VP Biden Wins Prestigious “Postpony” Award

Bruce Krasting's picture

The Vice President had this to say yesterday:



No changes in Social Security?? Joe B "guarantees" that? Who is he making this promise to? There are only two possibilities. Either Biden is flat out lying, or he is a fool.


Social Security is a “here and now” issue. It should be a matter that is part of the debate in the coming election. Charles Blahous, a Social Security Trustee, had this to say last weekend about the current status of America’s biggest entitlement program (Link):


“To me, urgent doesn’t begin to describe it. I would say we’re somewhere between critical and too late to deal with it.”


Critical? Too late? If this is what a Trustee of Social Security is saying, then what is Biden selling?

I’m going to give Biden an award for his words. I call it the “Postpony”. I’m tired of the phrase, “kick the can down the road”. When Biden spoke about SS he was kicking the can. He was pushing a strategy of postponing a debate/resolution of something that is important for the country’s medium and longer-term future. This is politics at its worst. Joe B. is just trying to buy some votes. So the VEEP gets the “POSTPONY”. A picture of the plaque:



I can’t think of an election where the VP candidate actually made a difference in the final vote. Maybe 2012 will be different.


Those who are under 50 today, and working, are going to get stiffed (big time) by Social Security. They will have 12.4% of their wages sucked out of their pockets and into a sinkhole. That money will be used to “deliver” on the promise that Joey B made to the baby boomers in VA yesterday. When those who were born after 1965 try to retire, there will be no money left in the SS Trust Fund. The under 50 set will recieve only 70% of what the boomers get (Current law). That's a lot of people who should be thinking about this issue as they vote.


I’m looking forward to the debate between Joe Biden and Paul Ryan (I’m not in love with this guy either). A question that I would like them to answer:


The Social Security Trust Fund reported to Congress that the Social Security Disability Fund will run out in 2015. Either benefits for 12mm people will get cut by 30% (current law), or any shortfall (mega $s) will have to come from more deficits and debt.

The next Administration will have to “fix” this problem. This is not a maybe; it’s a sure thing. What are the candidate’s plans for this fix?



Comment viewing options

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


Notice over the last week or so the media has been out of sorts with the Vice President? Biden is an advantage to the Republicans for obvious reasons. However, key Republicans are suggesting that he be replaced. Kinda dumb politically, but definitely a good thought if one considers the safety of the Nation.


Some contributors in the last Democrat Primaries donated $ to Obama to keep Hillary out of the White House. I contributed my first money ever to the Obama Campaign in order to defeat the Clintons. That has proven to be a mistake. The negatives for Hillary remain the same; her experience over the last 3+ years become a huge plus. The best choice would be for Clinton to run for President; however the Democrats would have huge problems with the black voters and maybe the Mexican voters. IF the Democrats could construct a deal where the Clintons would be playing First Chair and Obama giving speeches and playing golf, it might be a move that is good for the Nation. Obama must be removed from leadership one way or the other. They could let him sit in the Oval Office but is a neutered state.


I would personally be in favor of Clinton, knowing that I would need to stock up on items that she has a history of attempting to ban. I do not know if the Democrats are ready to really change the Financial situation or if the Clintons would have the authority to quickly do so. Clinton can not run on a Reform platform and might not be able to get Chicago politics out of DC.


The Republicans may be the best choice, but Clinton replacing Biden is a good move.


Hedgetard55's picture

Joe is a liar, period, always has been. Continues to this day to claim that a drunk driver killed his first wife, even though the driver was cleared and the fault assigned to his wife.

etresoi's picture

Bruce, you love to crunch social security numbers but forget to look at the macro situation.  The ol' US of A will not be around in ten years.  Go ahead crunch those numbers.

vinoverde's picture

well, perhaps he could have grafted away enough $$ to cover everyone.

foytik's picture

Bruce - So those under 50, or those born 1965 or later, (not quite the same thing) should not expect to get SS money when they retire? Using retirement at 65, this works out to around 2027 to 2030. What do you think happens at that point, does the govt. stop sending social security checks? Because if that is what will happen then even those born before 1965 would be effected. For example if you were born in 1960 then perhaps you get retirement from 2025 to 2030 and then at age 70 the checks stop?

