akuma587 said:
Social Security is still in the green. What are you talking about? Unfunded does not mean you are running yearly surpluses. It is projected to go into the red in the future, which can be easily solved by: 1) Raising the age that people can initially collect at to correlate with the increase in average life expectancy (doesn't take a statistician to tell you that). 2) Increase the amount of income that is taxable by payroll taxes on people making over $100,000. 3) Decrease benefits, especially for those who were in a higher tax bracket (at least until the baby boomer generation passes since they have offset the balance) 4) Potentially increase payroll taxes across the board as needed if you are still running low, and then drop them back down when the boomer generation passes. Its no different than anything else. You decrease spending and increase your income and you will remain solvent.
|
No social security isn't in the green.
It was in the green however the government spent all that money and all there is left is a big "IOU" meaning we're running on what's coming in now to fund those who are living now.
There is no money in the Social Security Trust Fund. We're living hand to mouth.
These [Trust Fund] balances are available to finance future benefit payments and other Trust Fund expenditures – but only in a bookkeeping sense.... They do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits. Instead, they are claims on the Treasury that, when redeemed, will have to be financed by raising taxes, borrowing from the public, or reducing benefits or other expenditures. The existence of large Trust Fund balances, therefore, does not, by itself, have any impact on the Government’s ability to pay benefits. (from FY 2000 Budget, Analytical Perspectives, p. 337)
Just like everything else, SS was funded on the dumbass principle that "Hey our economy will constantly grow and always get better right?"
