Good predictions about the state of the economy and the solvency of the trust fund far into the future are impossible. They depend upon predictions about life expectancies, immigration patterns, birth rates, interest rates and the health of the economy. Every year, the Social Security trustees make 3 different predictions about how long the surplus will last based on various assumptions – but politicians really don’t care about anything beyond the next election or two – unless they can use an argument for their own benefit. And they can make the numbers come out any way they want by assuming that all of us will soon be living much longer than we do today.

Members of the deficit reduction commission recently proposed a number of confusing changes and cuts to social security which were supposedly designed to keep the system solvent for 75 years. If these changes and cut were adopted, the trust fund would keep growing on paper, but there would still be no plan in place to pay the money back.

Prior to 1983, the social security trust fund operated with almost no surplus – - it was pure pay as you go – The only proper reason for creating a big surplus was because of the existence of the baby boom generation. – When the baby boom generation is mostly dead, the system can be examined again in light of life expectancies at that time and the state of the economy, and changes can be made if necessary. There is no reason to have a paper surplus for 75 years. – The government can’t save money by borrowing from itself.

Eventually there will be some compromises – but if the public really understood what was going on, it might affect whose ox will be gored when it times to make compromises.

Max, look, the attack on Social Security by the ruling class has been ongoing since 1983! There are TONS of information out there and books that have addressed this issue that may even be out of print because this issue is so old and ongoing. I could spend the next several hours providing you with links. This is something that I believe you should do yourself.

The very last time Dr. Smith submitted an article here I posted the link to the September debate. So if you need links and reference use the archive and search for “Allen Smith” and select the link where “Obama” is referenced in the title by Smith. There you will find the debate and links to several articles by Dean Baker and even to the Social Security Administration.

If you want to read some other older references I’d recommend:
“Who Will Tell The People” by William Grieder. This books dates back to the early 1990′s.

“The Politics of Rich and Poor” by Kevin P. Phillips (a Republican no less).

Try Doug Henwood. He exposed Robert Reich plan to attack the system via understanding growth rates in 1994.

Dr. Smith’s claim to fame is that he uncovered that the treasury bonds were “non-tradable” security. From this Dr. Smith infers that the bonds are worthless because they cannot be traded on the open market. But this issue is a red-herring. The Republican Bill Archer who was a member of the Greenspan Commission address this and states the reason why the bonds are not “tradable” is to prevent any bubbles being created by the trading of these bonds on the public’s retirement money. It proved to be a wise decision but fundamentally the decision to overcharge working people on SS taxes in order to create this “fund” was unnecessary and was used to cover the tax cut for the rich via the 1981 Kemp/Roth legislation.

As I wrote back in September 2010, I was a SS survivor recipient and SS is very dear to me and thus I have been following this issue for the past 30 years. I believe I know as much or even more than Dr. Smith who IMO is doing a disservice by not accurately outlining this issue.

Thank you for the civility. Now could you please provide the link to the information you are referencing. That is what informs your understanding of the solidness of the SS system and the extent to which workers are overcharged?

The trust fund exists Max. The bonds are fully redeemable. They work like any debt instrument of the United States. The main premise of Dr. Allen Smith argument is that the bond that are held by Social Security are “worthless”. That is untrue and if the U.S. defaults on Social Security that would severe ramification on all U.S. debt that are held primarily by rich & foreign investors.

What Dr. Smith confuses in his arguments is that the workers have been OVERCHARGED for Social Security. The government collects MORE than they need to run the system and to pay benefits. What the politicians plan is to redeem the bonds and to POCKET the Social Security money. What they are doing is devising rhetorical arguments in order to convince the public to accept less benefits or find ways — such as the student loan scam – to justify WITHHOLDING payments.

It’s not that complicated Max when the correct information is provided.

If you can answer this in a straightforward, minus name calling way, it would be appreciated.

I never “name call” Max. That is not my style because I don’t have to. I argue the facts and left-wing principles with links to support my arguments.

If you can answer this in a straightforward, minus name calling way, it would be appreciated.

One way the government is attacking Social Security that Dr. Smith totally misses is via student loans on young people. Student loans debt exceed credit card debt and default rates are quite high. As many of these student loans are backed by the federal government, young people cannot DISCHARGE these debts via bankruptcy. They’ll continue to accrue charges for the student’s entire life. What this means is that when students become eligible for Social Security the federal government will GARNISH their benefits using the excuse of interest, penalties, fees, and principle accrued on these bogus and immoral loans.

Student loans is the long term attack on Social Security and totally missed by Dr. Smith while he continues to scrawl misleading rhetoric.

Sure why not? And while we’re at it, let’s also use the political system to create beautiful purple unicorns.

That’s not sarcasm, by the way, since both propositions are equally as absurd. Actually, it’s probably more likely that some private military contractor’s unacknowledged, unsupervised black budget program into genetic research will create a purple unicorn long before the criminal elite and their political lackeys give back one iota of loot they have stolen through a political-economic system so thoroughly corrupted and rife with killing and despoilment and destruction as to render all forms of petitioning and hand-wringing essentially meaningless.

But what do I know? Let’s ask George Carlin. George Carlin, is it possible to use the political system to transfer the money from the rich back to the people?

“You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They’ve long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the state houses, the city halls. They got the judges in their back pockets and they own all the big media companies, so they control just about all of the news and information you get to hear. They got you by the balls.

“They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying. Lobbying to get what they want. Well, we know what they want. They want more for themselves and less for everybody else…

“And now they’re coming for your Social Security money. They want your —- retirement money. They want it back so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street. And you know something? They’ll get it. They’ll get it all from you sooner or later, ’cause they own this —- place.”

They own the purple unicorns, too.