Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If no deal by Aug. 2, Obama can't guarantee Social Security checks will go out

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
David Gill Donating Member (183 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 12:40 PM
Original message
If no deal by Aug. 2, Obama can't guarantee Social Security checks will go out
Source: MSNBC

In an interview with CBS Evening News, President Obama says he can't guarantee Social Security checks will go out Aug. 3rd if a debt-ceiling deal is not reached by the Aug. 2nd deadline.

Read more: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/07/12/7068367...



First Dens attacked the GOP on Ryan's proposed Medicare cuts, now they can say their risking the halt of Social Security benefits. But has Obama given up this attack with his talks of cutting both programs?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Larkspur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
1. That should also mean no $ to the wars Obama supports
How come he's not touting that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Because this is about the GOP, not Obama.
And Obama isn't stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. really. you find this to be an intelligent move?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. He said he can't guarantee it, which is 100% true.
He's just stating the truth of the situation which the GOP will be blamed for.

Would you rather he lie?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. Social secuirty payments have NOTHING to do with what is going on. Why is it true?
The money is there. Why on earth would he not be able to guarantee SS payments? This is a threat, a bluff, and a terrible one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. I don't think you understand basic politics.
That's okay, Obama's statement isn't directed at you. It's directed at the idiot GOP who are on their way back to the WH as we speak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:25 AM
Response to Reply #16
122. Good lord. Please see Reply 121.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freshwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #14
30. Pelosi said at the last government shut down threat that mailing would be affected.
Not direct payments that are made electronically automatically.

Because it really does mean something when the debt ceiling is not raised, and government shuts down. Those are real people in real time that mail those printed checks and maintain the machinery. Not by hand, true, but furloughing makes this happen.

They have to be sent out by law within a certain time frame, but they can't be sent out in advance to cover a government shut down, as far as I know. So he's telling the truth.

But the Tea Party people are ecstatic at their chance to get back at 'the man,' the evil, statist government, that is. They're drunk with the idea of inflicting mass chaos on those they consider unworthy. It's blackmail for the rest of the country that really can't fight back, who need that money and they will push this as far as possible.

The Chinese expect their payments on the debt to be paid. They don't have social security for their people, they believe like the libertarians and now most of the GOP does, it's a family affair. So they aren't going to hold their hands out waiting to be paid while we wail about our safety net going bye.

So Obama will have to make a deal, because the GOP won't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:17 AM
Response to Reply #30
118. If I worked for the feds, I would volunteer to work on the mailing. Ditto if I were a member of
Congress or a staffer of a member. Has he asked anyone to volunteer?

If not, how is that defensible? For just one thing, I bet more than one landlord has had an eviction notice in hand for a while, especially for apartments that are rent stabilized.

In his statements about halting OASDI payments, does Obama really make a very clear distinction between direct deposit checks--the bulk of the payments--and hand mailed checks, or does he just alarm ALL feeble disabled and elderly folks?

If not, how is that defensible?

FYI, the Chinese have nothing to do with OASDI. The funds for OASDI are there. No borrowing necessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CountAllVotes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #14
51. he is playing a very sick game
and I do not like it!

:mad: :argh: :grr:

:kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #14
78. There Might Not Even be a Functioning Post Office to Mail the Checks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:18 AM
Response to Reply #78
119. Most checks are direct deposit, done electronically and automatically.
No end to rationalizations, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. What does the deficit have to do with social security? answer: nothing.
What do the tax cuts have to do with the deficit? EVERYTHING. They caused the deficit. So why are we discussing social security AT ALL?

Why didn't Obama say the wealthy may have to pay back those excess temporary tax cuts we made. I may not be able to guarantee the tax cuts. or I may not be able ot guarantee American military presence overseas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Maybe he's saving that for tomorrow.
Again, I don't think you understand basic politics.

And BTW, he has said many times that the Bush tax cuts should expire for the top 2%. I guess you missed that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nyy1998 Donating Member (984 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. Agreed, it's a smart move by Obama
This forces AARP and Seniors who are already pissed off at the Republicans and Paul Ryan to get into the fight. Very useful ploy here by Obama
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 03:49 AM
Response to Reply #22
112. Yeah, nothing's as smart as scaring the beejesus out of the elderly and disabled so they fight
Edited on Wed Jul-13-11 04:42 AM by No Elephants
your battles for you.

ETA: Assuming they are not too feeble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
okasha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #17
43. Was that at the same time he was caving and restoring them?
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #17
81. Obama just signed the BUSh tax cuts into law again in December. I guess you missed that.
HE SAYS they would be renewed over his dead body, and could have let them expire, but HE renewed them. He signed those tax cuts into law with his very own pen. he had the power to let them expire.
What he says is not what he does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 03:52 AM
Response to Reply #81
113. With respect, Obama signing Bush laws is impossible. In December, 2010, Obama signed Obama tax cuts
Bush tax cuts expired under their own terms on December 31, 2010. Since then, we have been under the Obama tax cuts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 03:46 AM
Response to Reply #17
111. He didn't say it when it mattered, though. When it mattered, we got the Obama tax cuts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #10
45. He is lying , or playing naive , he can Guarantee it
When we hit the debit limit, it is him and Giethner that decide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:50 AM
Response to Reply #10
127. Why can't he guaranty electronic OASDI payments? And what efforts has he made
to even try to guaranty the hand mailed? Not as though he couldn't see this coming.

I'm guessing if any President wanted to, s/he could have a back plan for the small percentage of OASDI payments that are not direct deposited electronically. An printing of mailing labels and checks, stuffed and ready to go. IF the President wanted to. That's also probably true, but I don't expect Obama to cop to it.

