit do it for this one.

    1. Boehm sure isnt going to do any work.

      Him and Bailey are huddled together scared of the Kungflu part II.

      At this rate, all Americans are already dead from SARS-COVID.

    2. The contribution was changed in the 80s. Are you asking for another change?

    3. Did you actually read this article? Yes, there were articles written in the 1980s warning about the same thing. And, yes, Congress acted to change the program in response to those warnings.

      They didn’t change it enough but at least they kicked the can down the road for a few decades.

      1. Did you actually read this article? Yes, there were articles written in the 1980s warning about the same thing. And, yes, Congress acted to change the program in response to those warnings.

        They didn’t change it enough but at least they kicked the can down the road for a few decades.

        How does any of that make my point invalid?

        Oh, hint: Social security can’t be “insolvent”. It’s paid out of the general fund. We either pretend that incoming revenue is > outlays, or we admit that the entire government is insolvent.

        1. Oh, hint: Social security can’t be “insolvent”. It’s paid out of the general fund.

          Actually, it isn’t. Social Security has some screwy bond set aside for it. When those are depleted, it pays out partial benefits UNDER CURRENT LAW. The general fund does not get tapped.

          1. SS will pay whatever congress decides it will pay and like all federal government obligations the checks are drawn on the US Treasury. SS will pay 100% of the dollars promised in 2033 because congress will make sure that happens. The problem is we’ll be very lucky if those dollars are worth anywhere near 78% of what they are now. In all likelihood the petrodollar and the dollar’s reserve status will be in the rear view mirror by then.

          2. “Actually, it isn’t.”

            Actually it is.

  4. It hasn’t been inexorable for the last 30 years. No reason for it to be now. They’ll just raise the payroll tax. Why? Because seniors vote and young people don’t.

    The program’s been on a path towards destruction ever since the baby boom ended. I’m sure there have been yearly reports by green eyeshade actuaries saying just this. Which have been ignored in favor of kicking the can down the road and demagoguing anyone with the temerity to suggest genuine reform that doesn’t involve the beggaring of the young and poor in favor of the old and relatively rich.

    1. “Because seniors vote and young people don’t.”

      THIS “senior” doesn’t support Social Security. We should have phased out Social Security years ago and replaced it with a private/public program similar to the Chilean program. Never too late to start… though it might be a hard sell to the general public.

      1. I support reform also. The cost to bridge the program from public to private would have been almost painless if we’d done it in the early 90s. Now it will be a nightmare.

        1. Early 1990s? Goldwater proposed beginning some reforms in 1964 and the “Greatest Generation” voters trounced him. Boomers, and everyone since, has continued to refuse to reform, let alone, replace the system. And, due to the NAP, Libertarians can’t really call for reforms instead of immediate abolishment.

      2. “…We should have phased out Social Security years ago and replaced it with a private/public program similar to the Chilean program. Never too late to start… though it might be a hard sell to the general public.”

        Bush I (I think) floated that and immediately jumped into his foxhole to avoid the cross-fire.
        Selling financial reality to the electorate hasn’t been workable since before FDR and it got far worse after him.

        1. Yeah Bush gave it a shot but the Democrats went apoplectic. SS came to us through the progressive’s Great Prophet, FDR and any attempt to alter it is a sacrilege.

        2. Sevo, I like the reference to Chile’s system. I have been following it through articles and such since it was established back in the 80’s. It did so well, they recently expanded benefits. As I recall, they use low cost index funds. It is a no-brainer to do the same here in the US.

          Paul Ryan also published a plan some time ago that would have completely privatized SS over 75 years. Might be worth it to dust it off and take a look.

      3. Sign me up as another who will vote to start paring it back (hard!).

        Sure, I’ll take the check while it’s there, but anyone who thinks this is sustainable over time is either a fool or willfully ignorant. And before Tony shows up to tell me it’s my duty to take care of everyone else, even if we shut down the rest of the federal government, there simply is not enough money to keep doing what has been promised.

