March 15, 2010

AP Formally Notes Arrival of a Social Security Tipping Point — On Selection Sunday

SocSecBrokeCard0309

The Associated Press’s timing couldn’t have been better for those who still want to pretend that Social Security is really not in serious trouble. Stephen Ohlemacher’s item (“Social Security to start cashing Uncle Sam’s IOUs”) originally appeared on Sunday, in the midst of most of the major college basketball conference tournament championships, then followed by the evening’s announcement of the selections for the NCAA Division I Men’s basketball tournament. (The AP has issued minor revisions several times since its original appearance, up to and including today.)

The wire service’s timing, while convenient for the Washington establishment, as it minimizes the possibility of distractions from its statist health care obsession, couldn’t have been worse for those of us who wish the American people would get a grip on the gravity of the situation — which is why I saved this post for today.

What is about to occur is the event that as little as a year ago, according to the Social Security Trustees’ 2009 Report, wasn’t expected to arrive until 2016. Ohlemacher tells us that it’s right here, right now, and gets it right until his seventh paragraph (bolds are mine):

Social Security to start cashing Uncle Sam’s IOUs

PARKERSBURG, W.Va. — The retirement nest egg of an entire generation is stashed away in this small town along the Ohio River: $2.5 trillion in IOUs from the federal government, payable to the Social Security Administration.

It’s time to start cashing them in.

For more than two decades, Social Security collected more money in payroll taxes than it paid out in benefits — billions more each year.

Not anymore. This year, for the first time since the 1980s, when Congress last overhauled Social Security, the retirement program is projected to pay out more in benefits than it collects in taxes — nearly $29 billion more.

Sounds like a good time to start tapping the nest egg. Too bad the federal government already spent that money over the years on other programs, preferring to borrow from Social Security rather than foreign creditors. In return, the Treasury Department issued a stack of IOUs — in the form of Treasury bonds — which are kept in a nondescript office building just down the street from Parkersburg’s municipal offices.

Now 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. he government is projected to post a record $1.5 trillion budget deficit this year, followed by trillion dollar deficits for years to come.

Social Security’s shortfall will not affect current benefits. As long as the IOUs last, benefits will keep flowing.

Despite the air of certainty, the last bolded sentence is not provably true. “Benefits will keep flowing” only as long as the government can continue to do what Ohlemacher mentioned in his previous paragraph, i.e., “borrow even more money” to redeem those IOUs. When even Secretary of State Hillary Clinton goes off-message and acknowledges that the nation’s debt load has turned into a national security issue (i.e., we’re hoping against hope that China and others won’t use their leverage as creditors against us), it is clear that government’s ability to keep going to the borrowing well is by no means certain. If it can’t, something will have to give, and one of the “somethings” might have to be the current level of Social Security benefits.

Now the government that gave us a multitrillion-dollar Social Security obligation, an accompanying Medicare obligation that is almost five times higher, while compromising our national security, wants to micromanage all of the nation’s health care. Only in the Beltway wonderland would such an idea even resemble making sense.

Cross-posted at NewsBusters.org.

Share

4 Comments

  1. Actually, the politicians will be forced for the first time to prioritize spending. They are going to forced to pay back all the money they stole, that is we are going to be forced to pay back all the money they stole. Our only victory here is they won’t be able to borrow and spend anymore than they already have. Hmmm, a Pyrrhic victory for tax payers?

    What we are going to see here is an epic battle between the senior citizens who are owed $2.5 trillion and the rent seekers represented by self serving politicians. Who will win? We already know the taxpayers have lost, that’s a given.

    Comment by dscott — March 15, 2010 @ 5:22 pm

  2. BTW- Medicare

    As a result, while Medicare’s annual costs were 3.2 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2008, or about three quarters of Social Security’s, they are projected to surpass Social Security expenditures in 2028 and reach 11.4 percent of GDP in 2083.

    The projected 75-year actuarial deficit in the Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund is now 3.88 percent of taxable payroll, up from 3.54 percent projected in last year’s report. The fund again fails our test of short-range financial adequacy, as projected annual assets drop below projected annual expenditures within 10 years—by 2012. The fund also continues to fail our long range test of close actuarial balance by a wide margin. The projected date of HI Trust Fund exhaustion is 2017, two years earlier than in last year’s report, when dedicated revenues would be sufficient to pay 81 percent of HI costs. Projected HI dedicated revenues fall short of outlays by rapidly increasing margins in all future years. The Medicare Report shows that the HI Trust Fund could be brought into actuarial balance over the next 75 years by changes equivalent to an immediate 134 percent increase in the payroll tax (from a rate of 2.9 percent to 6.78 percent), or an immediate 53 percent reduction in program outlays, or some combination of the two. Larger changes would be required to make the program solvent beyond the 75-year horizon.

    tick, tick, tick…

    http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html

    Hence now we know why Obama wants to cut $400 billion from Medicare under the ruse of insuring the “uninsured”, someone has to either tell all the wage earners that their Medicare tax (1.45% FICA) is going up from 2.9 to 6.78% (combined Medicare employer and employee portions) OR reduce Medicare benefits by 53%. The second PONZI scheme is already unraveling, albiet very slowly then as momentum gains speed, the underfunded expenses skyrocket.

    Comment by dscott — March 16, 2010 @ 2:09 am

  3. The Obama Doctine: All we have to do is discontinue healthcare to everyone over 65 and promote abortion to have the population decline to a “sustainable” level. We must all do our part.

    Comment by Michael — March 16, 2010 @ 1:47 pm

  4. And just to rub it in:

    the House Health Care bill unveiled today includes a 3.8% Medicare tax on investment income (interest, dividends, capital gains, annuities, rents) earned by those with incomes in excess of $200,000 (single) and $250,000 (joint).

    http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2010/03/house-health-bill-.html

    Talk about your clawbacks…

    Comment by dscott — March 18, 2010 @ 7:35 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.