But I think the assumption that Social Security will last until even 2027 is shaky. If you just look at the SS system and do an actuary analysis then it survives until then, but if you look at the larger picture of the federal govt. budget, with growing shortfalls in SS disability, Medicare and Medicaid, resulting in increasing deficits, and especially if we take into account how the states are also running deficits, then I don't see how it can last that long. Or consider the larger picture that the whole debt based central bank system is unsustainable. Good to know that Social Security retirement system by itself would last until 2030, but doubtful how long those checks will really continue to come.     

masterinchancery's picture

There is no SS Trust fund: just a bunch of worthless IOUs from the Treasury.  So if SS is to continue "unchanged", it will be with printed money, which will certainly be highly devalued if not worthless by 2027.

rustymason's picture

Entschuldigen Sie, aber ist "hui" ein echtes Wort? Cogitam illud "nunc" esse, sed nescio, fortasse erro.

Never One Roach's picture

Good article Bruce. Great issues that MSM avoids. I'm sure any debates will be filled with hollow questions by lightweight journalists.

Haager's picture

The word "change" had to be removed from the Obama-presidency actually - so I guess that the "change" should be removed from the Biden announcement also, leaving "There will be no social security".

I mean its almost clear that the biggest chance for common people of the 1965+ generation will be to end as a Soylent Green (sort of) main ingredient. I don't see the young generation would love to work their asses off to ensure that the asses of the then grannies are cleaned.

pamriallc's picture

I sent some Zim $$$ to a foreign World Bank Executive. Debt of the USA paid back in full, with interest. 30 years of inflation and a 2% coupon will be very interesting math.

Moe Howard's picture

He is right though. Social Security will stand. You will get a check no matter what. However, it will be worth next to nothing due to massive inflation. May be furnace fuel if the EPA lets you burn anything for heat. The AGW problem, doncha know.

Don't forget the recent two years of no COLA for Social Security during massive food and fuel inflation. This is how they plan to pay for it. Cutting the value of the check, while at the same time stealing any savings in the stock market casino etc. They are going to strip mine the baby boomers of every single asset then toss them aside for the new generation of compliant plebes from south of the border, asia, and the ghetto blacks. Any white Europeans that want to be around in 30 years better high tail it for Idaho, North Dakota, Montana, Alaska etc.

Because it won't be "liberty friendly" in the other states by then.

ebworthen's picture

When the entire basis of the nation has become a ponzi, left and right conspiring with corporations and banks to defraud the populace, debauch the currency, sell present career employment oversees and sell the future generations altogether - the S.S. bait-and-switch carrot is a small club in the arsenal of the Kleptoligarchy.

mrdenis's picture

 "Our elderly need no longer fear that the checks they depend on will be stopped or reduced. These amendments protect them. Americans of middle age need no longer worry whether their career-long investment will pay off. These amendments guarantee it. "......86'RR Jeez that promise couldn't even last 30 years and that was from a president .......

GeezerGeek's picture

Too bad SS payments were not denominated in ounces of gold rather than FRN. Some of my earnings for SS purposes came from when gold was $35 per ounce (or whatever it was pre-'71).

Bear's picture

"I can’t think of an election where the VP candidate actually made a difference in the final vote. Maybe 2012 will be different" .... BK

I hope not!

I am taking bets ($40 so far) that in October, Biden will become ill or some other family emergency that will preclude him running for VP. This opens the door for H.Clinton. She makes for Democrat Dream Team ... October Surprise ... then in November, I become ill

Geruda's picture

The thinking you are doing before the speaking you are doing is making many peoples to be having pity for you when you are speaking about vice president people not making the people who are voting have different voting.   The Sarah Palin who was being the pick of the man who was wanting to be president is the reason the man was not being voted for.

GeezerGeek's picture

McCain would have lost even more decisively had Palin not been on the ticket to invigorate conservatives. McCain was and remains a RINO (at best) who had no executive experience. Indeed, of the four candidates in 2008 only Palin had any executive experience. Obama did not even have a full term as Senator. You, sir, know not whereof you speak when you suggest McCain would have done better had it not been for Palin. Her biggest drawback was the fact that the insiders in both parties hated her anti-establishment accomplishments in Alaska and were determined to trash her in any way possible. Her early stumbles and fumbles overshadowed her prior record.

