You are here

Log in or register to post comments
soulful.terrain
soulful.terrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 3 days ago
Joined: Nov 22 2010 - 12:15pm
Social Security payments at risk? Not so.

 

 

 

 

 

   Washington gets $200 Billion a month, Social Security costs $50 billion a month, and Obama is threatning to starve Grandma?

 Obama told CBS news today that he "cannot guarantee that those [Social Security] checks go out on August 3rd if we haven't resolved this issue. Because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it."

But wait just a minute. If Washington receives about $200 billion in monthly revenues and sends out roughly $50 billion worth of Social Security checks and the same amount of Medicare payments, why is Obama claiming the checks may not go out?

Isn't $200 billion minus $100 billion still $100 billion?

Because Obama is playing the demogogue, that's why. Pure and simple. He is trying to scare seniors into making panicked calls to their congressmen begging them to do whatever Obama and the Democrats want in order to keep the checks coming.

This is demogoguery of the worst sort because Obama has to know that what he is saying is false. When you and I say something we know to be false, it's called a "lie."

Clearly, it is of no matter to Obama that hiking taxes and raising the national debt limit very likely will keep millions of Americans unemployed and hobble the economy for years to come. All he has to do is scare enough voters long enough to get through the November 2012 election to get himself re-elected.

Here are the facts, as reported by MarketWatch and the Bipartisan Policy Center. You do the math:

* The federal government receives approximately $200 billion in revenues each month.

* Interest on the national debt in August will be approximately $29 billion.

* Social Security will cost about $49. 2 billion.

* Medicare and Medicaid will cost about $50 billion.

* Active duty military pay will cost about $2.9 billion.

* Veterans affairs programs will cost about $2.9 billion.

If you've been punching buttons on your calculator, you know that still leaves $39 billion each month. This is where Obama and the Democrats most fear to go. If Congress doesn't agree to raise taxes and the national debt limit, they will then have to make the tough choices about which of the remaining programs gets paid or cut and by how much:

* Defense vendors

* IRS refunds

* Food stamps and welfare

* Unemployment benefits

* Department of Education

* Department of Housing and Urban Development

* Department of Justice, etc. etc.

In sum, federal spending would have to be cut about 44 percent. For more on this, go here and here.

So the next time you hear Obama, or Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, or Sen. Charles Schumer, D-NY, or House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, or any of the multiple Democratic echo chambers in the liberal mainstream media, remember - what they are saying is pure demogoguery.

soulful.terrain
soulful.terrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 3 days ago
Joined: Nov 22 2010 - 12:15pm
more info

 

Michael McConnell of the Hoover Institution's AAFS (Advancing A Free Society) wrote:

 In his Friday night press conference, for the second time, President Obama raised the specter that Social Security checks might not go out if Congress does not raise the debt ceiling. His words: “Well, when it comes to all the checks, not just Social Security — veterans, people with disabilities — about 70 million checks are sent out each month — if we default then we’re going to have to make adjustments. And I’m already consulting with Secretary Geithner in terms of what the consequences would be.” Earlier he said in an interview on CBS News: “I cannot guarantee that those [Social Security] checks go out on August 3rd if we haven’t resolved this issue. Because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it.”

He must not be consulting with his lawyers, because this attempt to scare Social Security recipients is without legal foundation.

As recently explained in much more detail by legal scholars Mark Scarberry and Nancy Altman, and by the aptly-named Thomas Saving, a former public trustee of the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds, in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, , reaching the debt ceiling will not affect the ability of the Social Security Administration to pay its obligations.

The Social Security trust fund holds about $2.4 trillion in U.S. Treasury bonds, which its trustees are legally entitled to redeem whenever Social Security is running a current account deficit. Thus, if we reach the debt ceiling (which I continue to think is a remote prospect, even if less remote than it seemed a week ago), this is what will happen. The Social Security trust fund will go to Treasury and cash in some of its securities, using the proceeds to send checks to recipients. Each dollar of debt that is redeemed will lower the outstanding public debt by a dollar. That enables the Treasury to borrow another dollar, without violating the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling is not a prohibition on borrowing new money; it is a prohibition on increasing the total level of public indebtedness. If Social Security cashes in some of its bonds, the Treasury can borrow that same amount of money from someone else.

To be sure, a small portion of the money due from Treasury to the trust fund on the bonds is accrued interest. Payment of this portion will not have an effect on the debt ceiling, because the ceiling is calculated according to amount borrowed, not amount to be paid. That amount, however, is too trivial to affect the bottom line. Interest rates are low, and interest was last paid at the end of June.

President Obama is therefore wrong when he says that failure to raise the debt ceiling might result in not sending out Social Security checks. Many bad things might happen, but not that.

 

JIMV
JIMV's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 31 2008 - 1:46pm
Remember...

SS is funded independently by SS taxes which, at this date still cover 98% of the payments due...It is one of the few programs that can (mostly) pay for itself for a few more years. Threatenting to not pay means BoBo intends to steal SS tax money and route it, contrary to law, to some other program he gives a greater priority.

Lamont Sanford
Lamont Sanford's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 6 days ago
Joined: Mar 31 2006 - 8:32pm
I just thank God for the

I just thank God for the tender mercies like my 89 year old mother who is completely out of her tits now and doesn't know about all this right now.  She was in complete denial as a life long yellow-dog Democrat since Carter.  This shit would have just blown her out of the water.  Especially, the bullshit games they play with SS as a weapon.  She would be so far up her senator's ass he wouldn't know what the hell happened to him.  Today, she doesn't even know who is the president. 

soulful.terrain
soulful.terrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 3 days ago
Joined: Nov 22 2010 - 12:15pm
Pin the tail on the Donkey
Lamont Sanford wrote:

I just thank God for the tender mercies like my 89 year old mother who is completely out of her tits now and doesn't know about all this right now.  She was in complete denial as a life long yellow-dog Democrat since Carter.  This shit would have just blown her out of the water.  Especially, the bullshit games they play with SS as a weapon.  She would be so far up her senator's ass he wouldn't know what the hell happened to him.  Today, she doesn't even know who is the president. 

God Bless her.

Same here. I had an aunt and uncle that lived in south Alabama and under no circumstances would they ever vote Republican. It was always the same old story with them, "the Republicans want to take away our S.S." I hated to see my relatives succumb to fear and uncertainty by these slimy politicians.

They would say things like; "The Democrats are for the working man." I would prove to them that the democrat policies did not reflect the verbiage, and the democrats were nothing more than hypocrites. But to no avail. Heck, even when B.J. Clinton lied 33 times in front of the judiciary, they still resisted the truth.

I come to the conclusion that these types of party loyalists, like my aunt and uncle, mostly my uncle, simply love government. They love the government more than freedom and liberty. They love their handouts, and don't mind telling someone else that they are responsible for them, and it is just fine with them for the government to confiscate earned wealth from a producer and give it to a moocher.

Talk about Jimmy Carter, they loved him. Not that they knew anything about his politics, or his lack of leadership. All they knew was that he was a farmer from the south like they were. They didn't really care for Billy "Beer" Carter. They thought he was a nut. Jimmy Carter was, and still is a traitor to this country as well as a hater of the Jewish people. 

So, it hit me like a ton of bricks when I heard the community organizer-in-chief use the same old lie the other day when he said he wasn't certain S.S. checks would be sent out. I wasn't suprised because this fraud lies everyday. I was just highly pissed. Highly pissed at how this marxist is, as he says, 'fundamentally transforming' America. The transformation is well on its way and the children of this country will NOT enjoy freedom and liberty as we had, nor as my aunt and uncle did.

What you have is the consummate politician in Obama. A man that has never earned a paycheck in the private sector whatsoever. Nevermind a balanced budget?? When has Obama EVER had to balance a budget? The jerk has worked in government all his life! He's a non-stop campaigner that only knows two things...campaigning, and blame. No solutions, only campaigning and blame. This man doesn't know one damn thing about economics, except for maybe the Kensyian marxist crap he learned at Occidental College. He HATES business. Fact of the matter is..Obama, when speaking to his 'Organizing For America' sheeple, made the statement, "I know what we are up against, I know who the enemy is."

This Marxist called business 'the enemy.'

Never has any President in recent history, ever referred to the private sector as 'the enemy.' 

How can this nation survive with politicians that hate the private sector? It can't.

Obama's Castro-esq speeches is exactly what they are. Pure class-division, a necessary tool for progressive Democrats today and was very useful in the past for Fidel Castro and his henchman/butcherer Che' Guevara in defeating the Batista regime. Same with Mao, etc;

By the way, liberals love Che' Guevara. Here's a couple of pics of some Obama workers in three different Obama campaign headquarters:

 

 

 

 

 This is disgusting. To have an American flag next to this communist butcherer of the Cuban people.

 

 

 A picture speaks a thousand words. In this case, two pictures of the progressive lefts' favorite 'revolutionaries.'

 

 

Amazing, isn't it?

 

Flow charts, and graphs work in a classroom setting, and the marxist professors that think everybody else is stupid, relish in the fact that they have a captive audience with little or no opposition. Notice that these 'professors' never really seem to make it in the real world of business. They never seem to be able to transfer that marxist trash into anything productive, so they are relegated to the classroom. That crap doesn't mean jack in the real world of economics.

Concerning social security, In 2008, David Walker, then the comptroller general of the United States, reported that the total burden in present value dollars of these and other entitlement programs, including the federal government's liabilities, commitments,  and contingencies, is about 453 trillion. He added, "Imagine we decide to put aside and invest today enough to cover these promises tomorrow. It would take approximately $455,000 per American household - or $175,000 for every man, woman, and child in the United States."

Medicare and Medicaid spending alone "threaten to consume an untenable share of the budget and economy in the coming decades. The federal government has essentially written a 'blank check' for these programs."

Bluesbob
Bluesbob's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 months ago
Joined: Dec 22 2005 - 11:00am
Don't hate...

The 14th amendment specifically covers pensions, and the SS trust fund is backed by the "full faith and trust of the federal government". So the only way Congress can steal from it is through COLAs and age restrictions, unless we just hand it over, like a victim of highway robbery. Unfortunately, Medicare, Medicaid and even Tricare are afforded no such constitutional protection. And the same goes for almost everything else, which accounts for a huge percentage of the GDP. But if you exercise, eat right, get enough sleep and stay away from harmful foods and substances, you should be OK, at least statistically.
What I just don't get about you Teapublicans is why you think your hatred for Obama has, or gives you, credibility. Where were you when the Bush-Cheney mob was going to war based on a lie, lowering taxes so their buddies wouldn't have to pay for it, violating the Constitution time after time, outing CIA operatives, ruining the economy - and the list goes on and on. Where was your righteous indignation then? You have so much nerve now - where were you when you could have done some real good for the country?
Obama is an intelligent, and, I think, a decent man - unlike his predecessor.
But he doesn't seem to be a very good politician.

soulful.terrain
soulful.terrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 3 days ago
Joined: Nov 22 2010 - 12:15pm
Response
Bluesbob wrote:

What I just don't get about you Teapublicans is why you think your hatred for Obama has, or gives you, credibility.

Bob,

Noboby has ever said they hated Obama, at least I haven't. What I do hate, is his destructive policies and wasteful spending, his total disregarding the will of the American people by forcing Obamacare on the public, his record spending which incidently, he chastised Bush on the Senate floor for doing in 2008 which makes him a hypocrite, his continual lying, his class warfare tactics, His apologizing for America on foreign soil, His corrupt appointments within his administration, and the fact that he is a marxist. That about covers it.

 

Where were you when the Bush-Cheney mob was going to war based on a lie,

 

At the time, I thought we should have went into Afghanistan after 9-11. Not Iraq. But we did, and in doing so, we removed the butcherer of the Kurdistan people. Then we went into Afghanistan. So, I really don't have a problem with that. I just would have prioritized it differently.

But more importantly, three years into the Obama presidency, I'm not at all concerned with Bush/Cheney now. For the record, I described George Bush as a fiscal socialist. The truth is the truth.

 

ruining the economy - and the list goes on and on.

 

If that is your argument, then how is Obama any different? Obama has pretty much adhered to the Bush doctrine of spending, except with Obama you amplify it ten-fold.

 

Obama is intelligent

 

Maybe as a street organizer and campaigner. But that is it. period.

The left defined unintelligence by using Dan Quayle as the example. Remember the potato/potatoe spelling debacle?

If that is the measuring stick, then Obama, by his countless verbal gaffes, is by far the most unintelligent politician to ever walk planet Earth. Either that, or the democrats owe Dan Quayle a huge apology.

 

and, I think, a decent man

 

Maybe in his personal life, maybe? I don't know. He seems to definitely be more of a family man that Clinton was.

 But when it comes to incurring massive debt on future generations ie; children, He's not so decent. When he refers to the private sector as "the enemy" well again, not so decent. When he referred to traditional Americans as those "Clinging to their guns and religion"..again, not so decent. I believe arrogant is more fitting.

 

But he doesn't seem to be a very good politician.

 

I disagree. He's a resourceful political operative. Chicago has bred many. Couple that with the mega bucks backing him in George Soro's and General Electric, Labor Unions, etc; which makes him a good politician, but he is not a Statesman. We need less politicians and more Statesmen.

 

Lamont Sanford
Lamont Sanford's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 6 days ago
Joined: Mar 31 2006 - 8:32pm
"What I just don't get about

"What I just don't get about you Teapublicans is why you think your hatred for Obama has, or gives you, credibility..."

You had a good post going until you brought out your real hidden agenda.  Nice shot in the foot.  I hope it hurts real bad.  Because I'm enjoying it.

edever
edever's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 months ago
Joined: Mar 19 2009 - 3:05pm
Democrat, Republican,

Democrat, Republican, Marxist, Progressive...heck, even backwoods, in-bred dick trickles missing a couple of chromosomes...any of them spend too much time up on the hill inside the beltway and only one thing begins to occupy their collective brain cell:

How the fuck do I get re-elected?

