While Senator Sanders may portray our Social Security programs as solvent, it really depends on your reading of what actually happened. The Social Security coffers as it stands today may very well be in the black – as best as in the black can be for a program that’s post Baby Boomer era.
With most of us Baby Boomers closer to our sunset than our sunrise the “contributions” we pay into Social Security is not the same as before. We are increasingly dependent on what the younger generations put into this Roosevelt-inspired retirement piggybank. Unfortunately, the population scale of our young folks shrink into the shadow of a huge and very needy Baby Boomer population.
When the seeding of this population bomb reached its zenith in 1965, there were roughly 78 million of us Boomers. And despite the popular media image of a generation on sex, drugs and rock and roll, 98% of us Boomers are still here, having lived long and fruitful lives. They unquestionably represent “a cohort that is significant on account of its size alone.” In 1966 Claire Raines wrote in Beyond Generation X that “never before in history had youth been so idealized as they were at this moment.”
Idealized or not, one major contribution of us Boomers was the colossal amount of cash we paid into Social Security – over our lifetimes. The truth is, Boomers put so much money into the Social Security program that it would have handily paid for our retirement needs and the retirement needs of the next four generations.
But the temptation was too great, for you truly know that the days of our Congress so came as “thieves in the night.” Any government that is built upon the twin pillars of special interests and corruption could not in all honesty keep their hands off of that kind of money. The gnawing-away at the Boomer’s retirement account by the Congress was and is rapacious and relentless.
If Social Security had been left untouched we would not have our younger generations wondering how in the hell they were going to pay for us and them. There would be no talk of the insidious privatization, no talk of reduction of benefits and no talk of insolvency in twenty years. The Trustees report states “In 2011, Social Security had a surplus – revenue plus interest income in excess of outgo – of $69 billion.”
Folks – that’s f**king chickenfeed compared to the multi-trillions of dollars that should have been in there – to this very day.
I know you didn’t steal it. I didn’t steal it. In fact, we huge population of Boomers helped to deposit those trillions of dollars into Social Security.
There’s only one government body that’s capable of decimating trillions of dollars like that…and its name is Congress.
Note: Vidda Crochetta resides in the Wantastiquet River basin community of southern Vermont. Born during the Truman administration he is one of millions in the long running avant garde of the largest generation of modern times. No other era can define the meaning of what it was like to live in a world of young people that seemed made especially for them during a time of the greatest social change known to humankind.
Compromise
Obama’s new budget calls for cuts in Social Security via cost of living adjustments. He would like to begin by compromising, and hopes to make a deal with Republicans.
Amazing that he hasn’t noticed that Republicans don’t ever give him anything in return. If he proposes it, they are against it. Just because.
More money for the rich, and taking things from everyone else, are the only goals for Republicans in Congress and have been for decades.
Obama seems fine with taking things away from everyone else.
As vidda says, they all seem to all be stealing from regular folks to give more to the wealthy. And we all sit here hoping it will change somehow, magically, as if that squirrel is going to decide they’ve had enough of the birdseed at the feeder all by themselves.
The Democrats are wieners…
Good point Chris. As Michael Moore says, “The Democrats are wieners…”
I love the birdseed in the feeder analogy.
We, meaning all of us concerned citizens, are apparently not concerned enough to reignite the spirit of activism needed to ignore the Dems and Reps and put them all on notice. Worst of all, we can’t make them put it back. And wimps who do nothing deserve nothing.
A Wholy Owned Subsidiary...
Since the 90’s the so called Democratic Party has been working for the GOP. That became clear when Bill Clinton took union money and help to get elected in ’92, then turned around in ’93 a pushed NAFTA through Congress – something no Republican could have gotten away with.
Likewise, Obama is going to cap SS benefits and again a Republican could never get away with that.
All that said I find the original piece lacking in facts and needlessly fear mongering. There’s information all over the place if you care to look.
Here are the current trust fund tables:
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4a3.html
For 2012 the fund total is $2,732,334,000,000.
Income = $840,190,000,000.
Expenditures = $785,781,000,000.
The most alarmist projection has the trust fund being down to zero 25 years from now (the optimistic one says 75 years). It will still have close to a trillion a year in income coming in.
By comparison the defense department has no income and they do OK going to congress hat in hand. You would think 80 million old hippies could manage too.
On the size of the generations, what I have read is closer to what Annikee said, but more optimistic still. A USA Today article about the real estate market was bullish based on the size of the millennial generation (’80-’00) which they put at 95 million. They feel that the millennials have had to hold off on home buying for 4 years because of the economy but are ready to come charging in to boost the market.
Your premise that the boomers got screwed, I would agree to based on the humongous tax hike of ’83.