    2. Don’t worry the Feds will soon be “borrowing” from your IRA.

    3. We don’t have to worry about SSI going belly up in 12 years because Global Warming will end all human life at exactly the same time. Coincidence? I think not!

  5. Commies at unreason love them some Communist govt programs.

    HAHA. Everyday that I check on unreason to see if the staff have been fired yet, they keep producing garbage cans full of lies.

    That the and website gets glitchier by the day.

  6. “…delaying action until insolvency hits in 2034 will make the needed tax increases or benefit reductions about 25 percent larger than if Congress acted today.”

    2034: Someone else’s election to worry about.

    1. Nailed it. This can gets kicked until it’s 2034. You can guarantee that.

  7. So if MMT tells us the deficits do not matter, that a country that prints and controls it’s own currency will never default, why doesn’t it apply to social security as well?

    1. No one really believes in MMT.

      They just want to spend the money and worry about how to pay for it later.

      Basically like Trump did. And Biden is doing.

      1. “No one really believes in MMT.”

        Exactly, if they did it they wouldn’t care if billionaires and corporations don’t pay enough taxes, because you can just print more money to cover what they should have paid

      2. “Basically like Trump did. And Biden is doing.”

        When turd isn’t lying outright, his opposition to honesty ends up as innuendo, as here.
        Turd lies; it’s what turd does. He’s a pathological liar, too stupid to recognize that others are not fulled.

    2. Well MMT does still think that inflation matters.

  8. Hey, that was when I planned to retire…..

  9. Climate change will have destroyed the planet in 12 years! Well, OK, I shouldn’t exaggerate—the planet will be uninhabitable for humans in 12 years! So let’s splurge!

  10. St Ronnie raised SS tax:

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/01/laurence-m-vance/ronald-reagan-and-social-security-taxes/

    Anyone of his GOP spawn will do it if they have to.

    I still laugh at how many Peanuts still think the GOP is for “small government”. Especially after the record spending of the Con Man.

    Vote For Gridlock!

    1. “Vote for Gridlock!”

      So we should vote a straight Republican ticket in the next national election.

      OK.

      Take that, Peanuts!

      1. No, young Peanut.

        We gave the GOP total control during the Bush-Frist-Hastert years and that became a disaster. And then Trump-McConnell-Paul Ryan were awful too.

        Obviously Biden-Shumer-Pelosi are no good either.

        The only real gridlock is a Dem POTUS and GOP House because a Dem House are a bunch of pussies Republicans can scare the hell out of (see Iraq War, TARP, 2020 CARES Trump Welfare Bill).

        1. Right, so in the midterms next year, the president isn’t up for election, it’s all legislatures, so we should vote for a Republican congress and get gridlock.

          What I said.

          1. Why yes, We need a GOP House in 2022. I was thinking of past examples.

            Just put old Joe is a rocking chair on the front porch of the White House for two years. He’s qualified.

  11. The biggest blunder ever was the reform of 1982. It created SS surpluses which were to be available in the future to pay benefits. The problem being the surpluses coming in were spent as fast as they accumulated. So those surpluses were used to grow the size of fed.gov, mask the size of the yearly federal deficits, and now we have to borrow to cover the special treasuries (IOU) given to the SSA.

    A better solution for the surpluses would have been to buy a durable commodity with the cash to be stored for the long term and then sold to cover benefits. Precious metals (gold, platinum) or crude oil come readily to mind.

    1. I’d prefer the government stay out of those markets. Gold would be worth nothing until uncle sam wanted to sell. As soon as he sells.. poof. Value decreases.

  12. It’ll be worse than that, we all know it. This latest doom is revised downward (or upward? worse-ward) from the previous doom. All us dumb assholes who are set to retire around 2030’s have always known we are getting nothing from SSA.

    1. Social Security was an accounting trick baby boomers used to steal from generation x so they could stop working and live a posh (for them) lifestyle.

      1. “Social Security was an accounting trick baby boomers used to steal from generation x ”

        Pretty clever, them boomers, seeing how they managed to get it through Congress long before they were ever born. Blame FDR for giving in to the American Socialist Party back in 1935, if you like, but don’t blame the boomers for this one.

