ThomasJackson
(51 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-05-05 10:14 AM
Response to Original message |
| 45. past performance is no guarantee ........ |
|
the standard mutual fund disclaimer about prior performance.
just so's everyone on the same page, talking about SS from a "cash flow" rather than an "assets held" point of view is most illuminating. the "treasury securities" in the SS trust fund are not "real" Treasury securities in that the Trust fund can't sell them to raise cash, unlike the Treasuries held by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac or foreign governments, etc. They are legal obligations of thefederal gov't, but cannor be sold in the market. For those worried about the overall defecit, this is critical, because the ONLY way for the SS trust fund to convert these "assets" into cash money is to redeem them from the US Treasury. If you haven't been keeping up with current events ..... WE DON"T HAVE 3 trillion dollars with which to redeem those securities. Soooooo ..... if you don't like the current 500billion dollar defecit, how will being 3 trillion dollars in the hole feel?
Look, I'm not saying that private accounts are a great idea....BUT doing nothing is not going to fix Jack. And raising taxes only plugs a bit of the hole ..... still lots of room for improvement. So, lets have a rational discussion about how to deal with the issue, not stick our heads in the sand and hope it goes away.
|
| -SS Privatizers Say That The Trust Fund Is Meaningless IOU's |
loindelrio |
Jan-04-05 09:02 PM |
#0 |
-
10 reasons why Bush's plan for SS sucks.... |
chomskysright |
Jan-04-05 09:05 PM |
#1 |
 -
I'd rather die in a bus station bathroom than let a liberal kill a baby |
marcologico |
Jan-04-05 09:09 PM |
#3 |
 -
Where is that list from? nt |
Eric J in MN |
Jan-05-05 12:35 AM |
#36 |
 -
One Reason Why Bush's Plan to partially privatize |
Yupster |
Jan-05-05 03:24 AM |
#41 |
-
And stock certificates were used for wallpaper. |
dogman |
Jan-04-05 09:07 PM |
#2 |
 -
Are you saying... |
RoeBear |
Jan-04-05 09:11 PM |
#4 |
-
Exactly. |
dogman |
Jan-04-05 09:24 PM |
#10 |
-
There is a first time for everything... |
sendero |
Jan-04-05 09:16 PM |
#5 |
 -
Yes, it is paper in a sense |
DianeG5385 |
Jan-04-05 09:22 PM |
#8 |
  -
Not true... |
sendero |
Jan-04-05 09:48 PM |
#16 |
 -
That fractional ownership of stock in a company is ephemeral |
DianeG5385 |
Jan-04-05 10:30 PM |
#20 |
 -
Well.. |
sendero |
Jan-04-05 10:38 PM |
#24 |
 -
The Fact is That SS was a Masterpiece of social welfare |
DianeG5385 |
Jan-04-05 10:51 PM |
#27 |
 -
On this.. |
sendero |
Jan-04-05 10:53 PM |
#28 |
 -
Under the "it's only paper" reasoning ... |
TahitiNut |
Jan-04-05 09:44 PM |
#15 |
-
I don't.. |
sendero |
Jan-04-05 09:52 PM |
#17 |
 -
"just like you and I do in a bank"??? |
TahitiNut |
Jan-04-05 11:13 PM |
#31 |
  -
Deleted message |
Name removed |
Jan-05-05 06:44 AM |
#42 |
 -
What on earth is a "hard asset?" |
hunter |
Jan-05-05 11:07 AM |
#46 |
 -
Deleted message |
Name removed |
Jan-05-05 11:56 AM |
#48 |
 -
The Gov't. could buy stock in Enron, PG&E and Worldcom.... |
Porcupine |
Jan-05-05 12:34 AM |
#35 |
-
Make sure you own your house |
DianeG5385 |
Jan-04-05 10:55 PM |
#29 |
-
Many would lose even that. |
TahitiNut |
Jan-04-05 11:32 PM |
#32 |
-
It's only meaningless because they spent it on |
DianeG5385 |
Jan-04-05 09:17 PM |
#6 |
 -
Maybe We Should Start A Pre-Emptive Class Action (Shareholder?) Suit |
loindelrio |
Jan-04-05 09:22 PM |
#9 |
  -
I like this idea. We need to sue Congress |
DianeG5385 |
Jan-04-05 09:29 PM |
#12 |
 -
It Would Go Nowhere In Court, But Would Really Get Exposure |
loindelrio |
Jan-04-05 10:31 PM |
#21 |
 -
Remember in the 2000 debates all the talk about the |
HuskiesHowls |
Jan-04-05 09:25 PM |
#11 |
-
Did you mis-remember? |
davekriss |
Jan-04-05 10:32 PM |
#22 |
-
Privatization is VERY VERY Bad!!!! |
HuskiesHowls |