Social Security was in trouble.
The solution was to basically tax the boomers double. We had to pay for the generation before us and put away enough for ourselves simultaneously. The economist, Rabi Bhatra (sp?) called it the biggest and most regressive tax hike in US history.
If it does turn out that some of us do not get the full pension we paid for, then there should be a high political price paid by the party or parties that let/made that happen.
Facts smacks of...
Don’t get too snowballed by facts Paul. As I said to annikee, I wrote an “opinion piece,” for whatever someone wants to get from it. It was also meant to point the finger. There was nothing I said that was lacking facts within my own intent. I have internet too and if I had wanted to provide dry facts to look good, I would have.
You wanted facts so you dug. Fine, so print them in your own article.
Neither was it needless fear mongering. I wanted to point the finger and I’m right on target, facts or no facts.
It seems a bit naïve for me to read: “If it does turn out that some of us do not get the full pension we paid for, then there should be a high political price paid by the party or parties that let/made that happen.”
……..Yeah, right. Keep on dreaming. There is only the Incumbency Party that shares the money trail. The only ones who pay for anything are us, and we do so dearly.
Thieves?
In order for there to be thieves as your headline accuses, there has to be a theft.
The data shows the money is there – has not been stolen YET.
The problem I have with your whole slant is not the thieving part though. I don’t question that the SS trust fund is appealing to a lot of people who could profit from it.
For example, if that money was to be moved over to Wall Street it would accomplish two things for big investors – the top 1%:
buying $2.7 trillion dollars worth of stock would push all the stock prices through the roof and immediately benefit everybody who is in the market now; and it would leave the Federal government with 2.7 trillion in bonds to sell – which would probably cause the bond rating to drop and the interest they’d have to pay would go up, further benefiting investors.
That’s just one scenario and one reason why it might be an attractive target.
Fortunately, the generation before the baby boomers did not trust the stock market. Something about a black Friday and a Great Deepression…
Boomers? I’m not so sure we Boomers understand that we have that power to make social security the third rail of politics – remember the third rail is the one with the electricity – touch it and you die.
Long a truism of politics. And the reason soc sec has not been plundered before now.
BUT,
if you keep telling people that it is gone, that it has been stolen, they will give up. That is why I’m contradicting you. What you are doing is helping the people who would like to steal our social security, by feeding a sense of helplessness.
You’re not helpless or powerless unless you think you are.
In politics, the power lies where the people think it lies. Our parents knew they had the power – they saw it in the new deal.
We boomers have been steeped in a sense of hopelessness since we saw JFK, MLK,Jr and RFK gunned down.
I hope that the generations after us will be stronger.
As for starting my own article, I’ve done this topic I think. And now you’ve done it and we’re having a discussion about your opinion. Aren’t you lucky!
For our readers who have read this far…
Your scenario that the raiding of Social Security could happen in one big 2.7 trillion shift tells me you need to take your own advice and checkout some alterative POVs. Even the Congress or Wall Street isn’t so stupid as to grab an amount that size.
Yeah, I spent most of my life in NYC – I know what a “third rail” is.
For our readers who have read this far, please know that I never said Social Security is “gone” as Paul states. Therefore, no fret about his shaky nonsense about you being helpless. I know most of you will do a better read of my article. Paul and Annikee apparently like the shallow end of the pool.
Lucky??
I’m lucky that Chris and Lise provide this forum. I know there are a lot of good readers who visit this site and I assume most can be openminded and not too prissy.
I hope most take the time to read this, but more importantly, look for themselves. Please see my comment at the end of this thread with a few references.
The factual facts are facts
And thanks for them, Paul. Even though SS has been plundered by the Washington DC 1%, it still stands solvent. Moreover, it happened right before our eyes starting in the ’80s, boldly, with President Reagan announcing it as if it were the smartest thing to do. Since then, it’s been one battering after another served to the working class and often with the working class’ applause. We must uphold the plain truth. Giving into fearmongering and cynicism to appear cool serves nothing but one’s ego, though it seems the fashion of the day.
hoping for change to come
I am always so intrigued over the questions of what it takes to move concerned citizens to the point of action in the face of injustice. It’s usually a confluence of events that ignites the activist spirit, and there seems to be no single universal tool or strategy that can be employed to instigate movement and motion. Communication and the ability to help people see how an issue impacts them personally are central. Sadly, even the plight of fragile elders and the universal sense of vulnerability that infirmity brings does not speak loudly enough on this issue. I also think people need “permission” to act and speak out against power and authority.
Generation Y
Those born 1980-1995, the so-called Gen Y, are nearly as numerous (70 million) as the Baby Boomers (80 million). Gen Y is now 18-30s. Were there jobs in the US and not exported around the world, there would be plenty of people securing Social Security for many gens. We need job creation.