        1. They raised the pay in in the 80s without back casting those payments. They get the boost and paid less.

          1. And that is also true. It’s called buying votes, or “budgetary compromise,” or “bipartisan agreement.” But it all comes down to putting off until tomorrow what we need to fix today. And in this case, “tomorrow” means forever.

        2. They are the ones drying up the spring.

          1. That is true. The “baby boom” guaranteed that this would happen. And we have known about the “baby boom” since, at the latest, by the early 1950’s. We also knew that the boomers (I am one) were going to live a lot longer, on the average, than those who came before them, further stressing the system. It didn’t take a genius to figure that out. They chose to ignore it.

      2. I’m a boomer and you’ll have to pry my time machine from my cold dead hands. (A visit to the 1930s was not pleasant, particularly visiting the hospitals. “They used to hand-cut and sew people like garments. Needles and sutures. Oh, the terrible pain!”)

        1. Thank you Leonard (McCoy).

          “The City on the Edge of Forever” – always rated as one the best episodes, and yet, not an extraterrestrial to be seen, and the only “ray-gun” is used by the poor sap who disintigrates himself while trying to steal McCoy’s stuff. Why is that, that it’s always so well liked?

  13. Social Security Will Be Insolvent in 12 Years

    Just add more water.

    And remember, if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the precipitate.

    1. Every time I see the word abattoir – I start to crave steak.

      1. Unicorn steak– finest kind.

      2. Just don’t let sarcasmic near it.

        sarcasmic
        August.24.2021 at 8:49 pm
        Flag Comment Mute User
        And yeah, if I was cooking broiler when you ordered yours MW, I’d find the fattiest, gristliest piece I could find and burn the shit out of it. Nothing personal, but if you want to ruin meat, you won’t ruin good meat on my watch.

        1. Sarcasmic’s just a fry cook like Spongebob Squarepants?

  14. National Social-ist (Nazi) Security?
    I don’t see that in the U.S. Constitution.
    How did that happen illegally without the 2/3rds majority and State Ratification? Did the Nazi’s take over the USA?

    1. Basically, yes . It was called the New Deal at the time.

      1. And a democrat sweep this time – – – – – – – –

      2. Also known as anti fascism.

    2. State Socialism, whether the Soviet form or the German variant, was quite the rage at the time. FDR was smart enough to not call it that, but he (or Eleanor at least) was pretty into it, and we’re still paying the price.

  15. Good. Let it die and don’t replace it.

  16. O/T – How many socialists does it take to change a light bulb?

    “We’re not going to change it, we think it works”

    John Cleese rattling off light bulb jokes

    1. I saw his Residential Abbatoir scene @lunch

  17. Social Security’s average payment is about $1300 a month. The Democrats want to give everyone a Universal Basic Income of $35,000 a year or about $2900 a month. SS recipients are in for a big raise when SS becomes insolvent. Just do the math!

    1. “The Democrats want to give everyone a Universal Basic Income of $35,000 a year or about $2900 a month.”

      And that is the problem with UBIs as some people view them. Friedman’s proposal of a “negative income tax” would place it somewhere below the minimum wage, so something less than $1200/month.

      1. It’s a bad idea start to finish. I only point it out to show the lies and duplicity of the Federal government. While one is “going insolvent” they are gearing up to have another program even more costly.

    2. UBI is such a disaster. Even with the COVID welfare giveaways, every store on Main Street in this town has “help wanted” signs up. Imagine if we made that permanent!

      1. “Even with the COVID welfare giveaways, every store on Main Street in this town has “help wanted” signs up. Imagine if we made that permanent!”

        The difference is that the “reverse income tax,” modeled after Friedman, would replace ALL other federal aid programs, and NOT be just added to them. Of course, that is NOT what the Dems have in mind. What the left is proposing is a huge expansion of the welfare system, both in benefits and costs to the taxpayer, whereas a reverse income tax would seriously reduce the cost of the system to the taxpayer (by around 30%).

