On July 29, 2014, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget held a forum examining the latest numbers on Social Security's finances. Experts weighed in on what the report says about Social Security's solvency and what should be done to ensure it will be there for future generations.
Reps. Tom Cole (R-OK) and John Delaney (D-MD) talked about their legislation to establish a Social Security reform commission. Social Security Chief Actuary Stephen Goss gave a presentation on the report and what it means for Social Security's future.
The event also included a panel with experts from a wide variety of perspectives, including the American Enterprise Institute's Andrew Biggs, the Mercatus Center's Jason Fichtner, Third Way's Jim Kessler, and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities's Paul Van de Water. The panel was moderated by Damien Paletta of The Wall Street Journal.
Posts
2 comments:
"Social Security’s Financing Shortfall May Soon Be Insolubly Large: The shortfall has grown far beyond its size during Social Security’s 1982-1983 crisis. It was then saved from insolvency by a last-moment bipartisan rescue. The measures required were intensely controversial. We are already at a point where an agreement would require the left to accept benefit restraints roughly twice as large as in 1983, and the right to accept tax increases twice as large—unless either gives even more ground. There is no assurance of such an agreement. If the problem grows politically insoluble, Social Security’s financing structure must eventually be abandoned. This would most likely require permanent financing from the general fund. Gone would be the program’s contribution-benefit link, and the conception of Social Security as an “earned benefit.” "
What is wrong with uncovering the myth that social security is earned? Clearly it is not earned.
When a person says “We Earned it!” what exactly do they mean?
To me, this phrase is a righteous euphemism for making the more truthful statement: "We were snookered by this Social Security Ponzi scheme, and now we are going to snooker the next generation!"
If Social Security benefits have been "earned" who is obligated to pay benefits to those who "earned" them? Workers? On a regressive tax basis? Why? Why perpetuate a fraud upon the innocent? Who is responsible for bearing the burden of a fraud? The person defrauded? Or an innocent or unborn child?
"Experts weighed in on what the report says about Social Security's solvency and what should be done to ensure it will be there for future generations."
Wow, we are back in the past reliving 1983. Before we start talking or planning what needs to be done to ensure "it" be there in the future, we should ask those who will be the future if they want "it"!
Why would anyone want a millstone placed around their neck for life? Why would anyone willingly be a participant in a ponzi scheme? Why should we remove freewill with government dictatorship over our lives?
Before anyone does anything, they should understand what insolvency means. It is when liabilities exceed assets. Clearly Social Security has far more liabilities than assets and that is why the discussion continues.
Post a Comment