Please see also Reply 118.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:39 AM
Response to Reply #3
126. Let's wait and see if this backfires on him before we comment on how smart this is.
It's really irrelevant if you or I think this is about the GOP. It will matter whether most American's see this as Obama's fault or theirs. Right now, I wouldn't make book either way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dipsydoodle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. He's using the life insurance salesman's ploy
Selling fear. That stunt wouldn't work if he tried to sell no more wars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brooklynite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #1
20. Because however you feel about military activity...
...it means American military forces in harms way won't be paid, and funds to support them in place (since its not funcitonally possible to remove them instantly, however you feel about the drawdown schedule) won't be available either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:01 AM
Response to Reply #20
115. Let's be real. They can halt payments to contractors without halting troop's salaries.
Pentagon salaries, too.

Only a fraction of our troops are in harm's way, but I don't support cutting the salary of any them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
2. Booga Booga
You created this Administration, Mr. O. Congratulations on the FUBAR.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #2
63. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:42 AM
Response to Reply #2
104. What does the Administration have to do with the default?
Have people suddenly brain-farted and forgotten how government works?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 03:56 AM
Response to Reply #104
114. The administration has nothing to do with it. It's our fault.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eppur_se_muova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
4. No payments to defense contractors either, right?
Yeah, right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. exactly, and Congressmen and Supreme Court judges?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:03 AM
Response to Reply #8
116. Judges, yes. Halting salaries of Congress may present a Constitutional issue, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
6. More unnecessary stress for people in the name of political
maneuvering. It's not right, no matter who does it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hamsterjill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #6
36. I agree with you.
And I fear it will blow up in Obama's face for being the one who is publicly saying it. Yes, seniors, etc. will be mad, but will they focus their anger on the GOP? Or will they focus their anger on Obama? That's the question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amandabeech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #36
77. The GOP will do everything possible to get people to focus on Obama,
He will be the one who will actually have to do it, instead of cutting all the things that the GOP will suggest cutting at the last minute.

It's not good to be the one who actually ends up doing the bad deed. "You forced me into it" never plays well.

However, my recollection is that SS taxes cannot be diverted to any other use. What comes in must go out or be invested in a special series of U.S. bonds. People may get most of their money, but it might be delayed, unfortunately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:07 AM
Response to Reply #77
117. If only no one had used OASDI taxes for things other than OASDI. If only.
That was the promise. Government never kept it.

"It's not good to be the one who actually ends up doing the bad deed. "You forced me into it" never plays well."

Agree. Saying "The GOP left me no choice" makes him seem weak, a reputation he already has and the GOP has been exploiting. He will lose either way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dgibby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #6
49. I agree.
My income consists of military retirement and ss. All I think about is what if those checks aren't here next month? Not a good feeling. In fact, I checked my acct today, have a deposit pending (SS). It's for less than 1/10th of what it's supposed to be. What's wrong with this picture? Looks like I'll be talking to SS tomorrow if the rest of the payment isn't there. I hate this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MilesColtrane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #6
71. Make no mistake.
Edited on Tue Jul-12-11 03:34 PM by MilesColtrane
The Republicans in Congress and their leaders are the ones who created this in the first place.

The four Republicans in Congressional leadership positions combined to vote for a debt limit increase 19 times during the presidency of George W. Bush. In doing so, they increased the debt limit by nearly $4 trillion.


June 2002: Congress approves a $450 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $6.4 trillion. McConnell, Boehner, and Cantor vote yea, Kyl votes nay.

May 2003: Congress approves a $900 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $7.384 trillion. All four approve.

November 2004: Congress approves an $800 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.1 trillion. All four approve.

March 2006: Congress approves a $781 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.965 trillion. All four approve.

September 2007: Congress approves an $850 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $9.815 trillion. All four approve.

THEY have taken the American people and the entire world economy hostage, not Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #71
76. Oh, I understand the source of the problem. But I also understand
that our POTUS is playing the same public opinion games that the other side plays, and that they are causing people to go through incredible stress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MilesColtrane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #76
79. So do you believe he just should have kept quiet about the consequences of a default, or...
that a default won't happen?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:20 AM
Response to Reply #79
120. OASDI payments have nothing to do with default.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
7. That is some bullshit. The social security money is there. Available. Go fuck with
something else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David Gill Donating Member (183 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. It's just politics. Nothing will happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #11
41. So it's okay to play politics with people's livelihood?
Kinda fucked up, if you ask me.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:29 AM
Response to Reply #41
124. Apparently, IOKIODI. (It's O.K if Obama does it.) If Bush had done this, though. WOWZA!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:24 AM
Response to Reply #11
121. Unless you count extreme anxiety and stress on people least able to withstand it.
If it's "only politics," it's a very cynical and callous political game indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yodermon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
12. I don't understand. If SS is running a surplus, how can there be no $$ to disburse?
If it's still in surplus, then doesn't that mean by definition that existing payroll taxes cover SS payments?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roxiejules Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #12
32. There are dollars to disburse
According to the most recent DTS the YTD (fiscal) amount paid out on Social Security is $469 billion, well below the amount collected from Federal Tax Deposits of $780 billion.


https://www.fms.treas.gov/fmsweb/viewDTSFiles?dir=w&fna...







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #12
69. Nothing gets paid without Boehner's approval --- he's be gone the day after this, btw!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:27 AM
Response to Reply #69
123. I doubt OASDI payments need Boehner's approval.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MilesColtrane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #12
73. The money will be there.
The federal workers who print and mail the checks may not be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 08:46 AM
Response to Reply #12
149. He's just saying this to scare people. GOP supporters are driven by
fear, not facts or logic. This is for them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
13. Social Security Takes In More Than It Pays Out
And will for the next decade.