Everything else is smoke and mirrors.

Lamont Sanford
Lamont Sanford's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 6 days ago
Joined: Mar 31 2006 - 8:32pm
Good post.  Senator Byrd was

Good post.  Senator Byrd was a good example at getting reelected.   They need term limitations just like the President.

soulful.terrain
soulful.terrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 3 days ago
Joined: Nov 22 2010 - 12:15pm
Marion Barry
Lamont Sanford wrote:

Good post.  Senator Byrd was a good example at getting reelected.   They need term limitations just like the President.

D.C. Democrat Mayor/crack smoking/ex-con Marion Barry comes to mind.

 

 

 

After this, he got re-elected. Yes, Dumbasses do actually live in the District of Columbia.

soulful.terrain
soulful.terrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 3 days ago
Joined: Nov 22 2010 - 12:15pm
Under pressure? Just cave-in
edever wrote:

..any of them spend too much time up on the hill inside the beltway and only one thing begins to occupy their collective brain cell:

How the fuck do I get re-elected?

Everything else is smoke and mirrors.

Right!

..and here is the man that can cave faster than a speeding bullet. Republican John Boehner.

 

Might as well throw in that chinless wonder named Mitch McConnell too!

 

Lamont Sanford
Lamont Sanford's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 6 days ago
Joined: Mar 31 2006 - 8:32pm
Boehner did nothing.  Boner

Boehner did nothing.  Boner did nothing.

What is so hard about reduce spending?  They keep griping about making sacrifices.  I'm still waiting on the sacrifices.  One of these days we are going to make sacrifices.  That is what they keep saying.  Where are the sacrifices?  Lets make some sacrifices.  The only sacrifice I've seen is the pain and agony of watching these boners in D.C.  I'm thinking of sacrificing what is going in D.C. and take up some sort of mindless entertainment like watching reality shows.  It is a lot cheaper on the stress level watching "real" people make fools of themselves rather than paying attention to those pompeous motherfuckers in D.C.

soulful.terrain
soulful.terrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 3 days ago
Joined: Nov 22 2010 - 12:15pm
22 principled representatives
Lamont Sanford wrote:

Boehner did nothing.  Boner did nothing.

What is so hard about reduce spending?

It's not the spending reduction thats difficult. Its the relinquishing of power through spending cuts thats hard if not impossible for these life-long bureaucrats IMHO.

I'm thinking of sacrificing what is going in D.C. and take up some sort of mindless entertainment like watching reality shows. 

LMAO!

 

It is a lot cheaper on the stress level watching "real" people make fools of themselves rather than paying attention to those pompeous motherfuckers in D.C.

 

Seriously Lamont, I cannot watch them. They literally make me sick to my stomach. They know most people do not pay that much attention to politics and they seize upon that. And with the addition of a complicit media, its no wonder this country is in the shape it's in.

You know, there was actually only 22 Congressional Republicans that voted against Boehner's weak, watered down budget. It's sad to think that we only have 22 Representatives that actually give a flying f**k about the American people.

Speaker John Boehner pushed his debt-ceiling bill through the House Friday night with the support of 218 Republicans. Here are the 22 no votes:

Justin Amash (Mich.)
Michele Bachmann (Minn.)
Chip Cravaack (Minn.)

Jason Chaffetz (Utah)
Scott Desjarlais (Tenn.)
Tom Graves (Ga.)
Tim Huelskamp (Kans.)
Steve King (Iowa)
Tim Johnson (Ill.)
Tom McClintock (Calif.)
Mick Mulvaney (S.C.)
Ron Paul (Texas)
Connie Mack (Fla.)
Jim Jordan (Ohio)
Tim Scott (S.C.)
Paul Broun (Ga.)
Tom Latham (Iowa)
Jeff Duncan (S.C.)
Trey Gowdy (S.C.)
Steve Southerland (Fla.)
Joe Walsh (Ill.)
Joe Wilson (S.C.)

South Carolina seems to be the only state with balls.

CORRECTED: Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) voted YES on the Boehner bill. That was incorrect in the initial list. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) has been added to the list.

 

Lamont Sanford
Lamont Sanford's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 6 days ago
Joined: Mar 31 2006 - 8:32pm
I guess another round of

I guess another round of voting some of those idiots out of office is in order.    We'll just keep doing it until they finally get the message.  Congratulations to the 22 with a backbone.

  • X
    Enter your Stereophile.com username.
    Enter the password that accompanies your username.
    Loading