SS Trust Fund - "We lost $1.1 Trillion last year!"

Bruce Krasting's picture
Yes, that is a correct headline. In its annual report to Congress last
week SS acknowledged that its condition had sharply deteriorated in
2010. This sentence from the report is all you really need to know about
what the status is:

The open group unfunded obligation over the 75-year projection period has increased from $5.4 trillion (present discounted value as of January 1, 2010) to $6.5 trillion (present discounted value as of January 1, 2011).

Note that this is a present value calculation. The total unfunded
obligation has grown by a cool $1.1 trillion in just a year. In other
words, if we had to shore up the TF to the level that it was just a year
ago the USA would have to write a check for $1.1 T. The unfunded status
was a disaster a year ago at $5.6T, it got worse by 20% during 2010.
The cost of “fixing” SS goes up as a result. To put things in balance
one of these two extremes are now required:

For the combined OASDI Trust Funds to remain solvent, the payroll tax rate could be increased an immediate and permanent 2.15%, (or) scheduled benefits could be reduced by an immediate and permanent 13.8%.

If you think this a ho-hum result, think again. If benefits get cut
across the board by 14% we will have many seniors who will fall into a
hole. An increase in payroll taxes of 2.15% is simply not going to
happen anytime soon. There is no support in Congress for an increase
like that. It would mean that taxes on all workers/employers would have
to go up by $110b in the first year and rise every year thereafter. This
would be a very regressive tax increase that hurts lower end workers
the hardest. For 2011 there is already a payroll tax holiday of 2%. If
the required increases take place in 2012 it would mean a 3.2% reduction
in wages. Kiss the economy goodbye under that scenario.

I underlined the TF’s use of the words immediate and permanent as this language highlights the fact there can be no delaying on the fixes necessary at SS. One thing that you can take to the bank is that nothing will happen with SS in 2011 or 2012.
This is a problem that will simmer for at least another 24 months. This
delay will prove to be very costly for all involved. Both the required
tax increases and/or the required cutbacks will be much larger than

The NPV of the unfunded liabilities at SS are now growing by at least
$100b a month. One would think that this massive cost would spur some
response in D.C. Don’t count on it. As a result, SS is going to come off the rails in about two years.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Hobbleknee's picture

Why doesn't anyone file a class-action lawsuit, press charges, sue the government for fraud?

Piranhanoia's picture

It was a brilliant idea that was corrupted by the touch of human garbage in search of unearned income. It has been distorted and defrauded into this condition. It has been used as a cash cow by every get rich con in politics since.  Since the people of this country have only one real concern, watch what happens when they find out. Speaking aloud the idea that there is no budget for it will bring back the guillotine with myriad flavors, each with the same end, swift and continous.   Within the mansions, nothing from the dirty streets below shall rise, but the blood will flow from above just the same.

Wait and see just how fast these little empty suits squirm to pass the forever funding act when their constituents butcher a few for dogfood.  Any bets?

RoRoTrader's picture

hey bruce,

went long the USD/JPY tonight at 80.75, stop of 79.50. also long AUD/JPY at 85.60, stop at 84.25.

i know it looks like a strange correlation being short equity indexes and short the Yen, but think the Yen is on the chopping block along with stock prices.

also shorted the AUD/CAD just over 1.03........wrestling of the strong. i bet CAD

V shall see as the Germans say.

best regards



Bruce Krasting's picture

I wish you well with these. I like the long $ yen. I have no clue AUSCAD.

Watauga's picture

The greatest acts of evil in the United States since the two nearly unspeakable acts of evil (the slaughter of the "native" population and slavery):

(1) Lincoln's War Against the the C.S.A. and the United States Constitution (yes, the slaves ended up "free," which of course was a good, but the means was pure evil), which crushed limited government and allowed for the creation of the Leviathan State;

(2) Wilson's War Against Germany (a war the U.S. had no business fighting), fought solely to expand the American Empire;

(3) FDR's War on the U.S. Constitution, free enterprise, and private property (there may have been no more evil a President in U.S. history);

(4) LBJ's/Democrat's great vote-grab, which has sustained the Evil Party for 50 years, otherwise known as the Immigration Act of 1965 (the result of this has been to destroy the Western foundations of the American Civilization);

(5) Obama's massive expansion of Federal Power at the expense of both the People and the States, all while massing debt that cannot ever be repaid (the goal here is to crush the United States-as-we-know-it so that the Radical Left can rebuild it in the image of its favorite model, the USSR).

