Random Act of Journalism: AP say Democrats Lying about Social Security and Deficit.

Democrats repeatedly tell the American people that Social Security is not contributing to the deficit:

“Over 77 years and now through 13 recessions, Social Security has not added one penny to our deficit or our debt,” Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif., said at a recent hearing by the House Ways and Means Social Security subcommittee. Becerra is the top Democrat on the panel.

“I believe that Social Security has not contributed one nickel to the deficit because it is funded by the payroll tax,” Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent who heads the Senate Social Security caucus, said in an interview.

Former Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., disagreed.

“We all know that it’s on a cash-flow basis,” Gregg said in an interview. “The cash comes in, the cash goes out, and right now we’re running a negative cash flow.”

The Facts: Social Security’s shortfalls are adding to the federal budget deficit, in a roundabout way. One big reason: The rest of the government has been running such huge deficits over the years that it has spent all of the surpluses accumulated by Social Security.

 

Does Social Security Really Add to the U.S. Budget Deficit? Here’s How it Works

The Facts: Social Security’s shortfalls are adding to the federal budget deficit, in a roundabout way. One big reason: The rest of the government has been running such huge deficits over the years that it has spent all of the surpluses accumulated by Social Security.

Here’s how it works:

But the truth is, these assertions are all lies.  They are not “miss-statements,” they are deliberate and intentional lies designed to deceive the American people.  The men and women who make these claims are in positions to know better, it is their job to know better, and, as elected representatives, we should assume they are not stupid, ignorant or incompetent – which means we should assume they know better.  That makes the claims that Social Security is not increasing our national debt are lies – period!

38 thoughts on “Random Act of Journalism: AP say Democrats Lying about Social Security and Deficit.

  1. So if SS is viable, stand-alone program, what is the solution? A government that won’t dip into viable programs to fund pork barrel projects. They just need to keep their damn hands out of the cookie jar!

      • SS was viable, when there were 8-10 paying in for every person getting a check AND it was EQUITABLE when it was VOLUNTARY . . .

      • By this you mean every American paying into the program. The problem is ENTITLEMENTS, not SS. When you have people drawing every entitlement under the sun; food stamps, subsidized rents, etc. and they are third generation non-contributors, THEN they are allowed to draw SS on top of all that, that’s where the problem lies.

        • No, FC, I mean the problem IS SS. It is a Ponzi scheme — always was. It’s just that, when it was designed, they set retirement age so that the pyramid would never invert. Well, with the increase in longevity in America, the pyramid is now inverted and, thus, SS is no longer viable. FDR even explained this when he passed the law.

          • You and I have had this disagreement before. SS is not a Ponzi scheme though it does have some traits in common with a Ponzi scheme, case in point being the earliest contributors received the greatest (percentage wise) payouts. You (and Utah) like to use the phrase as misdirection.

            “So we could imagine that at any given time there might be, say, 40 million people receiving benefits at the back end of the pipeline; and as long as we had 40 million people paying taxes in the front end of the pipe, the program could be sustained forever. It does not require a doubling of participants every time a payment is made to a current beneficiary, or a geometric increase in the number of participants. (There does not have to be precisely the same number of workers and beneficiaries at a given time–there just needs to be a fairly stable relationship between the two.) As long as the amount of money coming in the front end of the pipe maintains a rough balance with the money paid out, the system can continue forever. There is no unsustainable progression driving the mechanism of a pay-as-you-go pension system and so it is not a pyramid or Ponzi scheme.”
            http://www.ssa.gov/history/ponzi.htm

            The problem with SS is that with fewer people paying in, whether it’s because of lower population, few jobs in a bad economy, or dead-beat entitlement takers, is that there is not currently as much money coming in as there is going out. and our legislators have used it as a bank to pay off other programs.
            .
            “The problem, he said, is that payments have risen more than expected during the downturn, because jobs disappeared and people applied for benefits sooner than they had planned. At the same time, the program’s revenue has fallen sharply, because there are fewer paychecks to tax.”
            http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/social_security_payouts_exceed_pay-ins/

            Additionally, a Ponzi scheme is a short-lived hustle designed to pay off the originator of the scheme, and it does not pay the elderly or retired. SS has been around since the 30s.

