PDA

View Full Version : Fact Check: Has Social Security begun tapping its trust funds?



RandomGuy
04-14-2010, 03:34 PM
by Monique Morrissey
March 19, 2010
source link (http://www.epi.org/analysis_and_opinion/entry/fact_check_has_social_security_begun_tapping_its_t rust_funds/)

A recent Associated Press story said that Social Security will need to “start cashing Uncle Sam’s IOUs” because the recession is adding to the system’s financial problems. The article said “the government will have to borrow even more money, much of it abroad, to start paying back the IOUs, and the timing couldn’t be worse.”

This is simply not true. According to the Congressional Budget Office -- the source cited in the article -- Social Security will continue to run a surplus for years to come, with the combined old age and disability trust funds projected to grow from $2.5 trillion in 2009 to $3.8 trillion in 2020. See Figure.

http://www.epi-data.org/ima/social_security_trust_fund.jpg

What is true is that the economy has shed eight million jobs, so payroll tax receipts are down 2.5% compared to pre-recession estimates. As a result, Social Security is projected to run a primary deficit—a measure that excludes interest on trust fund assets -- until 2014, when CBO expects the economy will be back at full employment.

Even though outlays will exceed payroll tax revenues, Social Security is not about to become a net seller of Treasury bonds, and is in fact still acquiring them to the tune of $100 billion a year. However, the story has taken off because it fits with the preconception that Social Security is in crisis and its finances are suspect.

The AP article uses the notion that Social Security is about to start tapping into savings as a hook to revisit the famous filing cabinet in West Virginia where the trust fund is held in the form of Treasury bonds, which the author says are “worthless on the open market.” This is technically true in the sense that the bonds, though similar to those held by the public, are “special-issue securities” redeemable at face value before they mature. But this actually makes them more, not less, valuable.

The fact that these bonds can be redeemed for cash at any time will come in handy when we do start drawing down the trust fund, which will probably begin some time after 2020. This is exactly what the trust fund is there for – to help finance the retirement of the large Baby Boom generation. Since Social Security has always been funded primarily out of current tax revenues, the trust fund balance should be close to zero under normal circumstances.

This is not to say that the system faces no challenges. Because wages for most workers were flat even before the recession hit, Social Security’s finances have been slipping since the system was last in balance in 1983. The system also needs periodic adjustments to address changes in life expectancy and other long-term trends. Thus, CBO projects that payroll tax receipts will only cover about 80% of promised benefits after the trust fund is drawn down in coming decades.

To put this in perspective, future generations will still receive higher benefits, in inflation-adjusted terms, than retirees today because of economic growth. Nevertheless, it would be far preferable to raise revenues so promised benefits can be paid in full. This can be achieved by increasing payroll taxes a modest amount (equivalent to 0.5% of GDP)—or better yet, by taxing earnings above $106,800, as Medicare already does. Polls show that Americans of all ages and political stripes would support a modest tax increase to preserve Social Security benefits for future generations.

DarrinS
04-14-2010, 03:38 PM
I guess there's no need to worry about those 76 million baby boomers who are about to retire.


Whew, what a relief.

Winehole23
04-14-2010, 04:00 PM
To put this in perspective, future generations will still receive higher benefits, in inflation-adjusted terms, than retirees today because of economic growth.

http://www.nahbmonday.com/mmbl/editor_images/crystal_ball_house3.jpg

RandomGuy
04-14-2010, 04:04 PM
[the author of the article in the OP seems to be predicting the future based on unfounded optimism]

I would agree.

There does seem to be some data to suggest that all is not "doom and gloom" however, and that is not something I have seen in a lot of MSM.

It was interesting to see a counterveiling viewpoint to a widely held saw. No more, no less. :wakeup

coyotes_geek
04-14-2010, 04:09 PM
To put this in perspective, future generations will still receive higher benefits, in inflation-adjusted terms, than retirees today because of economic growth.

..........and home prices will never go down...............

word
04-15-2010, 12:08 AM
Are you insane. G HW Bush began tapping SS and Zipper Billy wiped it out. Gore ran on the 'lock box' of SS, after it was too late.

There is no SS 'trust fund'. It's a misuse of the term. There was a surplus in the past of income -vs- payments, the 'surplus' was used in the budget. But there hasn't been a SS 'trust fund' since about '99 or so. It was raided. It is gone.

zipper billy and gw bush

worst presidents we've ever had, and it ain't gettin' better

EVAY
04-15-2010, 09:43 AM
Are you insane. G HW Bush began tapping SS and Zipper Billy wiped it out. Gore ran on the 'lock box' of SS, after it was too late.

There is no SS 'trust fund'. It's a misuse of the term. There was a surplus in the past of income -vs- payments, the 'surplus' was used in the budget. But there hasn't been a SS 'trust fund' since about '99 or so. It was raided. It is gone.

zipper billy and gw bush

worst presidents we've ever had, and it ain't gettin' better

Actually, it was Lyndon Johnson who first brougt the SS monies into the general revenue funds in order to mask the cost of the war in Vietnam.

The end of the Clinton administration was the first time since then that the budgets were sufficiently balanced that there was a chance of putting what was then still a 'surplus' away in the much derided 'lockbox' for the future. During Bush43's years, it all got eaten up again, so that now that baby-boomers are drawing down benefits, there is no more cushion.

Look, I didn't vote for Gore...couldn't stand the guy, but he was proabably right about what should have happened...and none of the fiscally conservative republicans in the WH or the Congress for the first six years of the Bush 43 administration ever had any concerns about it.

Bad fiscal decisions have been a bipartisan reality in America for a long time.
It didn't just develop with the current crowd.

Wild Cobra
04-18-2010, 01:22 PM
I guess there's no need to worry about those 76 million baby boomers who are about to retire.


Whew, what a relief.
Myself, I figure I'll work till 2019 for when my pension jumps from 1.0% x years x annual pay to 1-2/3% x years.