I’ve always questioned the “there are too many Baby Boomers” after having seen my ranks decimated by the Vietnam non-War and subsequent non-wars, drugs, the AIDS epidemic, many accidents and just life (3 of my 4 brothers are already dead, for instance). When I see writings like this I always wonder just how many of those 80 mil are actually still around.
Not Quite....
I have to run but will come back to this later.
Some quik points:
Despite your personal experience, with Nam, AIDs, accidents and any other mortality you’d like to mention, most of us Boomers are still here…
By the time of 1980 the Boomers and their parents in the Forties-Seventies had already put 30-50% of those trillions into SS
(more on this later….)
Who's Booming Who?
Well, there is the issue of creeping boomerism, too.
As someone born in 1964, I was somewhat surprised to learn I was being counted as a boomer. My parents were kids when the war ended, and I was not the result of reunited loved ones after armed conflict. I’m not part of the boom, but I’m counted in it for some reason.
I think most of us think of boomers being born sometime in the late 1940’s and early 50’s, eben though that isn’t the definition.
In 1980, this boomer was in high school, earning minimum wage (but starting to contribute to my social security).
Quite what quote
Where did you get the “98%” still alive figure, Vidda? I’m curious. Because I looked all over the place for that and found nothing like that. It’s a far, far leap from “98%” to “most”. “Most” could be 51%. So where does this 98% come from?
The main point is....
I suppose for the sake of statistics we need a mathematical starting number and an ending number. It is true that being born in the Truman years, I’m uncertain if I can call people born in the Kennedy years my generation, even if I do look young for my age. (See my profile pic that was taken 6 months ago… 🙂
There are also some different views of who the Gen-Y people are or who the Gen-X is, etc…. Since one of my salient points is about the long-term employee deductible taxes deposited into the Social Security account over all those years, that is the thing to focus on. It’s not about the mortality rate of Boomers or who is who in the generational breakdown.
The primary point is, as I wrote above: The Trustees report states “ In 2011, Social Security had a surplus… of $69 billion.” Folks – that’s f**king chickenfeed compared to the multi-trillions of dollars that should have been in there – to this very day.
That’s multi-trillions of dollars: $000,000,000,000,000. And it ain’t there. The name of thieves is not you and me, it is CONGRESS.
Chickenfeed farms
I’d say the larger context is that most people who have ever lived, –and it’d be worthwhile to do the math on this too–have been either enslaved outright, or existed under oppressive rule, or feudal rule. So by these terms, it’s their money in the end anyway, not ours we just do the doing.
Oh well, what’s on HBO tonight?
Who's on first?
I imagine you’re not alone being sensitive to the enslaved, oppressed peoples “who have ever lived.”
If I thought the money could do them good, however, I’d be happy to give it to them.
But in today’s world where impoverished elderly have to make choices between paying the rent or eating because their benefits have been reduced, they might not see my generosity in a favorable light.
I’m not sure the forty year olds who struggle to find or keep jobs in an outsourced/downsized job market, who tell me I’m lucky because I get my meager benefits, while they expect get nothing, aren’t going to pat me on the back, either.
But for those who have cable TV: http://www.hbo.com/#/schedule
No, Who is on second
I wanted to shed light not on the beneficiaries who made or missed the cut, but to ask the question why we the masses have allowed ourselves to be subjugated, so extensively. It’s really your point too, but rather than focus on the crook du jour, aka the US Congress…inveiglers of democracy, usurpers of the dream.. I’m wondering why wage slavery, or any any other kind of diminishment of our worth has persisted as part and parcel of the human condition.
The question of why we wage diminishment upon one another
You’re right, in that it is an inherent part of my point. The question of why we wage diminishment upon one another has an ironic parallel in the little “tit-for-tat” between annikee and me in the above comments. Indeed, some of the biting banter here is actually quite ancient. From slavery to nitpicking, the human condition somehow acquired an uncooperative vein that is complicated by, among other things, a lust for power and domination. But the whys and wherefores of why we wage diminishment would involve a depth of analysis that I’m unprepared to answer at this time. Between the two of us, I suspect I would bow to your analysis in any case.
It is, after all, the stuff of the mind of a Spinoza.
Cancer clinics turn away Medicare patients, thanks to the seques
On the Record,” April 4, 2013. GRETA VAN SUSTEREN Greta Van Susteren talks with Ted Okon, Executive Director of the Community Oncology Alliance, where she says to him: “You know what’s so appalling is that all these Medicare patients– they’ve paid taxes for decades! They’ve been good, you know, citizens. I mean, and they expected their Medicare. And Congress said when they passed all these laws that they weren’t going to– they weren’t going to lay a glove on the Medicare.”