            I’ll leave this discussion with this from James Joyner (Outside the Beltway)

            “I wish we’d simply created a welfare system for our elderly poor, rather than built up a gigantic government-run pension system to achieve the fig leaf of universal entitlement. But I support the idea of society providing a safety net for those who can no longer take care of themselves and what’s done is done.”

            • FC, go look up the definition of Ponzi scheme. SS most definitely IS a Ponzi scheme. And this idea that you have paid into a personal account: that is a lie. The SS Act of 1937 NEVER promised you a single penny of the money you pay in to SS — and nothing about that has changed. You do NOT have a “personal account.”

            • Just out of curiosity – – do you (or anyone else here) have an elderly parent, grandparent, aunt, uncle, etc. that relies on SS and Medicare for their food, shelter, and medical care, or perhaps you send money to these people or have them living in your home and pay their medical bills. Just wondering.

              • Yep. And that doesn’t change my view as to what is right and what is wrong when it comes to SS or any other issue.

                Those who would “justify” an injustice to satisfy a want can never claim to have any principle other than self-interest, which is why I am always amazed to hear the Left claim to be “for” other people: because the things they want are always for themselves and always come at the cost of another person’s rights.

                SS is no different, FC. And if you think that it makes me an ugly person because I will put principle before family or even self, go right ahead. IN another life, we called that honor — but I know that notion died some time ago.

                • “Those who would “justify” an injustice to satisfy a want can never claim to have any principle other than self-interest . . . ”

                  So your relative that depends on SS and Medicare to maintain their independence and dignity has no pride or honor of their own? No, I’m very famiiar with your principles and that you would put them before the welfare of your family surprises me not in the least.

                  • Which means I should not be surprised that you would put YOU before the welfare of others — your nation.

                    Now I’m confused: is that a “liberal” or a “conservative” ideal, FC?

                  • FC, read the SS laws. They do not work the way you apparently think they work. If they did, then you and I have a “right” to collect welfare, food stamps and ALL other forms of govt. “assistance” — no matter how much we make — because “we paid into it” (that is, provided we actually pay federal income tax and are not net receivers).

                • All of the “self-serving reasoning” was coming from you my friend, you and your “principles” of putting yourself above the elderly who live on fixed incomes. As far as your military injury, I didn’t know you had one. I’m not in your inner circle of friends, but even at that you volunteered to serve as did I. You haven’t done a thing hundreds of thousands of Amercian men have not done before you or will do again and many paid the ultimate price. I respect your service and regret your injury. Get over it and yourself.

                  • Get over it? FC, I’ve never mentioned it, so for you to speak as though I am making a big deal about it now…

                    You know why I seem so pessimistic? It’s because there are more people in this nation like you than there are like me. You would rather put YOUR duty to YOUR family off on me and mine than attend to it yourself, and when you get called on it, you have the nerve to say WE are the ones who have no sense of moral character.

                    YOU and YOUR attitude is why this nation is heading in the wrong direction.

                    Utah, THIS is why we are not going to turn this ship around: because — deep down — this nation does not want to. It has become fat, dumb and lazy. Yes, there are still a few good people left, but they are too few and growing fewer still with every passing election. And as long as we have people like FC justifying socialism, demanding a right to it, even, then there is no reason for hope — at least not from men.

                • “As for my injury: if you are going to stick to this pathetic line of self-serving reasoning, then it bloody hell WAS your fault — as you were part of the nation who sent me to do what you would not!”

                  “Get over it? FC, I’ve never mentioned it, so for you to speak as though I am making a big deal about it now…”

                  Man, I don’t know what you were smokin’ last night. YOU brougt it up, not me. 😉

              • I did,
                My Father took care of me for my first seventeen years.
                I thought helping him for ten was a pretty good pay-back.

                • Frank – Again, I was sincere about you doing a great job of taking care of your dad, but it occured to me, did you cash his SS checks to help with his expenses or did you return them?

                  Joe – Why do I have to be anything? Do you have to pidgeon hole someone so you can keep it straight in your mind? I’ve already publicly stated; I’m a moderate conservative and there is no telling what I will say, but I promise this, I believe in what I’m saying. Liberal? Conservative? You decide for yourself.