Lincoln's salvo against limited government, ultimately, is responsible for all the rest, for all the rest have flowed freely from that first strike.

NotApplicable's picture

While I agree with your arguments, they are hardly the first salvos against a republic of individuals living under liberty.

The Monroe Doctrine institutionalized US imperialism in the Americas.

Before that, Madison's War of 1812.

Before that, Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase.

All of these are government exerting authority over an ever enlarging area. But wait, there's more!

The Constitutional Convention itself was a coup, as it was supposed to further negotiate the Articles of Confederation amongst the states. Instead, they closed all the doors and windows in the heat of a Philly summer, and scrapped them.

The flaw, see, comes from the fallacy that man needs to be ruled by others. Man has always been, and will always be self-ruled. Only through violence, coercion or instillation of false beliefs is this not self-evident. External rule is nothing but a criminal enterprise in the form of a con-game.

Pitchman's picture

Like the President and his campaign promisses...


They looted the till and now they will make us pay for it.

treach•er•ous (trchr-s) adj.

- Marked by betrayal of fidelity, confidence, or trust; perfidious. See Synonyms at faithless.
- Not to be relied on; not dependable or trustworthy.
- Marked by unforeseen hazards; dangerous or deceptive

See minutes 7:00 to 14:00 of "Behind the Veil" Here.  While the film's left slant is swayed by the two party narrative; Larry Pinkney's insight on the Obama brand at 20:40 and "The Republicrats" at 1:39:22 cracks this myth and speaks to the heart of a failed system.  If you watch nothing else, see the Chris Hedges speech on hope at 1:45:00.  

Uncovered; is a system that affords three wars and tax cuts for the wealthiest few but can't afford to maintain our national parks or vital services for the most vulnerable among us.  While insightful, we cannot endorse the notion that free market capitalism is a failure.  It, like our beloved democratic republic and the rule of law has been hijacked and subverted for the benefit of a powerful few.  No mater the system or it's rhetoric; human evolution is marked by man's struggle for sovereignty and self rule against the tyranny of power and control. "Behind the Veil" exposes a treacherous ploy purchased through, and implemented by, those we trust to represent us....

In March of 2009 Bloomberg reported the Government and Federal Reserve had spent, lent, or committed $12.8 Trillion on the bailouts.  Today you can add to this; our continual support of Fanny and Freddy, the Federal Reserve's 'Quantitative Easing' programs at about $100 billion per month and that figure stands near $16 Trillion or higher.  Regardless; it is the largest transfer of wealth in human history and it continues unabated and wholly unchallenged.  

Meanwhile the Obama administration 

  • Increases secrecy, blocking more Freedom of Information Act request in 2009 than the Bush administration in 2008. - Huffington Post, March 16, 2010
  • Fights for Government immunity in prosecutions for domestic spying . - Electronic Frontier Foundation April 7, 2009 
  • Extends the Patriot Act without any reforms. - CS Monitor, March, 1, 2010
  • Cracks down on government whistle-blowers more than any President in history. - New York Times, June 11, 2010

Read the rest Here

"by their fruits ye shall know them” – Mathew 7:16

 - Inflection Point


honestann's picture

Wow!  I guess I'm not really surprised one bit, but seeing this level admitted by the predators-that-be themselves is a cold splash in the face.  Who knows how bad the reality is.

The trends and bad events are getting so bad, so fast, you gotta almost wonder whether the predators-that-be will purposely let RonPaul win in 2012, so they and their mainstream media whores can "once and for all" pretend liberty and Austrian economics don't work by dumping the mass of the world in freefall on the lap of RonPaul, then pointing out 4 years later that his "theories" and "policies" were insufficient to "fix everything" in 4 years.