  18. I can’t wait for it to collapse.

  19. I am shocked, shocked, to find there has been gambling here – – – – – –

  20. “Only the first $142,800 of income is subject to the tax.”

    No mention of the benefits cap that is tied to this. That’s the kind of thing doctrinaire Democrats do. Well done.

  21. “This time, however, there is almost no indication that either major party is prepared to act.”

    This is the Democrats’ program. They have opposed any meaningful reform to the system in the past four decades and absolutely skewered Paul Ryan and the Republicans for even suggesting fixes. The ball’s in their court now. 100%. Screw off.

    1. To be fair Al Gore came up with a lock box or something.

  22. Retired 2 years ago, but not yet taking SS – will wait till 70 unless something even more catastrophic occurs. Felt comfortable retiring once I verified via a retirement planning tool that we’d be OK even if the SS was cut by 25% in 2033. I couldn’t find anyone projecting or proposing a 100% cut – not even when I checked the Libertarian Party platform, which ambiguously states “Libertarians would phase out the current government-sponsored Social Security system and transition to a private voluntary system.” In my planning I pondered whether libertarian purists and anarchists were a viable threat to SS and concluded they weren’t, alas. The pragmatists in that crowd who could remotely pose a threat would need to adopt any phase-out or transition that was politically viable – which I think means anyone over about 45 to 50 years old would not see any large changes in benefits.

  23. At 46, I would gladly give up all my SSN benefits if I could keep the $17,136 I contribute annually to it, and instead put it in my own 401k/IRA account for the next 20 years until I retire. At an easy 10% growth, I’d have just over a million dollars on that amount alone.

    1. “easy 10%” over 20 years? Good luck with that!

  24. Republicans are fucked on this one because they lie to their voters and pretend like they support the little guy and things like SS and Medicare but reality is a different story. In practice the Republicans undermine programs designed for the middle class.

    1. The Nazi Foundation: Gov-Gun-Force = Wealth.
      The USA Foundation: Value Provided = Wealth.

      Since Guns don’t create human resources; It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see which one will ultimately fail – and fail hugely.

    2. Republicans lie? How about ALL politicians lie but Democrats elevate deceit to a virtue.

    3. Ah good Lard Ass Strudel shit for brains can predict the future. Except just substitute democrat for republican and you get the sense he fears the reality of the situation.

      It’s a 7-2 court in a few years, and 8-1 after that. Texas passes an abortion law and the SCOTUS ignores it.

      Except more as the years pass. The liberal and libertarian experiment is done.

  25. According to AOC the world will end by 2031 due to climate change so the fund is A-OK. In fact, it’s overfunded!

  26. Holy shit not insolvent! Yeah right they will just raise taxes or cut benefits, and most likely just print more dollars to cover it. Democrats have no shame.

  27. The solution is very very simple: repeal the wage cap on SS payroll taxes, problem solved. Do it now and SS will still have a surplus in 12 years.
    cbbp.org reports: “Social Security faces a significant — though manageable — long-term funding shortfall, which policymakers should address primarily by increasing Social Security’s tax revenues.”
    In addition,if totally ending the cap did not do the job 100%, the payroll tax could be increased by the tiniest amount and make a big difference: ” a gradual increase of 0.3 percentage points each for employees and employers (or less than $3 per week for an average earner), could close about one-fifth of the gap.
    If policymakers take no action, Social Security’s combined trust funds will be exhausted in 2034, at which point Social Security would no longer be able to pay full benefits; after then, it could pay about three-fourths of scheduled benefits, using its tax income ”

    If your tire is going flat, and you say….OMG, I am going to have a flat tire in 12 years, you are sticking your head in the sand. All you have to do is end the payrool wage cap and raise taxes about $150 a year (less than 50 cents a day) and voila, there is no danger of involvancy. In other words, stop whining and act!

