Should all monies borrowed from Social Security be paid back ?

[kentuck]

A simple question to the Democrats and Republicans in Congress? More to the point, I think the Democrats should propose it as a piece of legislation, just to remove all doubts. And this would include all the money that Democratic presidents have borrowed from the Social Security fund, as well as what Republican presidents have borrowed. This is a point that needs to be clarified during all this talk about Social Security. Democrats need to demand that all this money be paid back and that it be put into legisaltion. Because of these huge deficits and taxcuts of Bush and the Republicans, they would like to just write it off and never pay it back, it appears to this citizen.

[Zynx]

1. Um, we certainly can't do it all at once

Ultimately, though, those bonds have to be honored because the US defaults otherwise - which would be catastrophic.

[Tace]

2. I Agree Completely -- And The Funds Should Be Raised By

taxes on the wealthy. Simple.

[htuttle]

3. Anytime the government borrows money from a trust fund...

...it should be paid back.

Social Security isn't the only one they've had their grubby paws in. The Native American trust funds managed by the BIA are another example. Seems as if they've run off with most of that one, too.

[dweller]

every last damn penny . n/t

dp

[sui generis]

4. absolutely

government raiding social security needs to be as illegal as corporations raiding pension plans.

This administration is the single most irresponsible corrupt operation I have ever seen anywhere, including Pakistan and south America. They need to be held to the fire.

[cidliz2004]

5. Good idea! Bring the real "crisis" to the forefront, the stealing of

the IOU's by our Government with this current administrations determination to not only any of it back but to enable more "looting" of the fund.

[kentuck]

7. I hope the Democrats consider this....

I think this would be more effective than anything else in putting the Republicans on the defensive. It is their debt. And they don't want to pay it back...simple as that.

[cidliz2004]

17. Why don't they listen to our ideas???!!!!!!

This would be perfect #1 Bush isn't doing well with opinion on this issue #2 It is still a current issue #3 Turn the issue and spotlight right back on them with the question .... "Why don't you want to honor the fund that has been collecting a surplus for .....how many years, and furthermore where is the surplus?" Fully admitting that "both" sides of Government had some problems with wreckless spendinging, but under Clinton not only was the National Debt being paid down, but there was a surplus. We know that 9/11 hurt our economy, but to say that 9/11 is responsible for the massive record breaking deficeit today is exploiting this National Tragedy. The truth is weak, if not disasterous economical policies, coupled with the lack of sincere concern for the real issues of the aging middle class make for an incompetent administration"

[Wright Patman]

6. No country in history

has ever "paid back" this kind of debt. It is approaching the levels of Weimar Germany. The debt will be repudiated, probably in a de facto sense by hyperinflation.

IOW, retirees will still get the face amount of what was promised, but $18K a year by that time will buy only what about $1,800 a year will right now.

[htuttle]

11. FICA taxes go right up along with inflation...

...because they are a percentage of wages. There's no reason that we shouldn't be able to afford to provide COLA increases to benefits as well (since the face amount of FICA taxes will go up as inflation and wages do).

We could afford to pay it back, but not while we are pursuing a hair-brained plan for 'global domination' like Ernst Blofeld in some Bond movie. Drop Star Wars and the other useless pork for military contractors, and the money is there.

[kentuck]

13. But that is part of their scheme....

to tie SS to wages, rather than inflation, because that would in effect be a cut in benefits. Because wages tend to go up much slower than prices.

[htuttle]

14. That's how it works now -- at least on the payment side

Social Security was designed to be self-financing over the years. Payments into Social Security are already tied to wages, not inflation. To a certain extent, benefits are tied to the amount of money taken in for FICA -- they've never had to pay out more than they took in.

The biggest problem isn't really the baby boom per se, it's the trend toward lower wages all around (with the exception of a few higher wages at the very top). The solution to this? Take the money from the wages that HAVE gone up -- the very rich. Increase the cap for FICA taxes.

[kentuck]

16. But payments "out" of SS fund are tied to inflation...

and that is part of the "debate".

[htuttle]

21. True

But helping wages to keep up with inflation by raising the minimum wage, for example, would go a long way to keeping SS solvent.

Of course, that's also tied to the risk of outsourcing and competing with the rest of the world on wages, but that's a much bigger problem than any current 'crisis' in Social Security.

In the end, I don't think there's any solution to be found while we piss away hundreds of billions unnecessarily on blue-sky 'defense' boondoggles. Once a dollar is spent on a weapon, it stops producing any more wealth. Military hardware does not create more revenue -- it destroys it, no matter what the 'conquering neocons' would have us believe.

Sure, you can spend your money on a shotgun and make money robbing banks, but you're not likely to be able to succeed in that line of work for very long. The same is true of wanna-be conquering empires.

[kentuck]

24. True, also..

The "crisis" is with the debt run up by these radical neocons.

[cidliz2004]

8. Couldn't "we the people" bring a lawsuit against the Federal Government

for not safeguarding the SS funds KNOWING full well that in the future there wouldn't be enough to pay fully promised benefits? Couldn't somebody with big Kahunas start a movement to get support for a lawsuit, or if nothing else and full investigation of the "handling" of the SS Funds?

[Junkdrawer]

9. The money in in T-Bonds. When they come due, the SS Trust Fund...

will simply buy more T-Bonds. How would legislation address this? :shrug:

[kentuck]

12. It's about the debt.

And a long-term scheme to deal with the present debt crisis created by taxcuts and spending of this radical Administration and these radical Republicans that is unsustainable, but that politicians cannot bring themselves to say they fucked up.

[Junkdrawer]

18. Oh that's true. But I don't see how to use a "pay back law" to address..

the problem. Perhaps some kind of "no default" law could be written up, but I think T-Bonds already have the "full faith and credit" of the US behind them now.

[kentuck]

20. It would flush out the real problem...

The real problem is that with the huge debt run up by this Adminsitrations taxcuts and spending, they cannot continue to pay SS at present rate and pay the rest of the debt at the same time. Take $4-5trillion out of SS and that is $4-5 trillion that will not have to be paid back by the Bush beneficiares. If we continue with an increasing SS budget and with less and less revenues coming into the Treasury, the bubble will burst sooner rather than later. Bush is smart enough to realize that.

[indepat]

10. Repukes have no intention of ever paying these monies back: outlays will

not be allowed to exceed revenues so greatly reduced benefits are not the Repuke answer.

[ihaveaquestion]

15. It's a bogus issue - the money was never in storage anywhere.

The SS IOUs are markers for the money that will be paid when the time comes. The gov't isn't a bank and doesn't keep money in a safe for when it's needed. Treasury bonds have been issued for the SS trust fund and they will be paid by the gov't when they mature - just like any other debt the gov't owes.

The real issue is the huge amount of excess debt this administration has run up. They've mortgaged our children's future and this must be stopped - the sooner the better!

[cidliz2004]

19. That is the issue though, if "they" can't keep their fingers out of the

till, then the till should be a "bank" a "Fort Knox", why is that so difficult to comprehend? The Government manages money all the time and they put it "somewhere" as in Fed. Taxes. The State collects taxes as well. where do they go? There is no reason to not be able to set something up to "safeguard" our funds, to say so is ludicrous!!!! Furthermore, we the people should be given statements on how much "surplus" is accumulating over the years and discussion should be opened on maybe some way of investing those funds while they sit stagnant.

[BeFree]

22. Try this, cid,

What has happened is this: The left-hand of government loaned the SS money to the right-hand of government. Then the money was spent: it's all gone. Gone into roads, guns and schools, etc.

I do think there could be a case to be made that from now on, the money is actually invested in something besides roads, guns and schools. How about doctors and hospitals? The rich could be charged and the poor would get free care...

[cidliz2004]

23. That is going in the right direction