I know... won't happen.  But at some point the predators-that-be will surely realize what it might be like to all be wearing bullseyes when 7 billion people go crazy as the world economy totally collapses, and people get sick and tired of endless fraudulant, destructive wars.  Obviously that's what the police state is for, but... we all gotta wonder what it's gonna be like when the dam of worldwide fury breaks wide open.

GreenSideUp's picture

The trends and bad events are getting so bad, so fast, you gotta almost wonder whether the predators-that-be will purposely let RonPaul win in 2012, so they and their mainstream media whores can "once and for all" pretend liberty and Austrian economics don't work by dumping the mass of the world in freefall on the lap of RonPaul, then pointing out 4 years later that his "theories" and "policies" were insufficient to "fix everything" in 4 years.

Precisely what I've been thinking.  :)

NotApplicable's picture

This wouldn't surprise me, though, instead of letting him win, I see it more as they might fail to stop him. If that happens, then they unleash Plan B (which is really just Plan A with a different storyline), and blame everything on his "kooky antiquated ideology."

SmittyinLA's picture

Hey financing foreign invasion both at home and abroad is expensive, I say we cut both .

First we withdraw from Bosnia, Afpak, Iraq, So Korea (they can take care of themselves) and all of Africa, then at home we enact a "immigrant charge law" that includes SS & Medicare/Medicaid benefits.

jmc8888's picture

Um, yeah, SS is doing bad because the economy has fallen off a cliff.

It would surprise me to see it actually functioning.

You don't get rid of stank by changing your clothes, you have to take a shower.

SS itself is dependant on people paying in.....if they aren't paying in.....especially at a time with greater people dependant cyclically, then yes, it's going to look bad.

It's all about Glass-Steagall

No Glass-Steagall

No Economic recovery

Not enough pay into social security

It really is that simple. 

While we're at it, since we're saying what should be, we should increase payments to everybody on SS because it's been lagging for a generation.  We need to catch up and actually pay people what they deserve, which is MORE than NOW.

Social Security is in trouble, 99 percent because of the economy, 1 percent because of demographics.  I'm not poo-pooing demographics, it's that everybody else is poo-pooing the drag on social security because of the economy.  Not just the top level stuff either, the lower level stuff....private sector wage growth.

Decades of low wage growth under inflation (hidden through bunk stats)

Fewer people working

People working fewer hours

Everything that caused the above three things, will lead us to where we are.

Demographics is not causing this.  It sure ain't helping, but the crux is not demographics, its economics.

Glass-Steagall is the only way to set the system CORRECTLY, and thus despite the demographic headwinds, SS paying out MORE benefits, would be perfectly solvent.

SS needs to be expanded and strengthened.  Not reduced, marginalized, and thrown away.  If social security doesn't exist, or is reduced, you are that much more at prey from Goldman Sucks type banksters. 

So Bruce....not only will doing something to SS NOT CHANGE THE ECONOMIC PICTURE.

Implementing wall street (non) think tank ideas of altering social security, will not save the economy.  If anything it will make them worse.

Doing anything with social security is a waste of time, as long as Glass-Steagall isn't passed.

If you don't put on the turnicate, pouring more blood into the patient is FUCKING USELESS.

Put the Glass-Steagall turnicate on, and suddenly we aren't on that slippery slope. Suddenly the changes we make aren't like pissing into the wind.

Then you'd find out, merely with the reenactment and follow through on Glass-STeagall....there is no medicare problem, no social security problem, etc.

There is only a MONETARY problem.  A problem of MONETARISM.

MONETARISM is destroying Social Security. NOTHING ELSE.  Not demographics, not old people living's MONETARISM.

Monetarism is stealing everything from us, and it's what America was created to NOT BE.

Hamiltonian Credit System


Federal Reserve Monetary System (Roman, Venetian, London style)

What we are looking at with SS is merely a reflection of results within our monetary system.

It's fucked up, because the system is fucked up.  Nothing more, nothing less.

So should we be focused on social security? Why? It's a fucking symptom. 

Giving one robitussin, doesn't get rid of the cold.

So Bruce, instead of telling everybody we need a different formula of robitussin, perhaps we should see Dr. Glass Steagall.