So Obama is thinking of robbing recipients in order to pay for wars and other shit.

Obama's fetish for attacking Social Security seems to know no bounds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neoralme Donating Member (812 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #13
19. This man is Disgust personified. Does he think we're all stupid? Or
is this supposed to be some tricky hint that there is no money left in the SS trust fund.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stockholmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #19
84. the SS 'trust fund' is an accounting myth that cannot be detached from overall US debt
I believe that a old-age government national pension plan is an ABSOLUTE must, but to dislocate it from all the other US debt is simply to ignore reality. The empiric wars, exploding 'for-profit' health care costs, and other financial recklessness will bring the US into a state of bankruptcy and default, thus making the special Treasuries that the SS monies are invested in worthless.



http://moneywatch.bnet.com/retirement-planning/blog/mon... /


snip

Our political leaders continue a long tradition of using words to describe Social Security that give you an impression that is different from reality. Normally, when you hear the words trust fund, you think of an arrangement where money and investments have been set aside that are dedicated to a specific purpose, such as providing retirement benefits. And typically, the money and investments in a trust fund are separate from the entity that sponsors the trust fund. The trust funds supporting your 401k and pension benefits operate this way.

But the Social Security trust fund is invested in special government bonds issued by the federal government. Principal and interest on these bonds must be repaid by future generations, according to law. The bonds in the Social Security trust fund are counted both as an asset of the trust fund and as a liability, since they are part of the total federal debt. Basically, one hand of the government owes the other hand, and the investments in the trust fund are not separate from the entity that sponsors the trust fund.

In the distant past, Social Security was a pay-as-you-go system, where current tax collections paid for current benefits. The Social Security trust fund idea gave us the illusion that we were advance funding Social Security benefits, in a manner similar to the private pension system. In reality, though, Social Security is still pay-as-you-go, with the difference being that future generations will pay for both the benefits outlay and the repayment of principal and interest on the special government bonds in the trust fund.

Some people are outraged by the operation of the Social Security trust fund, using inflammatory language to describe our politicians as having raided the trust fund. I dont happen to be outraged. I realize and accept that the government has a variety of revenue sources, including FICA taxes, and a variety of expenditures, including Social Security benefits. There is and never has been any real link between our Social Security benefits and the FICA taxes that we pay. What the Social Security trust fund does represent is a legal obligation for our government to repay the principal and interest on the special bonds in the trust fund. I have faith that these bonds will be honored provided that future generations can afford to repay the bonds.


snip

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.businessinsider.com/myth-of-the-social-secur...


Let me ask you this, continues Suzy. Suppose we doubled that number on your piece of paper. Suppose we just cross out the $17,400 balance on your so-called Social Security Trust Fund, and instead we write in $35,000. Well round up.

Billy says eagerly, Suzy, thats fantastic! Now I wont run out of money for music spending any time soon! With $3,500 in my Social Security Trust Fund, it will take decades to draw down that balance.

Thats exactly what worries me, replies Suzy. We havent actually created any more money by doing this. We have just changed an accounting balance for an imaginary account. You can tell yourself that you have more money to spend on Social Security music, but you dont actually have any more cash, now or in the future. Its not like a bank account balance, or even like the real credit card debt you have been accumulating. Im really worried that this Trust Fund balance and your Trust Fund reports are giving you a false sense of security, and they are preventing you from taking a hard look at how much you spend each year on Social Security music.

You dont have enough dedicated allowance this year to pay for your Social Security music spending this year. You have an immediate cash flow problem, in that youre having to sacrifice $400 of other stuff just this year to make up the difference between what you collect in dedicated Social Security payroll tax allowance, and what you spend on Social Security. And that $400 gap will be bigger next year, and the year after that.

Billy, this is a problem for you right now. You need to slow the growth of your Social Security music spending. When you combine that with your spending on movies that you call Medicare, over time its going to grow to consume most of your $18,000 annual allowance. It will squeeze out your ability to spend your general revenue allowance on those boxing lessons, those school supplies, those museums and movies and parks and even your online farm.

You forget, sis, says Billy with a grin. While this Social Security Card isnt a real credit card, I do have a real credit card. I can just borrow the extra money I need and run a bigger deficit this year. I promised myself Id spend this $17,400 on Social Security music over time, and I cant break that promise. Ill just keep increasing my borrowing on my real credit card to do so.

And next year, and the year after that, cries Suzy. Yep. I plan to increase my spending each year on Social Security music. Ill draw more from my general fund allowance to pay that which is not covered by my dedicated Social Security payroll tax allowance. If that threatens to constrain my other spending, Ill just borrow and run up my credit card debt.

And youll keep doing this until By my calculations, Ill need to do something by 2037, when my Social Security Trust Fund runs dry.

But theres no money there. And if you keep telling yourself youre OK for another 27 years, youre not going to do anything about the real problem, which is that you cant afford this growth rate of your Social Security spending. At some point this cash flow problem is going to cause your real credit card debt to get so high that youll bump against your credit limit. Then your only options will be to drastically cut back on your Social Security spending, or slash the amount your spend on other stuff, or

Suzy gasps. Oh, no. Or youll wait until its too late, and then demand a bigger allowance, leaving even less money for the rest of the family.

Billy sits quietly, failing to suppress a smirk. And we havent even discussed Medicare.

snip


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Social Security trust fund consists totally of special issue Treasury bonds and certificates of indebtedness. These bonds can only be issued to and redeemed by the Social Security trust funds. These bonds cannot be sold in the open market.