Liberals hate successful, attractive conservative women. Palin had to go.

Next time you want to make a stupid comment, do some research first and then present facts to back up your baseless assertions.


Nachdenken's picture

I am the feeling we are not understand.

GeezerGeek's picture

After 30 years of dealing with my Chinese wife's  less then perfect English, I can say I know exactly what you mean. My Chinese is, admittedly, far worse, but the only languages I was ever good at were those understood by computers - Fortran, Cobal, assembler, C++, etc.

theTribster's picture

Wow Fortran, Cobol. Ugle stuff, dev'd is both languages for years. Thankfully thos days r over.

StychoKiller's picture

"The time of the snack is happy!"

MeelionDollerBogus's picture

Everyone remember this?


no bank holiday? Joe Biden's good old buddy Jon Corzine made sure a lot of money took a bank holiday. How many of those funds went directly to the Obama 2012 campaign as Corzine is a fundraiser and mafia-don?





official twitter accounts of the guilty (Eric Holder for the time being at Justice Dept)

I think it's a good idea that everyone let them all know how proud we are they're keeping the banks in check by letting them be robbed a billion at a time by their fundraiser.

Oldwood's picture

The concept that the financial markets are under regulated does not mean they are lacking in regulations or laws. They are lacking in transparency and enforcement. I just hate this shit that some new law is going to fix everything. The only thing that will fix things is enforcement of clearly written and unambiguous rules. And, enforcement means prosecution, not fines.

GeezerGeek's picture

Why worry about enforcing the rules when porn is just a mouse-click away? Besides, everyone on ZH knows rules are just for the common folks.

Pejorative Requiem's picture

Biden is just spewing, neither clueless nor lying, per se, just spewing. But that's what sock puppets do!

zorba THE GREEK's picture

Pejorative... I know Joe, he had done a very big favor for me a while back. Our kids went

to school together. He has been one of the least crooked senators in the past 30 years,

but your description of him as a sock puppet is spot on. Before he became VP, he was a very

powerful force in DC. He could have cashed in big time, but he didn't. His main fault is he

is arrogant. What a shame, he could a been a contender. 

nobita's picture

Yeah in Bidens defense he is one of the poorest senators even thou he has decades in Washington and represented the tax-loophole state.

Compare him to lets say Harry Reid. Harry is a multimillionare who worked for a few years as a prosecutor before politics. There is 0.00% chance that he earned his millions in a legit way.

Biden says stupid stuff yes, but he is not a complete fucking criminal like many of his peers.

theTribster's picture

Sorry everybody but Biden is a lying, cheating, stealing criminal. Has been for years. Obama piked him because he needed somebody that had experience and relationships. Same reasons JFK picked LBJ.
Besides all that, Joe is a flaming IDIOT. Glad he helped ur kids though.

Moe Howard's picture

That would mean you are aware that Joe Biden has had at least two brain surgeries, for aneurysms I believe.

I find it very strange that nobody, and I mean nobody, brings it up when he says these stupid things like Roosevelt on TV. I have known people who had brain surgeries and the behavior can at times be like Biden, odd thoughts expressed and a lot of nonsense.

You don't think these very odd statements and odd behaviors like plagiarism, racist remarks, etc, are caused by scrambled brains?

I do.


DOT's picture

Behavior seems consistent with partial onset seizure disorder. Give him a drink some maoi-s and kick him onto the stage.

GeezerGeek's picture

The statements Biden makes, along with your reminder of his medical history, are all part of a setup (in my opinion) to ease him out of the VP slot during the convention. It all came together for me when I heard that Bill Clinton would speak at the Democrat convention. Since Clinton is said to despise Obama, what purpose could his appearance serve other than to showcase Hillary? It's not like he's going to get up and say that he has proof that Obama is not legally eligible to be president, although that would certainly be a ratings success.

Landrew's picture

So the 3 TRILLION owed S.S. is never to be paid? That is exactly why there is a surplus! Did you just forget that surplus? Half ass article Bruce, without doing the homework. Shame on you, all hype not unlike O'Bummer himself.

theTribster's picture

Landrew from Satr Trek? Great episode.