But you see, as it would invalidate one set of beliefs that are currently in place, it will also thwart its current opposition, which really isn't opposition, since they're both MONETARY viewpoints.

You see, even the oppositions monetary viewpoints will get crushed, so they're too much of a pussy to say the truth, because they (austrians or like) will have their idiot ideas thrown out for the crap that it is, just like the Keynesians.

Austrian or Keynesian isn't a question, it's a grouping of dipshit monetarists.

You have to see the problem beyond the viewpoint of a monetarist, or you'll truly be Forrest Gump. 

Glass-Steagall, and fix the issues that are ERODING Social Security.

Focus on the crux of the problem, not the elastic periphery that can change on a dime, based on the conditions set by the structure of the system. 

It's not about fixing social security, that is too simple.  It's about fixing the entire system, by switching from a broken down, bankrupt one, to a real one.

Then with THAT in place, social security would be fine.

So why are we going down this sophistry route? We have to do something about SS.....really?  How about no, we fix the problem which is affecting and creating problems within Social security....and funny enough causing problems everywhere, including medicare.

You mean fixing the SAME problem that is affecting, jobs, education, research and development, capital investment, infrastructure, energy, space, water, resources, state gov'ts, federal gov't, gov'ts world-wide, (and SS/Medicare as said earlier)...can solve all these problems, or at least if not directly solve them, allow the means to solve them?  Kill all those birds, a flock of black swans, with one stone?

Wow...and it's true.

...and what's the best way to effect all this change? To set us up to succeed not to fail, by giving us the means to address the issues?


...and why should we be going another direction, when doing what is neccessary will literally effect just about ALL that ails us?

There is no other direction to take but the one that is causing all this to happen.  Fraudulent debt, and the legal ability to foist all of it upon us.

Take that power away from the Banksters in just one bill, used before, and coming again soon to the only countries that survive....Glass-Steagall

Fuck the fraud, it ain't SS's fault, but it sure will destroy it if we don't stop ALLOWING the fraud to take place LEGALLY. (that's monetarism....the use and foisting of fraudulent debt onto people legally)


Fraudulent Debt

Glass-Steagall.....(not SS reform*)

Payroll tax holliday is a farce, and is of course only making things worse, by reducing SS revenue, for nothing tangible but numbers on paper.

Bruce Krasting's picture

Okay, okay. Let's re-estabilish Glas Steagall.

I agree with you. That was a very big mistake.

Urban Redneck's picture

Prior to the repeal of Glass-Steagall the OASDI was projected to reach 2011's permanently negative cash flow in 2016.  Reinstating Glass-Steagall isn't enough.

aerial view's picture

Time for the individual states to secede from Fed govt which is too big, too corrupt and too out of control. Start new state govts with full transparency, referendum lawmaking, term limits and independent oversight and regulation. This is the likely outcome whether by Fed govt self destruction and revolution or peaceful planned transition.

nah's picture

the price structures the .gov and banks have colluded to create are phony... war works better

Old Poor Richard's picture

Republicrat Obummer deliberately cut the payroll tax to hasten the demise of Social Security.  Either you support the concept of Social Security and think this is both scandalous and disastrous, or you want Social Security to go away and Obummer's move was a baby step in the right direction to eliminating the old age safety net.

Meanwhile, we've been turned into a neo-socialist dystopia where people earning minimum wage have a better lifestyle than people earning $60K/yr and drastically better lifestyle than people earning $30K/year.

The writing is on the wall: either you are an elite or you are a prole.  The middle class is being first tapped and sapped, then destroyed.  We are returning to feudalism.  Obummer keeps trash talking people who make over $250K/yr (while not actually doing anything to them--yet), as he absolutely crushes the lives of people making $20-100K. 

Obummer wants you who make $50K and are getting beat up by the economy and looted by the banksters to hate your upscale neighbor who makes $120K or $400K.  You're supposed to hate the person who you can relate to (and unfairly be jealous of), and who in turn can relate to you sympathetically as another working stiff with a mortgage payment and mouths to feed but with less money to do it with. 