Sound familiar? Read full Text:
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/2013/04/05/cancer-clinics-turning-away-medicare-patients-thanks-sequester
Thieves By Any Other Name:
As I stated my “Congress as thieves article” is not new. The raiding and plundering of Social Security is well documented. I hope the readers here, other than Paul and Annikee, can take the time to review some of the literature and decide for yourselves how reliable the story of the Congressional and Wall Street plundering of Social Security is. (Also, for all intents – Wall Street, Corporate America and the Congress sleep in the same bed…)
The Myth of the Social Security Trust Fund
MARCH 01, 2000 by JOHN ATTARIAN
John Attarian is a freelance writer in Ann Arbor, Michigan, with a Ph.D. in economics. Under a grant from the Earhart Foundation, he has completed a book on Social Security, from which parts of this article are adapted.
>>Read more:
http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/the-myth-of-the-social-security-trust-fund#axzz2Ph0fdrn8
“The government’s $2.5 trillion debt to Social Security is the real reason that so many politicians want to cut benefits. They are trying to find a way to avoid having to repay the looted money…. Given the fact that much of the surplus revenue from the 1983 payroll tax hike ended up in the pockets of the super rich in the form of income tax cuts, I propose a special tax on this group of taxpayers to recoup the missing Social Security money. The government used revenue from the Social Security payroll tax hike to fund tax cuts for the rich because that was where the money was. I think the government should recover the ‘embezzled’ money by taxing the rich.”
>>Read full text:
http://ampedstatus.org/how-your-social-security-money-was-stolen-where-did-the-2-5-trillion-surplus-go/
Today, U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) announced he will force a vote during the budget resolution on an amendment that would allow Congress to “Stop the Raid” on Social Security surpluses. “It’s time for politicians to stop stealing from our seniors to secretly finance trillions in wasteful Washington spending,” said Senator DeMint. “Congress has been raiding the entire Social Security surplus every year to pay for bridges to nowhere, teapot museums, and bloated government agencies. Politicians in Congress are using Enron-styled accounting, but if this were done in the private sector they’d be sent to jail.
>>Read full text:
http://judymorrisreport.blogspot.com/2012/06/yes-my-fellow-americans-congress-really.html
Every year, Congress raids the entire Social Security surplus to pay for wasteful earmarks and other government programs. In the last 20 years, Congress has already raided two trillion dollars from Social Security, including interest. Without Senator DeMint’s “Stop the Raid” amendment, the Social Security Administration estimates that Congress will raid an additional $452 billion from Social Security between 2009 and 2013, which including interest would exceed $1 trillion.
“There is nothing but stacks of IOU’s in the Social Security trust fund because Congress has spent all of the money and will continue to spend it if we don’t take immediate action. Because of this raid by politicians, Social Security will not be able to pay promised benefits to seniors in less than 10 years.”
>>Read full text:
http://schotlinepress.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/demint-to-force-vote-to-%E2%80%9Cstop-the-raid%E2%80%9D-on-social-security/
We don't usually get to hear from most readers
If you feel strongly about restoring the integrity of Social Security for all Americans won’t you take the time to look in to it, and in your own way try to help with a reasonable solution to this issue.
~Vidda
The Social Security card that has no name no number
http://www.vtcommons.org/blog/name-thieves-who-stole-our-future
Both iBrattleboro and Vermont Commons are not only my two favorite news, information and opinion sites, they are two of the most widely read online publications in this CTE (Current Technology Era).
When I saw the blank Social Security card image that Juliet Buck, the editor, had imbedded at the top of the article, it struck once again in my lifetime just how a picture is still worth a thousand words.
If you’ve read my above article, like iBrattleboro, the vtcommons offers the variety we all look for.
Where is the Bailout for Social Security and Medicare?
After reading this piece, a friend the other day was talking about the bank bailout cost but we didn’t know then how much. When I saw the Sander’s “Too Big To Jail” piece today, I thought I would look it up. The NYTimes is always a good place to start.
Here it is:
The Government as Investor – $9.0 trillion = Spent:$1.6 trillion
The Government as Insurer – $1.7 trillion = Spent:$330 billion
The Government as Lender – $1.4 trillion = Spent: $528 billion
What our Congress spent to bail out the banks is not “f**king chickenfeed.”
If the Congress can authorize this amount for banks, where is the bailout for Social Security and Medicare?
Are the banks more important than the health, safety and welfare of the people of the United States?
Apparently so.
What the amounts include- Read more:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/02/04/business/20090205-bailout-totals-graphic.html?_r=0