                  Utah doesn’t believe he will get his SS that he has paid into, or so he says, yet he doesn’t say he’ll turn it down. Joe (and Frank) stands on the principle that he shouldn’t have to pay for someone else’s health care. If it’s really such a matter of principle, please don’t accept the checks when you come of age. Write the SSA and tell them you don’t want it! I would hate to see you compromise your principles by taking this dirty money from other people. If you are drawing SS disability or a military disability, please return that, too. I shouldn’t have to pay for your disability. Your injury was not my fault.

                  • Your logic disgusts me. It is nothing more than a justification for demanding that others give you something you DID NOT pay for. SS is a TAX! No tax promises you ANYTHING in return.

                    As for my injury: if you are going to stick to this pathetic line of self-serving reasoning, then it bloody hell WAS your fault — as you were part of the nation who sent me to do what you would not!

          • How many people paid into the “food stamp” program? How many have paid into subsidized rent and cell phones? How many generations have been on the government dole? Who has paid into SS? Every American who has ever held a job.

            • And I will go one step further. I stated in another thread on a post by James, it will be interesting to see how Ryan’s explanation his plan is presented as to how it affects the votes in the swing stat of Florida. If Romeny/Ryan do not make themselves perfectly clear, the will lose the senior vote in this state. When it comes to exchanging a vote for food and rent money, I’ll leave it up to you to imagine what’s gonna happen.

            • Sure, we pay in. We don’t have a choice – but if you are going to go down that line of “reasoning”, let me ask you this – how many people have 1) drawn out more than they paid in or 2) received benefits without ever paying in and 3) how many people have died before reaching retirement age and got nothing? I have a personal story, too. My mom lacked two quarters having enough paid in to draw. after working out of the home on and off for almost 20 years, she was not able to draw a dime back out. I have an uncle that had a heart attack and died at 61. Didn’t get a dime…and since he didn’t own the retirement “asset”, there was nothing passed down in his will. My mom and my uncle paid into a system that they got nothing back from…and no one in my family has ever taken a dime in food stamps, AFDC, WIC or any of the other myriad benefit programs.

              You can’t look at one side without looking at the other.

              You are making exactly the same error that the left makes in that you are assuming that just because we pay something in, that it covers everything and at any cost. You even hit the issue in your earlier posts when you state that the reason for the shortfall is the current economy. Don’t you think that if it was a true “retirement’ plan that has had contributions since 1936 it could withstand two or three years of lower intake without going in the red? That very fact should tell you that SS is a de facto Ponzi scheme and has become an entitlement.

              We can argue all day over whether having SS is the right thing to do or not – but you can’t argue the math…and just because you support it won’t change the fact that it has become a wealth transfer scheme. Again, we can argue all day over whether that is correct or not but that is a moral dimension, not a financial one. If anyone should be upset over that it is the people who are currently drawing from it after paying into it for a lifetime – because ever dollar that leaves the program to go to someone that didn’t pay in is a dollar that is taken from them.

              The only way that a program can avoid the politicians dipping their hands in it is to take it out of reach of their hands – but them dipping in it has nothing to do with the plan’s current financial woes. Even if the cash isn’t sitting there, a liability was created that they government owes. That’s not the problem, the problem is one of cash flow – the “in’s” aren’t enough to balance with the “outs”. That can happen to any entity, even if they have trillions of dollars in assets.

              And for the record – Ryan’s plan does not effect anyone 55 or older, so no current retirees would be impacted.

              • I just wish we could legally opt out. I do not need a single penny, nickel, or dime back …. I just wish I could have the freedom to self determine my own retirement.

              • I haven’t argued the numbers or the fact that changes need to be made. I realize the program is in trouble. As for people who invest and don’t get to draw; that’s part of what makes the program work (as bad as that statement seems). The FSRS (Florida State Retirement System) is set up the same way. Leave your money in the old pension fund, retire and die a year later, the state keeps it all. Choose another option and a surviving spouse can get a small stipend for 10 years (I think), but the state keeps the majority. Work for the state for 1-10 years and quit, the state keeps your money. About 6 years ago the state started offering an “investment option”. Move your retirement into an investment account and invest (like a 401K) in the stocks,plans, etc. you want. Then if you die, your spouse or designees get your retirement. Upside? If you invest wisely and the market stays up, you make money. Downside? Invest poorly or the bottom falls out of the market, you lose your retirement money. Many employees (me for one) gamble a little. I have my money in the traditional pension fund. It’s way more stable. A year or 9 months before I retire, I will move it to the investment fund. If I die before I move it, I lose it.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.