The elite take home multi-millions per year, but they live far off in gated compounds.  The tools Obummer, Boehner, Pelosi wave their hands and spray some smoke and tell you that you don't need to hate those lizard-brained sociopathic monsters on Wall Street who pwn the government, rake in millions or billions per year and who are looting your assets, your life, your country.  Soon the middle class will be gone--its head chopped off at $250K, then its guts devoured shortly after.  We will all be proles in a fascist neo-"socialist" society with our needs (Obamacare, free cable) met, but no control over our own economic selves, no economic freedom, assets illegal, unsanctioned trade illegal.  Paper money gone, precious metals unlawful. 

From each according to his abilities, to each just enough to keep him from revolting.  The police state will expand until the latter is no longer necessary and standard of living for proles will drastically drop. Will we eventually be exterminated instead of merely enslaved?

Orwell predicted a rather large outer Party who took care of managing the police state and empire.  He didn't anticipate AI, expert systems which can do that with very little human intervention.  The outer Party of leftover 'middle class' will live like in 1984/THX1138, and will be very small.


Bob Sacamano's picture

For many decades, the solution to every failed government program is to throw more money at it.

Let't try something different -- I vote for the 13.8% benefit cut.  Understand that is painful, but we have to start reversing the government dependency agenda sometime.  Do not turn SS into welfare (code word "means tested") for the elderly.


ATG's picture

Is anyone else surprised TG not impeached for defrauding government workers' retirement?

US Dipping into Pensions as it Hits Debt Limit

oldman's picture

Thanks, Bruce,

I agree with the means test since this will not force a legal showdown over the issue of an unfunded general obligation of the US Treasury, otherwise inescapable. Also, there is precedent for this in the mess Reagan left in the eighties surrounding the still clouded matter of partially taxing SS benefits----another form of 'means test'.


topcallingtroll's picture

That is exactly how the means test will be done.

Everybody gets their social security benefit.

Those with higher incomes will just give the benefit back in taxes.

Unless you are willing to go to the effort of estate and income planning.

glenlloyd's picture

It's always quite easy to make future promises that are too good to be true, I've had bosses who've done that before....but they didn't last long.

Selling the plan beyond anything more than a supplemental program was the fault of those who we elected. And it's been known since I was old enough to remember that one shouldn't count on it being there.

Reality is beginning to catch up, it won't be long now.


c0ncerned citizen's picture

Not to rain on a parade or anything,but, What about eliminating the cap on earnings subject to SS tax??

linrom's picture

Off course, your headline servers only purpose to alarm and brainwash. The fact is you and the Peterson Foundation couldn't find their way out a paperback now,  and you throw in 75-year projection and pretend that this not some figure pulled out of air.


Bruce Krasting's picture

Paperback? Possibly you meant paperbag.

As for the numbers, I don't make them up. I just quote them. Look them up yourself:


sgorem's picture

"Hopefully most of the current politicians will have retired by then"

and what's so wrong with a firing squad?

chistletoe's picture

In the elections of 2008, approximately 131 million US citizens voted.


right now, there are over 44 million people receiving food stamps.

There are over 53 million people receiving social Security benefits,

including 43 million retirees and 10 million either disabled or family members.

There are now 9 million folks receiving unemployment benefits.

The federal civilian payroll is 3 million, while the armed forces employ another 1.5 million.


Now, while I understand that one cannot go about reliably calculating how many voters are net paying in to uncle sam while how many are net taking out, it should be pretty evident from these numbers that there are mover voters who are receiving money than there are paying in.


and that is where the problem is.

Please do not ask me how to fix it.

linrom's picture

While the figures that you list above might seem to point to an intractable situation, the fact is you are looking at the wrong data that has nothing to do with the real crisis and the root of ALL fiscal problems, that is caused by  wealth and income concentration.

The choices are simple:

  1. feudalism
  2. revolution
WTFIGO's picture

The sky is falling, the sky is falling ... SS is going broke, so why don't we just make people put their money in that other ponzi scheme that has worked so well for our 401K, the stock market.  I'll bet if the economy was humming and living wages were paid and there were a few adjustments to SS, like the wage cap, nobody would be wringing their hands over this.  But instead we have bank fraud on a massive scale, casino gambling in all of the markets that have been eyeing the SS fund for years, and endless wars that are paid for by borrowing from China.  How about a war tax that would wake up the sheeple to the real financial burdens of the pointless wars, and a financial transaction tax on all of the needless gambling that only generates paper and paper profits for awhile until the next bubble bursts, but no jobs or goods and services.

litoralkey's picture

Look at this table:


Three scenarios.