The Social Security trust fund bonds pay the same interest as regular Treasury bonds issued on the same day and in the same maturity. When the bonds mature, they are rolled over into new bonds that include both the original issue amount and any interest due. The new bonds pay whatever interest as regular Treasury bonds of the same maturity issued on that date. These bonds are really nothing more than IOUs from one branch of government to another. They are not a real financial asset.

Social Security will eventually (2018 at the latest) need to spend more than it receives in payroll taxes. It will then have to start cashing in the bonds in the trust fund. According to the US OMB, there are only four sources that money can be drawn from. Congress could repay the money by raising other taxes. It could also authorize the Treasury to just borrow the needed funds. Another alternative would be for Congress to reduce other federal programs and to use the money that was to have been spent for them to redeem Social Security bonds. Finally, Congress could reduce Social Security benefits.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2010/11/18/131420919/are...


Proposals to fix the deficit are coming fast and furious in Washington these days. One major target: Social Security.

Whether you favor cutting Social Security may depend on how you view the Social Security trust funds, which currently contain $2.5 trillion for retirement benefits. That's $2.5 trillion that, according to some people, don't actually exist.

Here's the back story.

If you look at your paycheck, in the spot where it lists deductions, there's a line that says "FICA." That's the money that gets taken out of your check to pay for Social Security.

For the past 25 years or so, the amount of money the government has raised through those taxes has been greater than what it's been spending to fund Social Security.

The surplus came largely from the baby boomers and we're going to need that extra money when they retire and start collecting Social Security.

This is where the $2.5 trillion trust funds come in.

The government has invested all that money in Treasury bonds, which are traditionally considered among the safest investments in the world.

But a Treasury bond, remember, is the way the government borrows money. So the government is lending the Social Security surplus to itself. And the obligation to repay those loans is the trust funds.

"They are nothing like any trust fund that any one of us would think of," says Maya MacGuineas of the New America Foundation. "It conjures up an image of really holding savings, and it doesn't do that at all."

But there's another way to think about what the government is doing here.

The federal government owes $2.5 trillion to the Social Security trust funds. And if the government doesn't pay that money, it will default on its debt something the U.S. has never done in its history.

By the middle of the next decade, the Social Security surplus will turn into yearly deficits as more Baby Boomers retire. And the government will have to come up with hundreds of billions of dollars a year to cover its obligations to the trust fund.

At that point, the debate over whether or not the trust funds exist becomes a moot.

"The policy choices that we have to make good on Social Security obligations are exactly the same with the trust fund or if we'd never had the trust fund," MacGuineas says. "Raise taxes, cut Social Security benefits, cut other government spending, or borrow the money. That's the only way to repay the money."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 05:16 AM
Response to Reply #84
133. Wow. I don't recall seeing such a long rationalization of government theft and fraud before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stockholmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #133
155. Im not rationalizing, it IS theft and fraud, it's a giant ponzi scheme,& people in need will screwed
Edited on Wed Jul-13-11 10:31 AM by stockholmer
The choice is simple, end the empire, end the privately-run central banking cartel, and end the crony corporatist fascism, or the whole American system will collapse. There is no way to grow your way put of this, the only way out is to institute a 1% Tobin tax on ALL financial turnover (with the first $1 million dollars exempted), and end the systemic controllers death grip on the reigns of public and private power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neoralme Donating Member (812 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #84
148. I disagree with part of your statement
Edited on Wed Jul-13-11 08:34 AM by neoralme
Some people are outraged by the operation of the Social Security trust fund, using inflammatory language to describe our politicians as having raided the trust fund. I dont happen to be outraged. I realize and accept that the government has a variety of revenue sources, including FICA taxes, and a variety of expenditures, including Social Security benefits.


I am one of those outraged people. SS funds are funds entrusted to the government. As such, they should not be mingled. Do I know that they are and have been? Of course. I also know that the US is now one of the most crooked countries in the world, all things considered. I believe the government will end social security and medicare, but they will have to do it slowly, or they will see riots that will take them down, depending on whether or not the army will fire on its civilians. Bush reversed posse comitatus for just this reason, so troops could be used to quell riots by its citizens.

We all have our stories about how importance Social Security is to us. Leave it be said ( and I know this to be a fact), there are private groups of citizens forming all over the country to take on the government if they deny the people their justly earned benefits. I will be with these people with every piece or hardware I can carry. I would rather have the US go down completely than live under the rule of Koch Brother types.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stockholmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #148
156. those were the CBS Moneywatch author's words, not mine, and I personally would be outraged
this was my sole contribution to the post:

I believe that a old-age government national pension plan is an ABSOLUTE must, but to dislocate it from all the other US debt is simply to ignore reality. The empiric wars, exploding 'for-profit' health care costs, and other financial recklessness will bring the US into a state of bankruptcy and default, thus making the special Treasuries that the SS monies are invested in worthless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neoralme Donating Member (812 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #156
158. Yeah, Okay, but I still do not understand why that would not be
possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brooklynite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
18. Why should this be a problem?
Since some people claim he wants to "slash benefits", isn't this just giving him an early start?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
23. He is the decider, he chooses where the money goes, he can guarantee where the money goes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. So the executive branch now has the power of the purse?
Got a link for that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #25
39. Ya, its called the U.S. Treasury,, Giethner is the Sec. and Obama his Chief, Link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:34 AM
Response to Reply #25
125. Payment, like OASDI, and those of military contractors, are indeed "administered" by the administra-
tion. All the votes necessary to make things like OASDI and the Pentagon budget, etc. have been taken, in some cases, long ago. Creating new obligations would indeed be an Article I function. Things like the topic of this thread and payments to the military, from Pentagon to Halliburton, that are already oblligations, however, are indeed up to Obama at this point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zalinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
26. This is probably the first intelligent thing he has done.
With threatening that Social Security checks may not go out in August, everyone will be calling their reps. And, the most active political callers are.....those receiving Social Security checks. You can be sure that A LOT of repubs will get their ears burned off with this move.

