New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Myths About Social Security

The trustees are likely using a model that reinforces the notion that the money the government can spend is limited to what they take in as revenue plus what they borrow from investors (tbills). The budget is really not that important to the solvency of this program unless someone decides that the budget itself is the most important factor. I used to think this myself. But now I have finally understood the real nature of fiat money and a sovereign currency. The most important goal of all monetary and fiscal policy should be creating an economy that works for as many as possible without getting too hot or too cold. Right now, the FED is mostly propping up balance sheets and injecting money into the system through financial institutions. I think it is limited by law in this manner.

There is no limit to what we can borrow from investors theoretically. It is only limited by policy and inflation. The FED can inject money into the system at any part of the system if legislation allowed it. This is an issue of policy not budgets. Change the policy and the problem goes away.
 

Joe Economist

Council Member
The trustees are likely using a model that reinforces the notion that the money the government can spend is limited to what they take in as revenue plus what they borrow from investors (tbills). The budget is really not that important to the solvency of this program unless someone decides that the budget itself is the most important factor. I used to think this myself. But now I have finally understood the real nature of fiat money and a sovereign currency. The most important goal of all monetary and fiscal policy should be creating an economy that works for as many as possible without getting too hot or too cold. Right now, the FED is mostly propping up balance sheets and injecting money into the system through financial institutions. I think it is limited by law in this manner.

There is no limit to what we can borrow from investors theoretically. It is only limited by policy and inflation. The FED can inject money into the system at any part of the system if legislation allowed it. This is an issue of policy not budgets. Change the policy and the problem goes away.
To simplify, the Trustees are applying the current law of Social Security and the current laws of economic to size the problem Social Security instead of daydreaming about a world where currency has no meaning.

" I used to think this myself. But now I have finally understood the real nature of fiat money and a sovereign currency."

Drank the kool aid? I am bathing in it.
 

Sunset Rose

Mayor
Supporting Member
As life expectency continues to rise, the full retirement age needs to also go up.

Much of the Social Security dollars pay disability payments. There needs to be an incentive program implemented that will encourage SSA employees to weed our those who are scamming the system. We have seen too much fraud that allows "our" dollars to pay those perfectly fit and well enough to maintain employment.

Get Congress off their duffs and get this immigration issue worked out! We have thousands of people working for cash, while they and their employers don't pay a cent into the system. Do a better job of penalizing those who hire "day workers" and pay them under the table.

And... raise the Social Security tax where today's workers pay in more. Heck, my wife and I paid substantially to raise our kids. Let them toss a little more into my retirement fund. Or course, we're both in our late 60's and receiving full SSA benefits!!! :)
Full retirement age does not need to go up. I don't want to work until I'm too weak and crippled to walk. If you want to do that, you go right ahead.
 

Klunker

Council Member
Full retirement age does not need to go up. I don't want to work until I'm too weak and crippled to walk. If you want to do that, you go right ahead.
See, it's easy for me to suggest moving full retirement age upwards. I'm already there. My full retirement age was 66. I've started drawing benefits almost 2 years ago. My wife has drawn almost one year. We waited until we attained our full retirment ages, since we both continue to work full time. That way, we can pretty well earn what we want without effecting our ss benefits.
We worked for it and paid in to it. The longer we keep working... at today's income level, the more low salaried years drop off the back end and our benefits go up. We both also love our work. Too many people retire and are gone within a short while. Work keeps minds and bodies sharp and keeps maintains a purpose to get up and get motivated each and every day.

I do honestly believe the miracles of modern medical technology have given us longer life expectencies. Those longer lives mean we are generally a healthier population than we were a couple decades ago. So, we can be productive members of society longer. If we stay working longer, could gradual raising of the full retirment age mean all might get some of what they've paid in, vs. the younger generation getting none of what they paid in back in benefits?
 

Sunset Rose

Mayor
Supporting Member
See, it's easy for me to suggest moving full retirement age upwards. I'm already there. My full retirement age was 66. I've started drawing benefits almost 2 years ago. My wife has drawn almost one year. We waited until we attained our full retirment ages, since we both continue to work full time. That way, we can pretty well earn what we want without effecting our ss benefits.
We worked for it and paid in to it. The longer we keep working... at today's income level, the more low salaried years drop off the back end and our benefits go up. We both also love our work. Too many people retire and are gone within a short while. Work keeps minds and bodies sharp and keeps maintains a purpose to get up and get motivated each and every day.

I do honestly believe the miracles of modern medical technology have given us longer life expectencies. Those longer lives mean we are generally a healthier population than we were a couple decades ago. So, we can be productive members of society longer. If we stay working longer, could gradual raising of the full retirment age mean all might get some of what they've paid in, vs. the younger generation getting none of what they paid in back in benefits?
I'm a nurse. Nursing is hard work so I want to retire as soon as I can. You and your wife must not have physically hard jobs. I might look for some little job after I retire from nursing, I don't know yet. But I'm sure not going to keep being a nurse until I'm 66 years old. I've seen folks who die soon after retiring---hope that is not my fate!
 

Joe Economist

Council Member
Full retirement age does not need to go up. I don't want to work until I'm too weak and crippled to walk. If you want to do that, you go right ahead.
Then you need to organize with people like you to make sure that the system is sound.

The idea that raising the retirement age solves Social Security can be reduced to our children (ie you) will accept less than we give ourselves. So to get yours, you will have to convince your kids that they deserve less. This is a mathematical consequence not because we are living longer.
 

Joe Economist

Council Member
As life expectency continues to rise, the full retirement age needs to also go up.

Much of the Social Security dollars pay disability payments. There needs to be an incentive program implemented that will encourage SSA employees to weed our those who are scamming the system. We have seen too much fraud that allows "our" dollars to pay those perfectly fit and well enough to maintain employment.

Get Congress off their duffs and get this immigration issue worked out! We have thousands of people working for cash, while they and their employers don't pay a cent into the system. Do a better job of penalizing those who hire "day workers" and pay them under the table.

And... raise the Social Security tax where today's workers pay in more. Heck, my wife and I paid substantially to raise our kids. Let them toss a little more into my retirement fund. Or course, we're both in our late 60's and receiving full SSA benefits!!! :)
The most pressing problem in Social Security, is the lack of facts in the debate.

As the OP clearly shows raising life expectancy by itself does not hurt Social Security. If you think that SS disability takes up 'much' of the dollars, you ought to show it.

DI is completely separate from OAS. So it takes up none of the resources dedicated to the retirement benefits.

Immigration does not help SS. In fact, undocumented workers contribute nearly 10 billion a year from which they cannot collect benefits.

Just opinion -

I am glad that you spent money on your kids. If you want someone to pay more you should contact them instead of asking strangers for help.
 

Joe Economist

Council Member
Not to dismiss a source like HuffingtonPost, I have exchanged emails with SSA on this question. It was one of a number of questions that I had about the moneys-worth studies. They believe that statistically the longer life of high-wage workers over low-wage workers is offset by the increase in disability. I have my doubts, but I haven't found any relevant research on the question.

You should note that 'rich' and 'high-wage' are not the same thing. Your article does not even address the question raised by the earlier comment.
 
Last edited:
Top