Everyman's picture

NO, I do not believe the $3 Trillion in IOU's will ever be repaid.  The Government that "gave" the IOU's, is $16 Trillion in the hole with an increase of $1.9 Trillion a year.

Shame on YOU Landrew, your post was "half-assed" and very light on analysis and fact, heavy on bravado...kinda like....JOE!

Getting Old Sucks's picture

The 3 trillion in the trust fund is the easiest debt the government can pay.  That 3 trillion is part of the 16 trillion owed.  The treasury can issue treasury bonds to redeem trust fund bonds without raising the national debt.

blueridgeviews's picture

Now now doesn't anyone remember "dumb and dumber"?

All your money is right here in this suitcase.  See all the IOU's? Hey this IOU is for the Lamboghini $200,000. Better not lose that one.

We all know the democrats took the seperate SS funds in the 60's and made them part of the general fund. DId anyone really think they were just borrowing the money?

Same thing over and over again.  Vote for me and I'll buy this for you.

GeezerGeek's picture

When you think about it, what were the SS trustees to do with all that money coming in every year? Invest it in solid companies like Polaroid or AMF? Or maybe Pan American or Eastern Airlines? From one perspective, they did the right thing by investing in ultra-safe US government issues. It's called fiduciary responsibility. Once the money was available for spending, Congress wasted no time grabbing it. What else could they do? Leaving all that cash in some vault would have harmed the economy by taking it out of circulation.

SS is a bad program and has been from its inception. It was always more about politics than about securing seniors' futures. I'd go so far to say it has no basis in the US Constitution, but since that document in now no more than an historical curiousity I won't.

Clinteastwood's picture

Wrong Everyman, wrong Charles Blahous, and wrong Krasting:

"Charles Blahous, a Social Security Trustee, had this to say last weekend about the current status of America’s biggest entitlement program........"


Social Security is not a government entitlement program.  The money I have paid in to SS is not a "payroll tax."  That is my money the government has promised me for my retirement.  Any politician, or bs troll blogger who tries to say otherwise is a coward.  Don't tell me that once the government has it, it's no longer my money.  No, it's still my money, and if you're not going to live up to the deal we (me and the government) made a long time ago, you're not going to live.

jwoop66's picture

you been suckered, friend.   get in line.  Don't worry, though.  Some other politician will come along and promise you that they will get it back for you.  Vote for them if it makes you feel better.

GeezerGeek's picture

It only belongs to you if you have more guns than the government does, and if you're willing to use them. Might makes right. See how it works in North Korea. Here it just wears a velvet glove.

Everyman's picture

OK, it's "your money".

Doesn't mean that you are going to see a dime of that portion of "your money".


God, and people think I am dumb.

Moe Howard's picture

Supreme Court ruled the Social Security program is not a defined benefit program, it is a tax. That was ruled long ago. Google it.

CompassionateFascist's picture

"The govmint promised"? It is to laugh. It's ZOG money now, long since burned away on the welfare-warfare state.  

malek's picture

 Those who are under 50 today, and working, are going to get stiffed (big time) by Social Security.

You are correct. Thanks for not sugarcoating it.

...will recieve only 70% of what the boomers get...
...will get cut by 30%...

There is such a law already in place? I am not aware.
Bruce, might you point to it in link or hint form?

GeezerGeek's picture

Even if the nominal amount remained constant, which it doesn't, the COLA can be reduced to zero, or perhaps even lower.

There is no way the purchasing power granted to SS recipients will remain at the current level. Boomers like me, already collecting, will find their SS-based purchasing power shrinking year by year under the best of circumstances. Ultimately, that's all that matters: purchasing power. Ask anyone from Zimbabwe.

snblitz's picture

But I have a letter from the SSA saying what I will get when I retire.  There is even an online calculator.

blueridgeviews's picture

We knew that back in the 80's when we first starting getting raped by the gov't.

wang's picture
wang (not verified) Aug 15, 2012 8:17 PM

Bruce,Biden is taking a dive

you are playing into their meme with this article

Obama/Clinton 2012 wiill be the ticket