 Option (I)  is insanely optimistic.

 Option (II) is from this point in time realistic projection.

   Option (III)   is a double dip recession and lost decade or more of grueling economics in the US.


At some point, the Federal Government is going to have to haircut Treasuries and prioritize either the SS Trust Fund on one side, or the banks, institutions and foreigners.  Hopefully most of the current politicians will have retired by then, so maybe just maybe the next crop of elected scum will fear the populace enough to maintain SS funding and default on other Treasuries holders.

Urban Redneck's picture

I would hold out hope for Option 2 unless you are cheering for Recovery Summer 2 1/2 starring Leslie Biden & OJ Obama.

Below is a table covering historical projections about when the US would arrive at today (when OASDI is permanently cash flow negative under the intermediate scenario of the long range projection models).

OASDI Income and Cost Rates Under Intermediate Assumptions (Figure II.D2. in recent years)

2011 -shortfall is permanent
2010 -shortfall is a one year occurrence, then back to cash flow positive
2009 -shortfall begins 2015 (6 yrs away)
2008 -shortfall begins 2017 (9 yrs away)
2007 -shortfall begins 2017 (10 yrs away)
2006 -shortfall begins 2017 (11 yrs away)
2005 -shortfall begins 2017 (12 yrs away)
2004 -shortfall begins 2018 (14 yrs away)
2003 -shortfall begins 2018 (15 yrs away)
2002 -shortfall begins 2017 (15 yrs away)
2001 -shortfall begins 2016 (15 yrs away)
2000 -shortfall begins 2016 (16 yrs away)
1999 -shortfall begins 2015 (16 yrs away)
1998 -shortfall begins 2015 (17 yrs away)
1997 -shortfall begins 2014 (17 yrs away)
1996 -shortfall begins 2012 (16 yrs away)
1995 -shortfall begins 2013 (18 yrs away)
1994 -shortfall begins 2013 (19 yrs away)
1993 -shortfall begins 2017 (24 yrs away)
1992 -shortfall begins 2014 (22 yrs away)
1991 -shortfall begins 2025 (34 yrs away)
1990 -shortfall begins 2020 (30 yrs away)
1989 -shortfall begins 2020 (31 yrs away)
1988 -shortfall begins 2020 (32 yrs away)
1987 -shortfall begins 2020 (33 yrs away)
1986 -shortfall begins 2020 (34 yrs away)
1985 -shortfall begins 2020 (35 yrs away)
1984 -shortfall begins 2020 (36 yrs away)
1983 -shortfall begins 2020 (37 yrs away)

Bruce Krasting's picture

An excellent bit of research. Thank you for this.

What happened surprised everyone. I don't believe there are many who saw this coming. Certainly not the folks who make these projections at SSA.

Mind if I use this in a piece sometime? I'll give you the credit.


Cthonic's picture

What happened surprised everyone. I don't believe there are many who saw this coming.


Nonsense.  It's been predicted since the Eighties.  Those who didn't see it coming either didn't care, are innumerate, or willfully looked the other way. 

Urban Redneck's picture

Feel free I don't need credit, and all the data is easily and publicly available.

However, you should double check 1991 since they changed formatting that year, it might not be an entirely apples to apples comparison. 

The shortcoming of their smooth curves in long range models is they don't correctly factor in the mathematical impact of a recession in the out years on annualized revenue growth.  Unless you assume upfront that 5% or 7% means you really need to hit  8% or 10%. 

The last report Paulson signed off on was complete BS- they knew there was or would be a recession and they still plotted revenues as a upward sloping line.  Geithner's first report wasn't much better, but they at least they didn't hide the previous year's actual decline.

