Social Security is Not a Ponzi Scheme, Mr. Perry (It's worse)
- Thread starter cawacko
- Start date
cawacko
Well-known member
So you raise taxes to cover that? And what about Medicare and Medicaid? Will we still be facing issues with those programs at the same time which would call for additional raising of taxes?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
ROFLMAO... your saying it 'isn't a big deal' over and over again doesn't make it true.
If you had the option of 3.5% GDP growth and 2.8%... is that a big deal? It is.... It just is.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Don't you know? If you just keep raising taxes all problems disappear. Stoopit.
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Entitlement my butt!!! I paid for my Social Security Insurance since I was 15 yrs. old! My benefits aren't some kind of charity or handout! Congressional benefits -free health care, outrageous retirement packages, 67 paid holidays, three weeks paid vacation, unlimited paid sick days -now THAT'S welfare. And Congress has the nerve to call my retirement an Entitlement?
$6.5 Trillion over 75 years is not a big deal. The economy is projected to generate $929 Trillion over that period. $6.5 Trillion in the abstract is a huge sum of money, but in the context of 75 years and an economy expected to generate $928 Trillion it is not a big deal at all.
And putting it in terms of GDP growth is silly. That 0.7%, even if it is made up through taxes, will be circulated back into the economy through benefits payments.
cawacko
Well-known member
I got this quote from the book Endgame: The End of the Debt Supercycle written by John Mauldin and it comes from a paper he references called The Future of Public Debt: Prospects and Implications and it was put out by the Bank of International Settlements (BIS).
"As frightening as it is to consider public debt increasing to more than 100% of GDP, an even greater danger arises from a rapidly ageing population. The related unfunded liabilities are large and growing, and should be a central part of today's long-term fiscal planning. It is essential the governments not be lulled into complacency by the ease with which they have financed their deficits so far."
No disrespect Dung but there is absolutely no way that just kicking the can on S.S. and saying it won't be a problem in the future is in anyway prudent or beneficial to our country.
"As frightening as it is to consider public debt increasing to more than 100% of GDP, an even greater danger arises from a rapidly ageing population. The related unfunded liabilities are large and growing, and should be a central part of today's long-term fiscal planning. It is essential the governments not be lulled into complacency by the ease with which they have financed their deficits so far."
No disrespect Dung but there is absolutely no way that just kicking the can on S.S. and saying it won't be a problem in the future is in anyway prudent or beneficial to our country.
The unfunded liabilities he is referencing likely are not Social Security liabilities. They are in all likelihood Medicare liabilities. As I said, Medicare is a problem as it gets exponentially more expensive as a percentage of GDP over time. Social Security does not. There is an increase and leveling off. Check out Figure A-1 on page 68 of the CBO's long term budget outlook below. Social Security remains flat, healthcare related costs increase substantially. Social Security is not the problem.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/115xx/doc11579/06-30-LTBO.pdf
Minister of Truth
Practically Perfect
People should remember that when addressing SS, the reason why they should keep their hands off of benefits for people over 55 is because they all tend to have the same attitude here--they paid into it so its their money and not a taxpayer-funded entitlement.
cawacko
Well-known member
What would your proposed reform be to Medicare and Medicaid if you were in charge?
Part D drugs, be able to negotiate for lower prices! The pharma got the Congress in their pockets, big time!
Medicine for profit is bad!!!!!!