I know I'm going to be calling my repub rep, how about you?

zalinda
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #26
46. Uh, noooo -- this sends the message that SS is adding to the deficit. IT. DOES. NOT.
The SS money is there. There is no reason to hold it back, because THERE IS NOTHING STOPPING IT FROM GOING OUT.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zalinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #46
64. We know that.
But, I do know that when I talked to my rep before, she told me how upset the seniors were about getting cuts to SS. Her phones didn't stop ringing for days. I can only imagine what is going on at the office now.

I'll be calling the office tomorrow, I want them to be worn down and desperate when I call. I have all my talking points ready. About millionaires and corporations getting tax cuts, and I won't be getting my SS check. As I am a registered indie, she'll be looking for my vote, which I will tell her she won't get if the repubs don't tax the millionaires.

zalinda
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CountAllVotes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #26
54. I already did that
You should have already done that too!

Where have you been?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #26
108. He's not THREATENING.
He's stating a fact.

And I call bullshit on the claim that he's done nothing "intelligent" up to this point. And you didn't even get this assessment right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 05:38 AM
Response to Reply #108
137. Actually, he isn't just stating facts. Read the thread.
Edited on Wed Jul-13-11 05:39 AM by No Elephants
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:53 AM
Response to Reply #26
128. Really? Please see replies 112., 121., and 126., among others on this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
florida08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
27. this sounds like something a republican would do
Put fear into vets, the disabled and seniors? For what? To force pressure on the tea party? Dangerous game of chicken and not what a leader should do. Apparently he's saying he will take from ss to keep the government going by saying that. If the government defaults Geithner will get to decide who gets paid. That seems to be where we're headed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #27
34. He's saying the GOP will take from SS to keep governement going (and paying themselves)
It shines a big spotlight on the GOP cockroaches who aren't just playing the politics of fear, they are actually attempting to impliment it.

This isn't that difficult to understand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
florida08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #34
53. you really believe that?
He is the POTUS. The buck stops with him. You do realized the most of the country didn't know they received tax cuts right? They will let the default happen. He will get the blame. Democrats will get the blame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 05:07 AM
Response to Reply #34
131. The GOP simply can't take from OASDI to pay themselves. Obama is the only one who can do that.
Edited on Wed Jul-13-11 05:53 AM by No Elephants
OASDI money is under his administration's control. And Congress--most certainly not only GOP members of Congress--can't legally vote to steal it.

If Democrats AND the GOP were to vote to do that, (committing political suicide with their "ayes"), it would be the job of Obama and Timmeh to refuse them the money, on the ground the vote is illegal under both statutes and the 14th amendment.

If anyone has messed with OASDI money since January, 2009, it would have to be Obama and Timmeh.

So much for "He's simply being honest," eh?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raschel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
28. Bad move. The Republicans won't care if we eat cat food. The President's constituents will resent
him for this statement. Lose lose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CountAllVotes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #28
38. your are right
He is a damn fool for pulling this one out of his hip pocket. It will hang over his head until he is no longer the President and thereafter as well. It could damage the Democratic party as a whole in fact!

What a freakin fool he is.

ENOUGH OF THE CRAP ALREADY MR. PRESIDENT!!!!!!!

:kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raschel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #38
44. I don't think he's a fool, and I don't think he wants to see anyone go without SS, but I think
it was a bad move because those words came out of HIS mouth, and people are going to remember it. Especially some elderly whom I can guarantee you are buzzing each other on the phone lines as we speak.

He should have left that to the Republicans, who really don't give a rat's ass if we starve or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CountAllVotes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #44
47. and the words will spread amongst the disabled
Might be silent it seems but I wonder how long this country will enjoy seeing disabled people on the streets with no food.

Soon it will look like the streets of Calcutta the way things are going.

As for Pres. Obama - he can go to hell!

Trying to get what he wants by throwing stones at the very weakest among us.

SHAME SHAME SHAME ON YOU MR. PRESIDENT! :mad:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raschel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #47
55. I guess I don't get the strategy. It just leaves him holding the bag. Most people aren't politically
informed and go off of sound bites. Most haven't heard the words of Orrin Hatch, etc. but they'll hear this.This is is a bad sound bite for the President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CountAllVotes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #55
60. yep, you nailed it
Most people don't frequent places like the DU.

They listen to Faux News, etc. for their "real" info. :puke:

It is literally like the blind and stupid leading the populace at large which is becoming more brainwashed with every day that passes!

It will be Obama's words that shall follow him forever. What a fool he is for doing this.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 05:11 AM
Response to Reply #38
132. Exactly. This and his willing to mess with OASDI and Medicare will hang on the necks of Democrats
from now on.

Whenever Rethugs can manage a cut, they will say, even a Democratic President acknowledged there's no choice but to cut these programs--and he had the support of "sane" Democrats.

If I were a Democrat in Congress, especially if I were up for re-election in 2012, I would be beside myself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 05:29 AM
Response to Reply #28
134. Not only the President's constituents will resent him. Everyone's constituents will.
The one upside may be that Rethugs hate OASDI so much that the corporate media may not fuel the flames--not until we get closer to the first Tuesday in November 2012, anyway.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kstewart33 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
29. Very smart return of fire by Obama.
McConnell's statement first, and then this from the prez.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #29
40. I see old turtle neck is complaining...so then things must be okay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 05:35 AM
Response to Reply #40
136. Talk about fallacious reasoning!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
31. And the literalists scream and the people who actually understand
politics say "Attaboy, President Obama." There is a difference in understanding displayed in this thread. That makes me sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bowens43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #31
59. ridiculous........
I am always amazed when I see posts like this one. It makes me sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #59
70. Reactionary Screamers make me sad- constantly reacting with absolutely no clue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 05:44 AM
Response to Reply #70
138. LOL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 05:30 AM
Response to Reply #31
135. I so agree about lack of understanding. You and I would probably point to different posts to
Edited on Wed Jul-13-11 05:33 AM by No Elephants
support our respective points, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CountAllVotes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
33. and while you play politics Mr. President
People relying on Social Security can just panic and freak out and worry that they will not have money for food, shelter and other necessities soon. Some might end up doing drastic things, like commit suicide even.

This is a real great way to get what you want Mr. President -- scare the sh*t out of the American people that rely of their Social Security every month.

Enough with all of your pandering and other crap!

Why don't you threaten the rich and all those banks you have been tossing billions of dollars at on a seemingly endless basis and end the god damn wars without end?

How many people will end up dying if this happens?

If even one person dies because of this, the blood is on your hands Mr. President! :mad:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
JAnthony Donating Member (745 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #33
42. We need something to scare the SH*T out of the complacent American
voters!

Obama needs to tell them WHY and WHO IS HOLDING THIS UP!

Republicans need to fear the American voter will no longer buy TREEPARTYBUBLICAN bull crap!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CountAllVotes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #42
48. is an elderly and/or disabled person "complacent"
It can be quite difficult for some to even get out of bed in the morning. I suppose this thought never occurred to you, or did it? Many of the elderly cannot see very well as age is cruel and slowly but surely robs people of their ability to do things in life -- like walk for example. No wheelchair for you loser is the message! It is awfully damn hard to be out there fighting when you have a progressive disease or are in a nursing home!

If this is how Obama is getting his agenda pushed through, whatever that "agenda" might be, I don't want a damn thing to do with it as it stinks like sh*t!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JAnthony Donating Member (745 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #48
50. Sometimes the truth STINKS! Too bad elder Americans
and those who voted for idiot Republicans will have to smell the stink of truth
just like the rest of us.

I'm a Social Security retiree, and I know I'm not alone knowing what might come down in the next month or two if there is no agreement.

Lack of a Social Security check will feel like a day at the park, compared to how the world economies will grind virtually to a hault, how many milllions MORE Americans will be out of work in two months, due to government shut-down, a debt crisis as well

Figure on eating your last fresh fruit or vegetable in the fall, since merchants will not be able to obtain them, transport them, stock them! Figure on shortages everywhere. Figure on a 25% drop in previously owned housing prices. There will simply be NO credit available.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CountAllVotes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #50
52. tell that to someone in a nursing home
Edited on Tue Jul-12-11 02:16 PM by CountAllVotes
You've got a pension or something else backing you up. If you are relying on SS for your livelihood, as are many Americans, you'd be pissed off, not accusing people of being "complacent".

Enjoy your fruits and vegetables. :puke:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JAnthony Donating Member (745 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #52
66. I have two relatives in Nursing Homes, they know what's up
as do I. And I depend upon Social Security and a small savings to live day to day.

Please take your attitude elsewhere, some of us seniors know we are about to be put out to slaughter through no fault of Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 04:57 AM
Response to Reply #50
129. And some time half truths, lies and damned lies stink even worse.
The money for OASDI is there. Most payments are direct deposit, made electronically. And, if anyone wanted to, he or she could have taken care of the other payments by now, there having been plenty of notice that a shutdown was a possibility.

Now, we're making excuses for Obama at the expense of the elderly and disabled? Christ, what the hell has happened to Democrats?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Downwinder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #48
56. Plus vision and hearing are not covered under Medicare.

You can have a walker or a wheelchair, but not both.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CountAllVotes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #56
57. you can get a wheelchair
But those that seem to think that Medicare pays 100% for scooters and wheelchairs (and even walkers for that matter) are far from being "free". YOU pay the extra money that Medicare doesn't pay and oh, you want a power wheelchair you say? Good damn luck on that one!

Medicare pays for some things yes, but not everything. Without a costly supplemental plan and other insurances for dental/vision, you are on your own.

MEDICARE FOR ALL, OH YEAH. Let's cut it more first and then dump it! :sarcasm: :grr:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raschel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #48
85. Thanks for being a voice for the elderly and disabled!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 05:47 AM
Response to Reply #42
139. Problem is, Obama would have to take responsibility for holding up OASDI payments, if they are held
Edited on Wed Jul-13-11 05:48 AM by No Elephants
up.

If you really don't get why, try reading the whole thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eilen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 01:44 PM
Response to Original message
37. So, he actually said this, it is not a statement
from an "unnamed Administration source".

I don't even think a Republican would make this threat.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #37
105. WHAT threat? This is REALITY because of what the R's are NOT doing.
Why is this so difficult to grasp?

Some of you are so blind to your anger at the President you seem to have forgotten what's going on here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eilen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 05:01 AM
Response to Reply #105
130. Scaring old and disabled people is poor leadership
As if Republicans care if poor people get their checks.
Why not announce no payments to military contractors. Haliburton will be on the phone in a NY minute telling Repubs they better pass it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bowens43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:31 PM
Response to Original message
58. So Obama resorts to scare tactics......
how pathetic....this man is no leader.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CountAllVotes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #58
61. yep, scare tactics
How very tacky at that. Scaring the sh*t out of people that can no longer work and have no other way to pay their bills.