Rainman's picture

The SS Administration and the Surgeon General could have fixed this underfunding problem long ago. One agency is going broke because humans are living longer. The other agency works overtime to scare these same humans  into giving up their treasured vices.

Fruits and veggies, no smoking, 2 lousy drinks a day, no trans fats, 8 pills per day to bring down everything that's too high. These unhappy lemmings end up dropping dead simply because they prefer death to geriatric lethargy.... and later than actuarial expectations. Our gubmint masters need to get on the same page.

Don Levit's picture


Bruce Webb does not know how to discuss facets of the trust fund, because he seems to be emotionally invested in his opinions.

I have been collecting excerpts and links on Social Security and Medicare for several years.

When I provide the links and excerpts, he will make comments like "You can't trust the GAO, for David Walker has an agenda,"or Since when do you put faith in the CBO?"

I have even provided links to the Social Security Administration itself to refute his comments.

He never once was willing to discuss, word for word, the excerpts.

To see his latest replies to me, along with his friends,. go, and check out the comments on the article "Is Paul Ryan Endorsing?"

By the way, I was banned from his blog.

What an honor!

Don Levit


I am Jobe's picture

WTF. Time to take what you have and leave the country period.

KickIce's picture

Those who think this was setup as a ponzi scheme by FDR are dead wrong.  Originally, it was in a separate trust fund and was a huge money maker for the government.  Future politicians continued to expand it to buy votes, it was then placed in the general budget fund until LBJs "Great Society" act made it into the 3rd rail of politics.

That being said I think FDR was a commie wannabe and the original act was as unconstitutional as Obamacare is today.



NotApplicable's picture

Like all ponzis, they make money for the sponsor at first, but eventually blow up as they run out of new money to fund the payouts from ficticious earnings.

pasttense's picture

In the grand scheme of things this is a trivial amount of money. This is over 75 years. 75 years at the current 1.5 trillion/year budget deficit is 112.5 trillion. 6.5 trillion is only 5.8% of this.

topcallingtroll's picture

I wish people would quit the deception.

Social security is not a regressive tax. It is technically a disability insurance program and basic retirement plan. People at the low end of the income scale get a lot more from social security, compared to their contributions, as opposed to those with higher incomes.

Your benefit is calculated based on your contributions, plus a little extra socialist welfare added in for the lowest income.

It is definitely not regressive if it is to continue functioning under the guise of an insurance and retirement program. Of course if we want to throw all pretense aside and make it just another welfare program then of course it is regressive.

FMR Bankster's picture

One of the ugly things here is that as people lose faith in the system they will file for benefits earlier and look for ways not to pay their social security taxes. Get while the getting is good. I'm a baby boomer and we've been raised to believe in fairy tales. Snow White, Lord of the Rings, and if you want to get rich you don't save money you borrow you ass to wealth. When things can't contiue they won't. We're about to enter the ugly season where the fairy tales come to a bad ending. And for all you boomers whining about having PAID for your benefits who do you think didn't pay enough income taxes for years while social security trust funds covered the difference?  

DosZap's picture


You sir are correct,but the reason is not so simple.

 they will file for benefits earlier


The problem is they have no choice.

They cannot get  a job, and/or are loosing the one they have.

Plus they cannot afford to WAIT till the age limit is raised, because there are no options for gainful employment.

It's a Catch 22 situation.

topcallingtroll's picture

You bet.

I will arrange.for financial planning to prove my indigence when everything is means tested. I will also work less and dodge taxes.

Why be a stupid fool?

GreenSideUp's picture

Next up: private pension funds.  

CEOoftheSOFA's picture

Treasury Secretary Morganthau advised FDR not to sign the Social Security Act saying "The program will be broke by 1980.  I cannot put this burden on future treasury secretaries". 

CEOoftheSOFA's picture

Treasury Secretary Morganthau advised FDR not to sign the Social Security Act saying "The program will be broke by 1980.  I cannot put this burdon on future treasury secretaries". 

earnyermoney's picture



Seems your article on BEFE and territorial tax code would blow a huge hole in SSTF when companies acceleate the offshoring trend to take advantage of lowest corprate tax zones. Is that correct?

Bruce Krasting's picture

It's all going the wrong way.