Jan-04-05 09:22 PM |
#7 |
-
Mike Thompson toon on privatization |
Bozita |
Jan-04-05 09:32 PM |
#13 |
-
and another cartoon |
dweller |
Jan-04-05 09:42 PM |
#14 |
-
Privatization has been a disaster in every arena it has been applied. |
leesa |
Jan-04-05 10:06 PM |
#18 |
 -
You are absolutely right. All property and business should be |
ArkDem |
Jan-06-05 11:58 AM |
#71 |
-
My pet theory - THIS IS A DISTRACTION! |
Chicago Democrat |
Jan-04-05 10:11 PM |
#19 |
 -
baloney, this IS the real bad news! n/t |
marcologico |
Jan-04-05 10:34 PM |
#23 |
-
who'd be suprised if the neoCONs have already stolen everyones money? |
bpilgrim |
Jan-04-05 10:39 PM |
#25 |
 -
Oh hell they already have, remember Clinton's surplus? n/t |
marcologico |
Jan-04-05 10:41 PM |
#26 |
-
They are 100% serious and don't expect to encounter resistance. |
marcologico |
Jan-04-05 10:58 PM |
#30 |
-
Just like a lot of investment portfolios |
Mike Niendorff |
Jan-05-05 12:17 AM |
#33 |
-
I was talking to my mom on the phone today |
neebob |
Jan-05-05 12:29 AM |
#34 |
-
The trust fund is meaningless IOU's |
Yupster |
Jan-05-05 01:13 AM |
#37 |
 -
There are only two ways for an IOU to be meaningless |
hfojvt |
Jan-05-05 01:47 AM |
#38 |
  -
Okay so let's say I have a new car fund |
Yupster |
Jan-05-05 02:45 AM |
#40 |
 -
which part of "will not pay" have you refuted? |
hfojvt |
Jan-05-05 11:45 AM |
#47 |
 -
This is frustrating, but I'll keep trying |
Yupster |
Jan-05-05 01:22 PM |
#55 |
 -
I share your frustration |
hfojvt |
Jan-05-05 05:18 PM |
#61 |
 -
So in practicallity, the bonds are meaningless, but |
Yupster |
Jan-05-05 05:44 PM |
#62 |
 -
symbolism has its practical uses |
hfojvt |
Jan-05-05 08:00 PM |
#63 |
 -
No problem |
Yupster |
Jan-05-05 10:12 PM |
#64 |
 -
Uh-huh. Just like a "Federal Reserve Note" is a meaningless IOU. |
TahitiNut |
Jan-05-05 10:01 AM |
#44 |
 -
Why, then, social security is fully funded! |
Inland |
Jan-05-05 12:06 PM |
#50 |
  -
Correct - the only way for social security to be |
Yupster |
Jan-05-05 01:04 PM |
#52 |
 -
The bonds aren't meaningless--the fund represents the promise of the gov. |
Inland |
Jan-05-05 04:53 PM |
#57 |
 -
The formula has changed every single generation |
Yupster |
Jan-05-05 10:17 PM |
#65 |
 -
No, the formula changed in 1983. |
Inland |
Jan-06-05 10:58 AM |
#68 |
 -
So let's launder them now and the problem is solved, right? |
mdhunter |
Jan-05-05 12:17 PM |
#51 |
-
The problem is that starting in 2018 |
Yupster |
Jan-05-05 01:10 PM |
#53 |
 -
You just went back to using the fund you said was meaningless |
Inland |
Jan-06-05 11:04 AM |
#69 |
-
That's what Bush is telling you. Message received. |
Inland |
Jan-05-05 05:03 PM |
#60 |
-
Why do privateers insist on calling it privatization? |
BrotherBuzz |
Jan-05-05 02:08 AM |
#39 |
 -
I completely agree. |
TahitiNut |
Jan-05-05 07:06 AM |
#43 |
-
past performance is no guarantee ........ |
ThomasJackson |
Jan-05-05 10:14 AM |
#45 |
 -
So the bonds are worthless IOUs because the republicans won't pay them. |
Inland |
Jan-05-05 11:59 AM |
#49 |
-
Congress will honor its promise |
Yupster |
Jan-05-05 01:14 PM |
#54 |
 -
No, the bonds and funds are the accounting tools |
Inland |
Jan-05-05 04:59 PM |
#58 |
-
Exactly... The republicans don't intend to honor the ious... |
txaslftist |
Jan-05-05 02:42 PM |
#56 |
-
Oh, no--they wouldn't screw foreigners. Its Americans who are screwed. |
Inland |
Jan-05-05 05:01 PM |
#59 |
-
The Chinese don't care |
Yupster |
Jan-06-05 12:13 AM |
#66 |
-
I guess you missed my little joke. |
Inland |
Jan-06-05 10:50 AM |
#67 |
-
god help us ... what idiots. |
ThomasJackson |
Jan-06-05 11:39 AM |
#70 |
-
No, it is no additional debt at all |
Inland |
Jan-06-05 12:12 PM |
#72 |
-
think cash flow not assets held |
ThomasJackson |
Jan-06-05 03:49 PM |
#74 |
-
I don't think we disagree |
Inland |
Jan-07-05 10:24 AM |
#75 |
-
Frame the debate |
nadinbrzezinski |
Jan-06-05 12:15 PM |
#73 |