Social Security

By IsaacBackus
Sep 30, 2010 11:42 AM

This morning I saw the Honorable Richard Neal’s ad on TV touting that he protected Social Security from Wall Street. I was in PA last week and saw a similar ad by Rep. Paul Kanjorski. Nothing makes me madder than this sophistry on Social Security. Anyone whose thinking is based in reality knows that an insurance program must have a fund that is invested for growth to meet future liabilities. Rep. Neal is communicating to us loud and clear that he is incompetent in this area. He is part of the Congress that does not understand that they must grow the fund to pay future benefits. If you have any doubt, find Walter E. Williams, The National Ponzi Scheme (COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.), on Google. “We have a national Ponzi scheme where Congress collects about $785 billion in Social Security taxes from about 163 million workers to send out $585 billion to 50 million Social Security recipients. Social Security’s trustees tell us that the surplus goes into a $2.2 trillion trust fund to meet future obligations. The problem is whatever difference between Social Security taxes and benefits paid out is spent by Congress. What the Treasury Department does is give the Social Security Trust Fund non-marketable ‘special issue government securities’ that are simply bookkeeping entries that are IOUs.” “According to Social Security trustee estimates, around 2016 the amount of Social Security benefits paid will exceed taxes collected. That means one of two things, or both, must happen: Congress will raise taxes and/or slash promised Social Security benefits. Each year the situation will get worse since the number of retirees is predicted to increase relative to the number in the workforce paying taxes. In 1940, there were 42 workers per retiree, in 1950 there were 16, today there are 3 and in 20 or 30 years there will be 2 or fewer workers per retiree.” “Social Security is unsustainable because it is not meeting the first order condition of a Ponzi scheme, namely expanding the pool of suckers. Social Security has been one congressional lie after another since its inception....” “...In Flemming vs Nestor (1960), the U.S. Supreme court held that you have no 'accrued property rights' to a Social Security check. That means Congress can do anything it wishes with Social Security. There is little or nothing that can be done to prevent the economic and political chaos that will result from the collapse of Social Security.” I am voting for Tom Wesley because I believe he is committed to fiscal responsibility.