Way to go Mr. President! :grr:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:28 AM
Response to Reply #58
99. When Hope (copyright 2008) fails, use Fear (copyright 2011).
The only good emotional motivator left for him now is Love, and we won't be seeing that card employed any time soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 05:53 AM
Response to Reply #99
140. I haven't finished reading this thread yet, but I'm guessing your post is the thread winner.
I might have added "contempt," but your post is better as is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:44 AM
Response to Reply #58
106. Bullshit. All he's doing is laying out what will happen because of Republican obstruction.
And as of this writing, the R's have started to blink.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Paper Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 02:37 PM
Response to Original message
62. Dear Mr President, will you be here to back me and others when
we cannot pay for our basic necessities. Do you think the electric company, my insurance company, my town tax collector gives a damn if my SS check does not come? That SS check is what I live on. You try it someday. Every political big-whig should try and get by on $951.00 a month. And...you want to take it away? Think I live too high of the hog with my 'entitlement?'.
We paid for this pittance, don't forget that. In my case for 50 years. Planning to give those dollars back to me?

How many more millions of people will have to be on welfare or other assistance because you folks in Washington are so out-of-touch with the plight of the average American. How many more of us will see the value of our houses go to zilch. Could not sell them if we wanted to. Where do we go from there, even if we can sell them, to the streets? You guys are playing with fire and, even though we are burned, you will be also.

Money for bombs but not for citizens. Don't you see something wrong with this picture?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hamsterjill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #62
67. Well said!
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RebelOne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
65. That is just wonderful, President Obama.
Edited on Tue Jul-12-11 03:05 PM by RebelOne
I voted for you not expecting you would do this to our seniors. I am collecting Social Security and I have enough in the bank to tide me over until this crisis has passed. I just hope the SS payments will be retroactive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:40 AM
Response to Reply #65
103. Why are you pissed at the POTUS?
Do you not realize whose fault this actually is?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
68. If he had the guts to do that -- they'd be no Repugs in Congress the day after that happened!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cognitive_Resonance Donating Member (733 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
72. Hardball. Keep turning up the heat on the GOP. Bohner is in a real no win position. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 06:03 AM
Response to Reply #72
142. It remains to be seen who ends up in a no win position over this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reformist2 Donating Member (998 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 03:39 PM
Response to Original message
74. Let the Repugs have their default... it will be the last thing they ever do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Islandlife Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
75. What, if anything, can the president guarantee
There are very few things guaranteed in life.

His statement is correct and he could spend the rest of his term listing other things he cannot guarantee and still not cover every possibility.

It is an empty statement worded to create fear and anger.

I don't buy it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 06:02 AM
Response to Reply #75
141. He could guaranty OASDI payments, if he had had the least desire to do so.
Most are made by direct deposit, electronically. He can certainly guaranty thos.

Checks that are mailed could have been readied well before now, along with mailing labels and stuffing of envelopes. (I have no idea how that is done, but, if it isn't mechanized, shame on our government.) He had plenty of notice this might be coming.

Failing use of a modicum of foresight and advance planning, he could ask for volunteers.

It's easy not to be able to guaranty something you have less than no desire to be able to guaranty.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Devil_Fish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 06:51 PM
Response to Original message
80. But he sure as hell can guarantee more drone strikes against brown people. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unkachuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 08:28 PM
Response to Original message
82. "...can't guarantee Social Security checks will go out Aug. 3rd..."
....as far as I know, in the seventy five years of the Social Security program there has never been a missed payment....

....any president associated with Social Security failing to pay beneficiaries won't be president for very long....can you say, one-term? All an opponent would have to do is promise he/she would never let Social Security default and they would have our votes, 88 million votes....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-11 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
83. OMG, does that include SSI?
:scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harvey007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:22 AM
Response to Original message
86. Obama gives Social Security warning in debt debate
Source: LA Times


President Obama said he "cannot guarantee" that millions of Social Security beneficiaries would get their checks as scheduled next month unless he and congressional leaders agreed to raise the nation's debt limit by Aug. 2, a warning that came as both sides ratcheted up the tension over the monthlong standoff.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-de...



But military spending can continue as usual.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emilyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #86
87. Fear ploy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #87
88. an unneccessary and SICKENING ploy
Edited on Tue Jul-12-11 11:11 PM by Skittles
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #88
90. True enough though you got to admit its a little funny to see the same tool (fear)
that the republicans have used so well themselves now being wielded against them it's almost...............karmic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #90
91. it's alarming SS recipients far more than REPUKES
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #91
92. I think thats the point kinda
Right now the republicans havent really felt the heat but getting dozens if not hundreds of phone calls from concerned voting seniors will worry the gop fast enough especially since alot of those same seniors helped so many republicans into office when the republicans attacked obamas health plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 06:07 AM
Response to Reply #90
143. Used against Rethugs? Why would they fear? They'll get their checks AND
hang this on Obama. It's the elderly and disabled who are being put into fear and anxiety.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #143
160. Why should they fear it? Because of the power the senior voters wield and its a power the
GOP knows full well because they used it to win alot of seats in the 2010 election themselves by getting the seniors afraid and angry at Obamas healthcare plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #88
109. Not a ploy. It's a FACT. -nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Downwinder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #86
89. I expected this. I'm good for three months.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RebelOne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #89
154. Well, if worse comes to worse, I'm good for a year. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Downwinder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #154
161. After three months, I'll have to go to jail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alarimer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #86
93. This should also apply to soldiers' pay.
Or any other government employee (Congress, the President, etc). All the pay will be reduced if the debt ceiling is not raised.

