Most Excellent Bill Proposed to Boost Social Security $2,400

[jimgilly]

The US is already bankrupt borrowing trillions more than they take in each year. 

 

So sure, let's just print more funny money (like they've been doing) and pretend everything is just fine while the economy, currency and petrodollar are coming to an end.

 

Instead of hoping they are going to boost your benefits, just be happy your getting a check now and the dollar is currently strong because this party is about to crash.  This year, next year, whenever, it's not far off so enjoy it while you can.

[bendejo]

 

It's good to see there was some kind of watchdog on that monkey business they pulled on Medicare premiums last year.  I wouldn't expect a GOP administration to do anything about it.

Quote

“After receiving CMS's report reevaluating the 2022 Medicare Part B premiums, we have determined that we can put cost-savings directly back into the pockets of people enrolled in Medicare in 2023,”

https://www.aarp.org/health/medicare-insurance/info-2022/medicare-keeps-part-b-premium.html

 

 

[Jingthing]

This makes this proposed bump look like a drop in the bucket.

 

The part about SS recipients losing 40 percent of their buying power over the last 22 years because COLAs don't actually keep up with inflation!

 

Put that in your boomer bong and smoke it.

 

https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/07/16/ugly-secret-huge-social-security-increase-on-way/

 

Here's the Ugly Secret About the Huge Social Security Increase on the Way

Edited July 16, 2022 by Jingthing

[gk10012001]

In addition to raising the income cap for when they stop taking out social security "taxes", I would not be surprised that in a few years they will increase the percentage a little bit from the current 6.2 or whatever it is, up a bit to say 6.5.  Not a big increase for most people but it could add up overall to the fund

[Longwood50]

First off, I am a social security recipient.  However there is this "notion" that social security is solvent and somehow the government can just pay more.  THERE IS NO MONEY IN SOCIAL SECURITY.  It  is a pay as you go plan.  The current contributions from workers is what is used to pay the benefits of those that are receiving benefits.  The U.S. Treasury borrows every penny that is deposited into the Social Security Trust Fund and then "invests" in special Treasury Bonds.  Think about that.  You have one area of the federal government saying I will take the money but "owe" it back to you.  That is like you taking money from your left pocket, spending it, replacing it with a piece of paper labeling it a bond, calling it invested.  You can not borrow money from yourself and call it invested. In the end, the "assets" in the social security trust fund are treasury bonds.  That is an IOU meaning the Treasury Dept owes the money.  The bonds of the Treasury Dept are general obligations of the Federal Government and hence are to be repaid from general tax receipts.  When they talk about the soccial security trust fund running out of money, it only means that when current contributions are less than current benefits, the trust fund has to "sell" those bonds on the open market.  That only transfers the ownership of the debt.  The Treasury will still owe it.  It is nothing more than smoke and mirrors to create the illusion that somehow your money is being invested.  It is not.  You can not loan yourself money, say you are paying yourself interest and call it "an investment" 

So raising the benefits only means the Treasury will have to borrow even more money to pay for those benefits.   

A bond is a "loan" an IOU.  In this case the Treasury gives an IOU to the social security trust fund.  The ultimate ponzi scheme. 


https://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Lyndon_Johnson_Social_Security.htm

Edited July 22, 2022 by Longwood50

[KhunLA]

1 hour ago, Longwood50 said:

First off, I am a social security recipient.  However there is this "notion" that social security is solvent and somehow the government can just pay more.  THERE IS NO MONEY IN SOCIAL SECURITY.  It  is a pay as you go plan.  The current contributions from workers is what is used to pay the benefits of those that are receiving benefits.  The U.S. Treasury borrows every penny that is deposited into the Social Security Trust Fund and then "invests" in special Treasury Bonds.  Think about that.  You have one area of the federal government saying I will take the money but "owe" it back to you.  That is like you taking money from your left pocket, spending it, replacing it with a piece of paper labeling it a bond, calling it invested.  You can not borrow money from yourself and call it invested. In the end, the "assets" in the social security trust fund are treasury bonds.  That is an IOU meaning the Treasury Dept owes the money.  The bonds of the Treasury Dept are general obligations of the Federal Government and hence are to be repaid from general tax receipts.  When they talk about the soccial security trust fund running out of money, it only means that when current contributions are less than current benefits, the trust fund has to "sell" those bonds on the open market.  That only transfers the ownership of the debt.  The Treasury will still owe it.  It is nothing more than smoke and mirrors to create the illusion that somehow your money is being invested.  It is not.  You can not loan yourself money, say you are paying yourself interest and call it "an investment" 

So raising the benefits only means the Treasury will have to borrow even more money to pay for those benefits.   

A bond is a "loan" an IOU.  In this case the Treasury gives an IOU to the social security trust fund.  The ultimate ponzi scheme. 


https://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Lyndon_Johnson_Social_Security.htm

Yep ... they've been borrowing from Peter to pay Paul for ever.  Sucked the self funding Soc Sec Fund dry.

 

USA is technically 'bankrupt' both morally (politicians) & financially.   Just not allowed to say it out loud.

 

The elite give the illusion, it's not, because they are making all the interest from financing the deficit.

 

Just one of their cash cows.

[Longwood50]

39 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Yep ... they've been borrowing from Peter to pay Paul for ever.  Sucked the self funding Soc Sec Fund dry.

Technically there has never really been a social security trust fund.  If you "save" money and put it in an investment account the "investments" must be from someone other than yourself.  If it was truly invested, there would be stock, bonds from either other nations, or companies, real estate, gold etc.  You can not put a piece of paper in the social security trust fund that says that the "treasury" guarantees those bonds and not end up with one area of the government providing a guarantee to pay another area of the government.  It is the same government and all debts are general obligations of the government and hence its citizens. 

The treasury has borrowed all of the social security funds. So the "trust fund" has as assets IOU's from the federal government.  So social security owes you, and the government owes the social security trust fund the money to pay you.  And that is "investment"   If this was a private company with a pension plan they would put you in jail. 

They are relying on the theory that as sovereign debt that it can't go bankrupt.  Well when the amount of debt servicing exceeds the amount of government cash flow they only have two choices.  Raise taxes or borrow more.  To date, the USA government is borrowing more.  By definition a company is bankrupt when either of these occurs.  That the total liabilities exceed the total assets of the firm, or that cash flow is insufficient to meet obligations.  The latter is already true since they keep borrowing to cover bills.  The former may be true.  If the amount that the USA has obligated itself to with unfunded mandates does equal the $210 trillion quoted by Forbes, the total net worth of the entire world is estimated to be $500 trillion.  I doubt that the USA has a value equal to 40% of the entire world. 



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_Trust_Fund

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnmauldin/2017/10/10/your-pension-is-a-lie-theres-210-trillion-of-liabilities-our-government-cant-fulfill/?sh=4d4a66a465b1

[TheAppletons]

On 6/18/2022 at 7:03 AM, ThailandRyan said:

Thanks, since I do not receive SS and instead have a pension that gets a COLA adjustment each year it is why I asked the Q?

The SS COLA is now predicted to be approx 10.5% for 2023.  

 

https://www.newsweek.com/social-security-benefits-cola-huge-increase-inflation-1728388

[Jingthing]

Arguably this could be a separate topic, but I'm not gonna do that. So here goes. For those of us who pay for Medicare Part B as expats we know that hikes in that can eat up COLAS. However, there appears to be good news on that from for next year as well. Most likely Part B will either be reduced, stay the same, or only a modest increase this time. 

 

Good News for Retirees: Lower Medicare Part B Premiums Could Be Coming | The Motley Fool

Quote

 

Millions of Americans are eagerly waiting to find out how much their Social Security cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) will be for 2023. However, even the most optimistic estimates of the size of the increase probably aren't high enough to offset the actual higher costs that seniors are incurring.

One big reason why that's the case is that Social Security's COLA calculation doesn't include Medicare Part B premiums.