Originally posted by whodeySocial Security is part of the national dept, and a large part. Until last year, Social Security receipts were used to disguise part of the annual deficit. The turning point arrived when more is paid out than is received. The end point is when the "trust fund" runs out, or actually much sooner, when the government runs out of fools to loan them money.
The article mentioned nothing about inflation. It is all about what they count as debt and what they do not. For example, Social Security in terms of debt is just ignored.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraWith the government running trilliion dollar deficits every year and printing money to cover it, I can't imagine why inflation would go up, can you?
The article does not mention it but it is clearly relevant here. A projected cost of say $40 trillion over 50 years (for example) is not given in 2012 dollars since the dollar will most likely be worth less in 2062. That's not to say I don't think taking into account future expenses for Medicare or Social Security is a smart thing to do - of course it i ...[text shortened]... intentionally overestimating future liabilities is not a very helpful step towards that goal.
Nontheless, the fact remains that the current deficit we are spoon fed does not list all of the debt. They are cooking the books just like their Wall Street cronies.
1 edit
Originally posted by normbenignSocial Security may be part of the debt, but it is not listed as such in terms of the total debt or the yearly deficit.
Social Security is part of the national dept, and a large part. Until last year, Social Security receipts were used to disguise part of the annual deficit. The turning point arrived when more is paid out than is received. The end point is when the "trust fund" runs out, or actually much sooner, when the government runs out of fools to loan them money.
In fact, I think Bush found a scheme as well to keep the expenses for the war off the debt column.
Why are they allowed to do this?
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyNot sure. I know it is why I abandoned my quest to become a CPA. The rules of the game change too often. The worst problem is the intentional debasing of money by central banks. Nothing in banking or economics can be validly argued because the goal post shifting is constant.
Social Security may be part of the debt, but it is not listed as such in terms of the total debt or the yearly deficit.
In fact, I think Bush found a scheme as well to keep the expenses for the war off the debt column.
Why are they allowed to do this?
The Social Security Trust fund simply buys treasury bonds. They have to invest the surplus, when there was on somewhere, and Tbills are safer than most. Those bonds and the amount of SS debt are measurable, of course not predictable due to central bank debasement of currency.
Originally posted by normbenignThe system is so jacked up there is no way for it to survive much longer.
Not sure. I know it is why I abandoned my quest to become a CPA. The rules of the game change too often. The worst problem is the intentional debasing of money by central banks. Nothing in banking or economics can be validly argued because the goal post shifting is constant.
The Social Security Trust fund simply buys treasury bonds. They have to invest ...[text shortened]... of SS debt are measurable, of course not predictable due to central bank debasement of currency.
What do you think will replace it?