Note: this will never actually happen but the threat may be enough. Who knows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #93
95. Maybe but many of those in congress and the senate
Edited on Tue Jul-12-11 11:59 PM by cstanleytech
are wealthy already or well off so they probably will be ok unlike alot of the military or those who depend on social security who live check to check.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 06:14 AM
Response to Reply #93
144. I disagree as to troops. Pentagon salaries and military contractors, I'm right there with you,
though.

Constitution puts some restraints on what can legally be done with salaries of members of Congress--not that most of them are living hand to mouth (and if they are, they ought to cut expenses) anyway.

Congressional staffers, gophers, etc., however, are not Constitutionally protected. Neither is the President and his staffers or WH staff, from those who cook and clean in the WH to his Chicago corporatist Chief of Staff.

Do I expect to see Michelle in an apron, alone in the WH kitchen cooking and baking, though? Not really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bkkyosemite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #86
94. I think Obama
should have said I'm afraid I cannot promise Congress and the Senate will get their pay for next month and also I cannot promise their perks or their medical, dental etc benefits..instead of saying SS...If he only had .....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #94
96. Ya but that wouldnt have s much of the same potential to get the seniors
to start calling their representatives to stop digging in their heels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 06:16 AM
Response to Reply #94
145. Please see Reply 144.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
man4allcats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #86
97. If those checks don't go out as scheduled,
he might as well start packing his stuff. If I come up short of cash and have to move, I'm sure as hell gonna do everything I can to make sure he has to as well. I will never vote for any Republican, but that doesn't mean I'll vote for him instead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #86
98. I think he deliberately said this to provoke the constitutents of
the Republican party (well, and maybe a few others) to call their reps screaming, raise the cap, raise the cap....

It was a ploy.

Sam
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 06:17 AM
Response to Reply #98
146. Very cynical and callous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 09:13 AM
Response to Reply #146
151. I don't think so -- it is simply pretty strategic to get the American
people who will be most devastated by a failure to raise the debt limit by August 2 motivated to lean on their representatives. Obama himself, with many in his base alienated, cannot act alone. He must have the support of the average citizen. Telling them directly how adversely impacted they could be by a failure to raise the debt ceiling is simply honest and candid. Letting businesses know how they too will be adversely impacted is a stroke of genius inasmuch as that is the true base of the Republican party. Today we learn many have once again written a letter begging, begging, begging for a deal to be reached.

Obama's comments are instilling a sense of urgency into all walkers in American life to demand a deal from the Republicans, and they cannot ignore this. After all, some of these now awake donate to their (Republicans') campaign coffers. So the choice has been made clear: Republicans must deal or face the possibility of going down in defeat in upcoming elections. Which alternative do you think they will choose?

Sam
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #86
101. Cheap trick on Obama's part.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #86
102. And whose fault is that?
This is a direct consequence of Republican bullshit in Congress. And as I write this, Republicans have blinked after POTUS put the implication out there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mizmoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:31 AM
Response to Original message
100. Maybe it's not a gambit
He's pointing out consequences, not playing games.

A few years ago our banking system almost collapsed. We have two wars we can't afford to stay in, and can't seem to get out of. Unemployment is at record highs. Over 10% of the population is on food stamps. Our infrastructure is falling apart. Revenue does not even come close to our expenses. And now there's real talk of our defaulting on our debt, the only way we can meet our expenses. Does anyone really thing that government direct payments could continue very long undisturbed if we defaulted, or can you see a fall-of-the-Soviet-Union style collapse?

This has been coming for decades.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 01:47 AM
Response to Reply #100
107. Finally - someone who understands the plain reality.
Some around here are so invested in seeing a conspiracy in everything said and done by POTUS they don't know a basic statement of consequence when it's right in front of them.

That's pretty bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nossida Donating Member (205 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 03:16 AM
Response to Original message
110. actually
All this Political Theater is rather entertaining.
But does anyone actually believe Wall Street, and
the Corporate Oligarchs, will allow their Puppets
in the republican Party put the US into default?

The Thugs are simply pursuing their DO NOTHING
policy since the 2010 election. Let the Right
wing run their mouths, and dig their own grave.
Between Paul Ryan's utter nonsense, and this US
Debt Limit farce, their goose is already cooked
in 2012.

Now about that Rupert Murdoch/Fox scandal.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 06:22 AM
Response to Original message
147. Cynical, callous, and may backfire badly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
150. It's a kind of political theater. There's no reason why SS checks should be held up.
The Federal government has billions of dollars of bills due every day. It can stiff any of thousands of vendors. It doesn't
need to stiff SS recipients.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
152. But payments to Wall Street investors will continue as scheduled. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
buckrogers1965 Donating Member (515 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 09:53 AM
Response to Original message
153. 100% congresses fault.
Congress says to spend "X". The president has to spend "X". Congress says to raise "Y" revenue. The president raises "Y" revenue. If "Y-X" is more money than we have, we have to borrow "Z" upto the limit that congress sets.

Congress said to spend over the limit. The president is violating the law if he spends or doesn't spend.

If we republicans actually cared about a balanced budget we would have done something about this when we had control of congress and the presidency for the better part of a decade.

This is a manufactured crisis and both "sides" are playing their parts just like any big time wrestling event.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rayofreason Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 10:36 AM
Response to Original message
157. So the whole "trust fund" thing was a lie? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evasporque Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
159. He just played the "GOP starving the seniors" card...hahahaha! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 17th 2019, 11:01 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC