I mean it sounds like you're agreeing with me in a complicated way, the trust fund is still money owed to the public so it should be counted when we talk about the debt. Yes?
> I mean it sounds like you're agreeing with me in a complicated way, the trust fund is still money owed to the public so it should be counted when we talk about the debt. Yes?
Yes - the SS Trust Fund holds $2.9T in Treasuries. They matter as much as the other 80% of Treasuries.
The larger issue with SS is that it's not funded to meet its future obligations.
That's a problem regardless of whether the US government defaults.
I don't think it's particularly important to single out SS in this discussion about US debt.
SS was designed that you'd get $x dollars in the future. It didn't mean that $x would buy you a certain lifestyle.
There was no guarantee that ~95% of adults would still be working when you retire, and that you'd be able to get waited on in restaurants for $10.
If the US government spends into oblivion - it affects everyone. Especially when it spends to pay people not to work. I don't think SS beneficiaries get hit particularly hard.
What I think is problematic is people thinking that SS beneficiaries should be the only people immune to the US government overspending.
As is typical in this country - no one wants to solve hard problems - they just want to make sure no problems affect them.
SS is mostly pay-as-you-go (~93% of income). You don't pay into SS, and they buy treasuries, and hold them for you as some terrible investment portfolio.
The amount of revenue SS gets from Treasury payments (~7%) is tiny compared to how much is paid into it annually.
You're not technically paying for YOUR retirement. You're paying for someone else's retirement, and at any point it can become popular to reduce or increase SS payments.
The Treasury piece is not particularly important to the conversation about total US debt.
Yes - the SS Trust Fund holds $2.9T in Treasuries. They matter as much as the other 80% of Treasuries.
The larger issue with SS is that it's not funded to meet its future obligations.
That's a problem regardless of whether the US government defaults.
I don't think it's particularly important to single out SS in this discussion about US debt.
SS was designed that you'd get $x dollars in the future. It didn't mean that $x would buy you a certain lifestyle.
There was no guarantee that ~95% of adults would still be working when you retire, and that you'd be able to get waited on in restaurants for $10.
If the US government spends into oblivion - it affects everyone. Especially when it spends to pay people not to work. I don't think SS beneficiaries get hit particularly hard.
What I think is problematic is people thinking that SS beneficiaries should be the only people immune to the US government overspending.
As is typical in this country - no one wants to solve hard problems - they just want to make sure no problems affect them.
SS is mostly pay-as-you-go (~93% of income). You don't pay into SS, and they buy treasuries, and hold them for you as some terrible investment portfolio.
The amount of revenue SS gets from Treasury payments (~7%) is tiny compared to how much is paid into it annually.
You're not technically paying for YOUR retirement. You're paying for someone else's retirement, and at any point it can become popular to reduce or increase SS payments.
The Treasury piece is not particularly important to the conversation about total US debt.