    1. You going to raise the maximum monthly benefit too or just screw over those who are going to be paying more? Maybe adding a few years to the retirement age would help…very few jobs break you down at age 62 like most jobs did back when s.s. was started.

      1. And the men (and it is almost exclusively men) who do work those jobs can go fuck themselves?

      2. Maybe taking some of the wealth Bezos uses to fly inside dicks to space would leave many fewer people in worse shape.

        1. Hi Tony, I was wondering when you’d show up!

          Did you stop to consider how many people worked on cutting edge jobs as a result of Jeffy’s joy ride?

          I know that trickledown economics aren’t popular on the left, but that doesn’t mean the concept isn’t valid.

          1. It’s not valid because of all the evidence. Turns out when you give a bunch of money to wealthy people and remove labor rights from everyone else, the wealthy get more wealthy and everyone else stagnates or gets poorer. I’m so glad it took 40 years to prove that arithmetic works.

            I’m sure every baron of industry has done admirable things. I’m sure Charles Manson was nice to his grandmother once.

      3. I was born in 1956 and my SS full retirement age is 66 and 4 months. I work one of those jobs that breaks you down that you think don’t exist. My body is worn out and I have serious doubts that I’ll be able to work much longer. A lot of guys like me out there.

    2. “…All you have to do is end the payrool wage cap and raise taxes about $150 a year (less than 50 cents a day) and voila, there is no danger of involvancy. In other words, stop whining and act!”

      Fuck off, slaver.

    3. Just get rid of SS. Not everyone deserves to get taken care of until they die. A lot of people are assholes. The world would be a better place if everyone didn’t feel so damn entitled to being taken care of that they could go around acting like dicks without a care in the world.

  28. Social Security Will Be Insolvent in 12 Years

    That’s cute: Boehm actually believes that there is such a thing as a “social security trust fund”.

    Boehm: do your homework. The trust fund is a fiction. Benficiaries are paid out of contributions, nothing more.

    1. Benficiaries are paid out of contributions

      Nope. There is no connection at all between the payroll tax and what gets paid to SS claimants.

      -jcr

      1. Nope. There is no connection at all between the payroll tax and what gets paid to SS claimants.

        You are completely missing the point. The point is that that US government maintains the fiction that there is a “fund” when there is no such fund. Social security is always a transfer from current taxpayers to current recipients.

        The statement that there is “no connection at all between the payroll tax and what gets paid to SS claimants” is absurd. If they payroll tax disappeared tomorrow, the missing tax revenue would have to be made up from other sources.

  29. 1) No agency of the federal govt can “run out of money” unless Congress and the President will it.
    2) FDR agreed to the SS tax to make it appear that workers “earned” their benefits. Additionally, the SS tax was created as a mechanism to prevent SS being taken away by “politicians.”
    3) The federal govt creates its own money and has no need to rely on tax collection or credit markets to spend.
    4) RESOURCE availability is what will sustain SS/Medicare and ALL other federal programs into perpetuity. And NOT supposed dollars in fake “trust funds.” By law, any so-called balance in federal “trust funds” can be manipulated UP or DOWN.

    1. 1) No agency of the federal govt can “run out of money” unless Congress and the President will it.

      Agencies can’t create money out of thin air, only Congress and the Fed can do that. If those institutions choose not to do so, the US government can run out of money.

      The federal govt creates its own money and has no need to rely on tax collection or credit markets to spend.

      When the federal government increases the money supply, that is equivalent to (1) a tax on cash and (2) a disproportionate subsidy to the initial recipients of that government money (meaning, they both get the money and they don’t suffer from the inflationary effects).

  30. The Ponzi scheme is about to blow up, same for Medicare. Don’t worry liberal will say just tax the rich, but wait they are taxing them for their 3.5 trillion dollar boondoggle. That’s on top of the current debt and deficit. Those rich people need to get off their butt and earn 1000 times more.

  31. How many examples of gov’t corruption and ineptitude do we need before we stop voting for this shit?

    I don’t care what their intentions are, everything politicians get their claws in turns to poison.

  32. SS has never been “solvent” in its entire history. There is no trust fund, there’s just a stack of government IOUs. If any private organization looted its pension fund and issued its own bonds in place of the stolen money, everyone involved would be doing time.

    -jcr

    1. Those “IOUs” are government bonds, the safest investment there is for US funds. It is as real as a stack of one hundred dollar bills.

      1. Government bonds, which were sold by the government, and bought by the same government.

        It’s the suitcase full of IOUs from Dumb and Dumber. Only this time it’s not fictional.

        1. Part of SS income is interest on those bonds, so the government treats them as real.
          Anyway, what some have overlooked is that well before the alleged insolvency date is that SS has now entered the bond market as a seller and its sales will increase for the next decade until it runs out of the bonds it holds. It isn’t clear to me whether the government has any obligation to buy those bonds or they must be sold on the open market.

      2. Cool story, bro. Remind me, how do I trade those US government bonds for gold at 16:1?

        The USA is bankrupt, and has been since the Nixon regime.

        -jcr

  33. Can we say it like it is. Most of he proposed “solutions” are plain old, spread the wealth communism, taking money away from productive citizens and giving it to the unproductive. Means testing is a nice way to say the ones who work hard will be doing almost all the paying in, the ones who barely worked their whole lives will be the ones doing most of the collecting. Raising the cap on social security taxes in any way without also raising how much the high earners who this will effect will be able to collect is plain and simple a wealth transfer from the rich to the poor.
    But is anybody surprised? The US now has more in common with the USSR economically than it has in common with itself when it was truly capitalist (before the progressive era of the early 20th century). God forbid you expect the unproductive welfare class to actually have some skin in the game instead of milking the productive class dry.

  34. One way would be to radically reform the SS disability system. We spend over $147 billion on disability payments. Almost every recipient I encounter are cashing checks for anxiety, depression, nebulous ‘back’ injuries and other dubious health issues after disability lawyers send them to be diagnosed by doctors who specialize in disability claims. I have also met a quadriplegic man who worked full time for a major company. He refused to live on disability after his tragic accident. Contrast that to people who suck up our money and smoke weed all day because their ‘anxiety’ keeps them from working. I suspect we could save around half of that $147 billion if we kicked the free loaders off.

    1. That is less money than Elon Musk alone has to his name. Why don’t we just take all of Elon Musk’s money? It’s just one guy.

      Oh yeah, we must permit the vast accumulation of wealth by individuals while taking away food from the disabled, because “principle.”

  35. I thought they put it in a lockbox?
    I’m sure they will tax my 401K money to make up for it.

    I have always been certain that no matter how well I planned this out the government would screw me and I would spend my declining years eating cat food that was not as good as the high quality stuff that I feed my pampered feline.

  36. Well, global climate warming change will destroy the world on that date, so no worries, right?

  37. “We can keep funding SS by printing more money or just slightly raising payroll tax or tax on the rich”

    That’s the gist of your “will SS run out of money” search result on google. It works great in a world where inflation, economic uncertainty and even fluke calamity like the pandemic doesn’t exist.

    SS needs more workers to pay into the system, but those workers will likely take in 3 times what they put in when they start to collect. Imagine if we let in a million immigrants who are in their mid 40s. They’re decades away from retirement and may not pay much income tax for the 30 years they live in America.

  38. And this is why we don’t suckle the guvment’s hind teet. All you get is chunky, sour milk. Better to have your own cow and get fresh, creamy milk every day.

  39. This is why the failing socialists are getting rid of the older populations…via mRNA injections. All social programs, of which Social Security surely is, no matter that you pay into it, will fail over time. This is because the promises are made to garner votes and support and in the end, the programs become much more costly when government is involved.

    Government creates no wealth, only tries to redistribute it to get votes and sustain power. Over the last 20 years, Social Security should be 30% higher to account for inflation. I expect the raises will be puny. Of course, the Fed could pump ungodly amounts of electronic pesos from Heaven into the coffers…all at no cost. It’s only debt and it’s free!

Please to post comments