Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: MadIsh32
Didn't baby boomers work in that economy and contribute massively to the SS system, pay taxes, purchase houses and consumer goods during that time.

Who spent the SS surpluses? Who spent all that tax money? Who made the laws that sent the manufacturing to other countries?

Who were the ones called upon to go to Vietnam? Mostly baby boomers from what I know.

22 posted on 11/06/2015 8:25:04 AM PST by Parmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Parmy

“When you look at the numbers, the advantages boomers have enjoyed are breathtaking. Start with the economy. Boomers went to work in a job market that their children rightly romanticize. It delivered living-wage work for wide swaths of Americans, even those who didn’t go to college, which by the way cost a fraction of what higher education costs today, even after you adjust for inflation. A single earner could provide for a family. Employees could reasonably expect to advance in their companies and work their way into the middle class. Incomes grew across the board.”

So what did boomers do with those taxes and the money that was contributed to the economy? Who made laws sending manufacturing to other nations. Boomers with the applause of the boomers who voted for them.


25 posted on 11/06/2015 8:26:59 AM PST by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: Parmy
Who spent the SS surpluses?

Short answer: your parents and grandparents. If you are collecting Social Security, you did.

The surplus wasn't as large as a lot of people think. It is about to peak, but it's still only enough to pay less than 3 years of benefits.

The reason it's that small? It's because most of the payroll taxes collected over the past 40 years were immediately paid as benefits.

In the 70's, Congress increased old age benefits to an unsustainable level, and/or didn't raise taxes high enough to compensate. They tried to correct it in the 80's, but it wasn't enough: the economic and demographic assumptions were too optimistic.

And I'll save you the effort of retorting with the usual canards: It wasn't SSI -- that's separately funded from the general fund. And it wasn't disability fraud -- while the DI fund has a more severe problem, it's separately accounted with it's own trust fund and a dedicated portion of the payroll tax.

I'm referring only to the OASI (old age and survivor insurance) benefits.

Who spent all that tax money?

If you are referring to the surplus in the Trust Fund: it wasn't spent, it was loaned. It's currently in the equivalent of US Treasury Bonds, as required by law when Social Security was created.

In 2010, the payroll taxes became insufficient to pay benefits, so Social Security started withdrawing from the Trust Fund. It's a relatively small amount, and the dividends collected are sufficient to cover the withdrawals. But, that will change in the next few years, and the Trust Fund balance will start to decline -- until about 2034 when it hits zero.

If nothing is done and the Trust Fund hits zero, benefits will be reduced about 21%, by law. Social Security can't borrow money.

To give you an idea of the severity of the problem right now, you can read the summary of the 2015 Trustees Report, starting at the bottom of page 7:

https://www.socialsecurity.gov/oact/tr/2015/tr2015.pdf

For the combined OASI and DI Trust Funds to remain solvent throughout the 75-year projection period: (1) revenues would have to increase by an amount equivalent to an immediate and permanent payroll tax rate increase of 2.62 percentage points (from its current level of 12.40 percent to 15.02 percent, a relative increase of 21.1 percent); (2) scheduled benefits during the period would have to be reduced by an amount equivalent to an immediate and permanent reduction of 16.4 percent applied to all current and future beneficiaries, or 19.6 percent if the reductions were applied only to those who become initially eligible for benefits in 2015 or later; or (3) some combination of these approaches would have to be adopted.

87 posted on 11/06/2015 9:08:14 AM PST by justlurking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson