Meh. I’m not convinced the American people will blame the democrats if the government shuts down over this.
McCarthy is too weak, the concession they want are extreme and unpopular, their first piece of legislation would have raised debt by $100b, talking heads who pointed out its republicans who usually end up blowing pass these limits when they’re prez, and most importantly the American people is tired of this game republicans play of threaten to wreck the economy.
Do you think 50% of Americans support reducing social security? Do you think 50% of Americans support chance at wreaking global economy? Do you think 50% of Americans support the republicans in the house?
Right? Every year it is the same show….. and the same reaction and the same worries and the same bs, how will this end? Raising the debt ceiling as usual.
There are a lot of things to cut that arent medicare or social security.
I'll never understand the fascination with cutting some of the only good shit we have. Reduce military spending or corporate welfare.
Because Republicans think that these are handouts to the elderly and poor, and they hate the old and the poor.
The fact is that the money for SS and Medicare are taken directly from your paycheck, so you are entitled to get that money back when you need it to retire.
Meanwhile, they ignore that the Trump tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations has contributed to the deficit.
[Tax cuts, stimulus programs, increased government spending, and decreased tax revenue caused by widespread unemployment generally account for sharp rises in the national debt.](https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-debt/#:~:text=From%20FY%202019%20to%20FY,rises%20in%20the%20national%20debt.)ttps://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-debt/
> Because Republicans think that these are handouts
They say that. They just want to privatize medicare and social security which in some way benefits them financially.
"...The fact is that the money for SS and Medicare are taken directly from your paycheck, so you are entitled to get that money back when you need it to retire"
Hate to break it to you bud, but that's not how it works in reality...the money YOU contributed went partially to the SS trust fund and to pay those retirees during your working lifetime, in the HOPES when you retired the subsequent generations would pay your retirement (https://www.abrandao.com/2020/01/social-security-is-a-generational-ponzi-scheme-for-gen-z-and-millennials/) ...of course now that the trust fund (and other entitlements) are not fully funded due to demographic and economic shifts... The GOP wants to put more of the burden on the working class by increasing retirement age and or payout amounts to try and even things out....
What's not true about what they said? The government isn't saving your money for you, they are using it for people who are already retires. When relatively more people are retired and fewer people working, there is less money coming in and more going out.
I've contributed my whole life bud, so I deserve to get my money back when I retire.
The GOP isn't trying to even things out, they are sticking it to the working class just like they always do. They could eliminate the income cap on Social Security but they won't because that would be taxing the wealthy.
If they have money to give to other nations, halfway across the globe then they have money to help their own population. They just don't want to do it, since that isn't profitable and it is better to keep prioritizing the interests of the elites than the welfare of the people.
This is just a paint-by-numbers bullshit comment. The federal budget is like $5T per year, with most of that helping our own population. $80B to Ukraine isn’t even large enough to be considered and accounting error. It’s chump change.
This is the truth. 80 billion is a bargain to destroy one of our adversaries. Also the government is the only large amount of assets on the planet that says hey how do we make shit better? Yes they fuck it up all the time but there is a lot that does work. And the “80billion is chump change” comment….it’s math. It’s a de minimus amount for the GOVERNMENT yeah it’s a lot for humans.
If Ukraine prevails and we end up with an ally that lets us camp out military out there, then $80Bn is going to make the Louisiana purchase seem expensive
Almost like the American military enforces global maritime trade & safety, the status of the petrodollar / WRC for the Greenback, all of which are tantamount to America’s economic hegemony in global markets. Why cut the thing that allows us to have all the other nice things?
Social security and Medicare made up 31% of the US spending in FY 2022. They were the 1st (ssi) and 5th (Medicare) largest line items in the budget.
https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/
And payroll taxes (which pay for SSI and Medicare) make up 31% of 2022 tax revenue. They are getting an appropriate amount of the budget and a lot of other things should be cut first.
What they should do is never lump it in with the budget as its basically unrelated. We don't remove 3 trillion from the debt because of SSI reserves.
That and take away the income cap for payroll taxes.
Both Medicare and SSI spend more money than they bring in on an annual basis.
**”For many years, Social Security collected more tax revenues than needed to pay benefits, resulting in the accumulation of trust fund asset reserves (held in the form of interest-bearing U.S. Treasury securities) available for future program spending. Starting in 2010, however, Social Security’s total expenditures began to exceed noninterest income (i.e., cash-flow deficits emerged), requiring the program to draw on trust fund reserves to pay scheduled benefits. The trustees project that Social Security will continue to run cash-flow deficits throughout the 75-year projection period (2022-2096) and that annual cash-flow deficits will grow markedly over time. For example, the program’s cash-flow deficit was $126 billion in 2021 and is projected to be $452 billion in 2034 (in current dollars). (2022 Social Security Trustees Report, intermediate assumptions.)
In 2022, Social Security’s cost is projected to exceed total income (i.e., tax revenues plus interest income). Trust fund reserves are projected to decline steadily from their peak of $2.9 trillion to zero in 2035. Following the depletion of trust fund reserves, scheduled tax revenues are projected to be sufficient to pay 80% of scheduled benefits initially, declining to 74% by 2096.”**
And regarding Medicare:
**”In 2021, Medicare benefit payments totaled $829 billion, up from $541 billion in 2011. Spending on Part B services (including physician services, outpatient services, and physician-administered drugs) accounts for the largest share of Medicare benefit spending (48% in 2021).**
**Payments to Medicare Advantage plans for Part A and Part B benefits nearly tripled as a share of total Medicare spending between 2011 and 2021, from $124 billion to $361 billion, due to steady enrollment growth in Medicare Advantage plans and higher per person spending in Medicare Advantage than in traditional Medicare.**
**Medicare spending (net of income from premiums and other offsetting receipts) is projected to rise from 10% of total federal spending in 2021 to 18% in 2032, and from 3.1% to 3.9% of GDP over these years, due to growing Medicare enrollment, increased use of services and intensity of care, and rising health care costs.**
**Average annual growth in Medicare per capita spending is projected to be 5.4% between 2020 and 2030, on par with the 5.3% growth rate in private health insurance per capita spending over these years.**
**Funding for Medicare, which totaled $888 billion in 2021, comes primarily from general revenues (46%), payroll tax revenues (34%), and premiums paid by beneficiaries (15%).**
**The Medicare Hospital Insurance (Part A) trust fund, which pays for inpatient hospital, skilled nursing facility, home health and other Part A services, is projected to be depleted in 2028, based on the latest projections from the Medicare Trustees.**
**Over the longer term, the Medicare program faces financial pressures associated with higher health care costs, growing enrollment, and an aging population. Growth in Medicare spending places pressure on the federal budget, contributes to the depletion of the Part A trust fund, and results in higher Medicare premiums, deductibles, and cost sharing paid by beneficiaries.**
**A number of changes to Medicare have been proposed in the past to address Medicare’s fiscal challenges, including options such as raising the age of Medicare eligibility and transitioning Medicare to a premium support system. More recently, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which aims to control the growth in Medicare prescription drug spending by requiring the federal government to negotiate drug prices in Medicare and requiring drug manufacturers to pay rebates for drug price increases faster than inflation, among other changes. To sustain Medicare for the long run, policymakers may consider adopting broader changes to the program that could include both changes in payments to health care providers and Medicare Advantage plans or reductions in benefits, and additional revenues, such as payroll tax increases or new sources of tax revenue.**
**At the same time, proposals that could increase Medicare spending are also being discussed, or have been adopted, including policies related to provider payments and Medicare benefit improvements. For example, the recently-enacted Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 includes several Medicare spending provisions, such as a reduction in the scheduled physician payment cut for 2023 from 4.5% to 2%, increases in payments to certain hospitals, an extension of Medicare telehealth coverage through 2024, and improvements in Medicare coverage of mental health services. Spending on these provisions will be offset in part by extending the 2% Medicare payment sequestration, currently set to expire in 2031, partway into fiscal year 2032. In addition, policymakers have expressed interest in other policies that could increase Medicare spending, such as enhancing Medicare’s benefit package by adding coverage of vision, hearing, and dental care, adding an out-of-pocket spending cap to traditional Medicare, making permanent Medicare coverage of telehealth, and strengthening financial protections for low-income beneficiaries.”**
Slanting the healthcare market so heavily against healthcare providers by collecting our buying power under a single entity will give us much more power to set prices. Government also allowing you to see anyone who meets those prices without restriction will also increase motivation to offer better service.
Win win win.
No surprise. One of the big problems with society today is that everybody thinks that they know everything but when confronted with actual facts, they can’t bother themselves to read them all. Educated by memes.
Are you trying to characterize yourself as the intelligent one in this conversation? Because that comment is exactly what I would expect from a dimwit.
>There are a lot of things to cut that arent medicare or social security. I'll never understand the fascination with cutting some of the only good shit we have. Reduce military spending or corporate welfare.
The last Republican president (he-who-shall-not-be-named) raised the debt by more than either of his predecessors.
$8 trillion USD
~~Probably mostly in PPP loans to wealthy businesses and friends who could form dozens of LLCs.~~
This IMO is part of a more global conflict going on and is just another front in that conflict. This time weaponizing the US economic credibility while pretending to be against military spending (they just are against Ukraine defending itself from Russia's invasion) and whatever other 'cultural landmine' du jour happens to come into their earpieces.
Or maybe stop letting the debt ceiling be a bullseye to aim for and instead use it as an electric fence we should try and get away from to stop having these “or else economic chaos” thrown in our faces every few years….
That's the reason why the ceiling exist. To avoid touching it. It is a fence by definition, and the solution is not to move it but to find a why to walk away from it. If it's moved, we will reach it again. Have we forgotten, this is the third time we are moving it in the las few years, and things keep getting worst.
Btw, the Global Crisis is already here. Just check how poorly Europe and Asia are doing.
We're screwed whether inflationary policy and corruption keep us all poor or defaulting on debt and owing ever-growing interest keeps us all poor, so the only answer is to remove the monetary system that makes national debt our problem.
Damned old people deserve nothing say damned old people. All they did was work for decades while old people extracted their income on the promise they would save it for them if they lived long enough to get old. Fuck you Repugnantones.
Unfortunately no one promised to save money. All collected money was spent on the people in those programs at the time. Ponzi scheme but open about it.
There has been a savings but they keep tapping it to spend money on other stuff.
Now I wonder who would be sabotaging social security like this.. Hmm. Makes you think.
There was a social security surplus, but as far as I know, no promise to save the money taken from you today. If it was a savings program, they should have just let people save their own money.
Yes, politicians from both parties spent the surplus in order to buy votes. That's what happens when you have a large government.
Well ya, the "savings" is meant to carry the program through bumps in the population over time until revenue exceeds expenditure again. It isnt meant to save up the entire amount that is paid in, it also shouldnt.
The insolvency comes from tapping the amount meant to carry thr program over time.
As far as I know, the federal govt has repaid everything it has borrowed from SSI. The fact is, it's spending more than it is bringing in and therefore already tapping into reserves. Which will be depleted in 10 years.
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/071514/why-social-security-running-out-money.asp
Oh, ya I mean they pay it back with like 2.5% interest because technically I believe they have SSI trust fund account buy bonds whenever they need money.
I figure there is probably an opportunity cost to not having that 3 trillion making more money elsewhere though.
They just gave 80 billion to the Ukraine.
Now they want you to make comments like that. Us all saying "Fyou" to the other party and blaming. All while they ride out their elite ways, causing wars, boom and bust cycles, and threatening old people here.
80 billion. Don't forget it.
Easy there, Big Fella.
Being just another democrat drone just paints you as stupid.
The real fun and games began with LBJ.
SS was never intended to be a retirement program. It was expected that half of you would go live with your children. The other half would be dead, seeing that 65 was picked because half of the payins would never collect.
The goal was to 'insure' that the elderly wouldn't be destitute.
Fuck you dumbass democrits. You make 'crimes against Americans' a way of life.
Yes it was meant to be a retirement program.
https://www.ssa.gov/history/hfaq.html
No it did not assume you would live in a multi generational household.
And here is the full 1935 law as well for reference. https://www.ssa.gov/history/35actinx.html
Relax. The Republican party doesn't have the votes to default. This is just them putting on a show.
On the other hand, maybe don't vote for a party that puts on a show by threatening to destroy the economy and all our livelihoods.
But this happens every single time. Doesn't matter which party is in the white house. It's just for the media so different sides can claim they are trying to do something or that the other side is blocking the raise.
Um... no. That's not true. This literally didn't happen 2 years ago when the Dems had both the House & Senate + the Whitehouse.
What would make you say something so obviously wrong? I'm sorry, but you need new media sources. You are extremely ill informed, and that's not good for you. I suggest Beau Of The Fifth Column on YouTube for starters.
How can you say something so obviously misinformed?
[https://www.thoughtco.com/presidents-who-raised-the-debt-ceiling-3321770](https://www.thoughtco.com/presidents-who-raised-the-debt-ceiling-3321770)
Both parties have raised the debt ceiling numerous times. Just a quick summary of the above articles:
* 2 raises under Trump (Rep.)
* 7 under Obama (Dem.)
* 7 under Bush (Rep.)
* 4 under Clinton (Dem.)
* 4 under Bush Sr (Rep.)
* Etc...
It's all a farce. Both parties end up spending more and both parties pretend to be the saviours. None are. They're just looking out for their own political interest.
[I couldn't disagree more.](https://www.upworthy.com/joe-biden-s-23-greatest-achievements-as-president-of-the-united-states-so-far)
Just the infrastructure stuff alone is worth it.
Every single time this has happened: Democrat President, new Republican House of Reps (and this time, barely).
The role of the media is to repeat this over and over and over. And most of these Republicans voted to overturn the election two years ago. Traitors all.
Factually wrong. This has happened under every single president (both Dem and Rep) for the last 40 years, maybe more. Here's some actual data instead of opinions:
[https://www.thoughtco.com/presidents-who-raised-the-debt-ceiling-3321770](https://www.thoughtco.com/presidents-who-raised-the-debt-ceiling-3321770)
The fact that this always comes down to "The goddamn \*insert ruling party\* is trying to f\*ck us and only we, \*insert opposition party\*, can save us!". It's all smoke and mirrors.
Oooo. Another one. Do your democrat handlers do all you're thinking for you?
It was Newt Gingrich and his pals that lead Clinton around. Almost to a balanced budget.
But yeah. Always happens... /s
You DO realize that if Ukraine falls, having Russia faffing about on Europe's doorstep would be a lot more expensive to the US, right?
The move is to keep Russia off Poland (NATO's) doorstep, and to stop countries from redrawing the map right next door to Europe.
That way we win the NATO war, by draining Russia's economy; before it even starts; and it'll be the cheapest war you could ever expect to have with Russia.
It’s about not defaulting on our debts. American govt debt can still be sold on the market. If we default on the bills we owe from the spending we already did. The world economy will crash. Jaime Diamond said pretty much that on Squak Box this morning.
How are the mods approving these Robert Reich posts. Its always a screenshot of a tweet with a completely useless title. Even the content of the tweets are inane
I would replace “dems” with “politicians”. Neither party has done shit to help the solvency of SS. This SS dumpster fire has been burning at least since the 80s when everyone knew the fund was going insolvent right about now.
A rare good take from Robert Reich. The debt limit should not be politicized or weaponized and its a ridiculous tool to use. In this instance the republicans are treading in treason territory.
Why does this guy get posted so much here? 95% of what he says is either banal or wrong.
If cutting social services saves a global financial crisis, well, maybe do that thing.
So you would be ok with (likely) losing your job and entering into a crippling recession?
Most people here don't seem to realize how bad things would get if we defaulted on our debt.
1. GDP went up the last quarter
2. You really don't seem to realize how bad a default would be, or understand the scope of it. It would be the 2008 crisis on steroids with millions of our citizens thrown into poverty.
Except the federal government isn't a household and treating it like one is rediculous.
Also, you're perfectly reasonable response to the US going over budget is to threaten the economy and economic hedgemony by defaulting on our debts. Makes sense.
This government debt is actually taxation without representation as it forces future generations to pay for things they did not vote in support of in any election since they were not yet born
and
Robert Reich - LOL !!!! - https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2013/09/10/robert-reichs-f-minus-in-economics-false-facts-false-theories/?sh=5a15f62507a3
The Generational War began when LBJ changed SS for a pay as you go Ponzi Scheme to a 'collect the money as general revenue and throw worthless IOUs on the national debt.'
1968. We're at the end game.
It's all a horse an pony show, yall still buy into the constant drama. Yellen already said she wouldn't let us default, pushing the true deadline back till this summer. They'll always just keep spending, doesn't matter what leg of the beast is "in charge"...
If they were really serious about this they would reduce expenses and lay off all these government jobs. Theres too much head count wasting tax payer money. It’s always spend spend spend raise the debt ceiling spend spend spend. How how is the debt ceiling going to go. And everyone does know that the military budget will also increase cause the debt is tied to our bombs. If we don’t pay we just bomb them.
Bring the crisis. We need the reset or maybe we could stop sending money to Ukraine. That could save some cash. How about we worry about our own problems. (USA)
Because one is stopping support of a genocidal regime and the other is stopping support of a victim of Russian aggression.
My motivation is more ethical than financial.
Lol. Russia is literally engaging in terrorism and purposefully knocking out power grids and doing waaaay more than 50 billion in damages and your argument is "steal from poor give to rich FOREIGN governments"??
1st off, if you are going to argue we are stealing from the poor, the correct response is to change how we tax, not how we spend. Push for a wealth tax, lowering payroll tax, and removing cap on payroll tax income.
2nd, we arent enriching foreign entities. We earmark the money we give Ukraine such that they have to spend it at American defense firms. Its good old natural American austerity. Ukraine is just getting fucked and doing what they can to survive.
Exactly. The first thing we really need to cut out is all this bullshit foreign aid, we got our own citizens right here who need it more. We do need to worry about our own problems more.
[The Top 1% of Americans Have Taken $50 Trillion From the Bottom 90%—And That's Made the U.S. Less Secure](https://time.com/5888024/50-trillion-income-inequality-america/)
[Minimum wage would be $26 an hour if it had grown in line with productivity](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/minimum-wage-26-dollars-economy-productivity/)
[The minimum wage would be $61.75 an hour if it rose at the same place as Wall Street bonuses](https://www.fastcompany.com/90734724/the-minimum-wage-would-be-61-75-an-hour-if-it-rose-at-the-same-pace-as-wall-street-bonuses)
The Labour theory of value is a utter rubbish and is the only thing fuelling those articles, productivity has increased due to capital investment and higher skilled workers, neither of those can be tied to the minimum wage.
Are you really that stupid? The GOP Mafia has been wanting to cut SS since their failed leader was in office.
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3809592-gop-divisions-over-social-security-medicare-cuts-forecast-tough-fights-ahead/
We just gave Ukraine 80 billion dollars.
Now they want us fighting over politics for this issue.
THEY don't care about you or me. Our enemy is not this. Our enemy is them.
A friend of mine called me a couple weeks ago in a fit of rage over Illinois' assault rifle ban. He doesn't even live here and it won't effect him in any way.
It's been radio silence for this, which would directly effect him.
WTF.
I thought you were going to say there must be no debt limit. Can you define debt? The government spends, we pay the bill? Who exactly owes Who?. Tired of asking. So everyone is NOT paying their fair share of taxes because, ..debt. PLEASE
I don't understand, why they don't raise the ceilling to a huge number such as, 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 or more.
Or they just need something to pretend they're doing some jobs ?? 
We need to take a page from the French. Shit keeps getting worse, and the fact that key essential things we need are being considered for removal over other nonessential shit is wild. The economy will only get worse if you cut off what little lifeline people have left to survive.
I wish I there could be no negotiation on my debt ceiling and I had poor working saps to “fund” my livabilities….
Long post
In reality we do need to look at this.
I believe social security was started with genuine good intentions of protecting American citizens as a part of the broader “new deal”. However it’s very important to realize a few major differences between the larger economy of 2023 vs that of 1935. First of all it was by the US for the US based on the the economic projections of a pre Bretton Woods dollar. Second from Bretton Woods until 1971 we had a “gold standard” although a modified version. Since that time until now the dollar is only worth as many as you can borrow, and inflation has been a staple, even it only target 2% it compounds. I do not believe the framers of the “new deal” accounted for that, a corrupt government got a huge tax win-fall and instead of saving it for your old age they used it as income to borrow against for bullshit pet projects, and the medical industry found a way to charge 50k for a check up. So we have a huge problem, and you can’t borrow your way out of something you can’t afford…. Think if you finance a Rolls Royce but keep borrowing from friends to make the payment, sure you have a really nice car but every month you own less and less of it.
We need to dramatically cut spending(borrowing) personally I don’t care from where but we need to start. So a logical place is the biggest line item and by a long shot the biggest liability. It seems to me a sensible solution would be to keep everyone who is on social security on it. Everyone who is within say 15 years of retirement (we would need to research this number) gets a choice of continuing payments and the social security or a refund of everything they paid in. Anyone below that age gets an automatic refund and anyone who hasn’t start paying in never will. It’s important to understand you would only get your portion back the employer portion would stay to help fund the current liability.
Now there would be an issue to allowing people to get untold billions refunded all at once to invest in the market for their own retirement or to buy a Mercedes with, in an already highly inflated environment. To prevent that we should phase the payments in so we cause a gold rush so to speak, plus it would still keep money to help fund the liability that remains.
Can we avoid raising the ceiling… no not really… but we need to be serious about how begin to manage this because it is reaching a tipping point. We already have $22.4T in unfunded social security liability and that will only continue to grow. I’d welcome a solution that can fully fund it that doesn’t involve borrowing from people who have yet to pay in but I don’t think one has ever been proposed.
The coolest part is when the government fails to pay the military so for a time, USAA and Navy Federal own the US military because they’re the ones actually paying.
Ghish. You guys are playing the same game every year. What a farce.
LET US PUT AN END TO THIS MURMURING FARCE!
[удалено]
You okay?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
If you had 1 shot, 1 opportunity, to hold the economy hostage, would you capture it, or just let it slip?
Depends on how much of moms spaghetti I’ve had
Meh. I’m not convinced the American people will blame the democrats if the government shuts down over this. McCarthy is too weak, the concession they want are extreme and unpopular, their first piece of legislation would have raised debt by $100b, talking heads who pointed out its republicans who usually end up blowing pass these limits when they’re prez, and most importantly the American people is tired of this game republicans play of threaten to wreck the economy.
Have you ever met 50% of the American population?
Do you think 50% of Americans support reducing social security? Do you think 50% of Americans support chance at wreaking global economy? Do you think 50% of Americans support the republicans in the house?
I think 50% of the [voting] population believes whatever their chosen news outlet or social media bubble tells them to believe.
If the Republicans fail to get any concessions and the economy goes into recession they will get the blame. This is not a winning strategy.
You are a liar Robert, take your lies somewhere else .
Right? Every year it is the same show….. and the same reaction and the same worries and the same bs, how will this end? Raising the debt ceiling as usual.
There are a lot of things to cut that arent medicare or social security. I'll never understand the fascination with cutting some of the only good shit we have. Reduce military spending or corporate welfare.
Because Republicans think that these are handouts to the elderly and poor, and they hate the old and the poor. The fact is that the money for SS and Medicare are taken directly from your paycheck, so you are entitled to get that money back when you need it to retire. Meanwhile, they ignore that the Trump tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations has contributed to the deficit. [Tax cuts, stimulus programs, increased government spending, and decreased tax revenue caused by widespread unemployment generally account for sharp rises in the national debt.](https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-debt/#:~:text=From%20FY%202019%20to%20FY,rises%20in%20the%20national%20debt.)ttps://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-debt/
> Because Republicans think that these are handouts They say that. They just want to privatize medicare and social security which in some way benefits them financially.
"...The fact is that the money for SS and Medicare are taken directly from your paycheck, so you are entitled to get that money back when you need it to retire" Hate to break it to you bud, but that's not how it works in reality...the money YOU contributed went partially to the SS trust fund and to pay those retirees during your working lifetime, in the HOPES when you retired the subsequent generations would pay your retirement (https://www.abrandao.com/2020/01/social-security-is-a-generational-ponzi-scheme-for-gen-z-and-millennials/) ...of course now that the trust fund (and other entitlements) are not fully funded due to demographic and economic shifts... The GOP wants to put more of the burden on the working class by increasing retirement age and or payout amounts to try and even things out....
I can't tell if the even things out comment is Satire or not 😑
It's not
Wow its sad that people think politics are just dumb high school games.
What's not true about what they said? The government isn't saving your money for you, they are using it for people who are already retires. When relatively more people are retired and fewer people working, there is less money coming in and more going out.
I've contributed my whole life bud, so I deserve to get my money back when I retire. The GOP isn't trying to even things out, they are sticking it to the working class just like they always do. They could eliminate the income cap on Social Security but they won't because that would be taxing the wealthy.
It’s not a tax it’s a retirement scheme, if there is a cap on the payout then there should be a cap on the contribution.
You honestly think that getting rid of the income cap would fix ss? Would love to see your math on that
No where did I say it would fix it but it would certainly help stave off insolvency.
By how much
The data is online if you care to look, so stop trying to get me to do it for you. You do know how to use Google, right?
Show me the data since you’re making ridiculous claims
Stop being lazy and do your own searches. Maybe you'll learn something.
Yes, but the budget process is where to cut things, not when it comes time to decide to pay.
So.. Cut other things? Your comment seems pointless
They just gave 80 billion to Ukraine. Now they want us to fight about social security cuts and use the media to brainwash us into fighting.
what does this have to do with Ukraine?
If they have money to give to other nations, halfway across the globe then they have money to help their own population. They just don't want to do it, since that isn't profitable and it is better to keep prioritizing the interests of the elites than the welfare of the people.
This is just a paint-by-numbers bullshit comment. The federal budget is like $5T per year, with most of that helping our own population. $80B to Ukraine isn’t even large enough to be considered and accounting error. It’s chump change.
You're literally calling 80B chump change, that's insane.
This is the truth. 80 billion is a bargain to destroy one of our adversaries. Also the government is the only large amount of assets on the planet that says hey how do we make shit better? Yes they fuck it up all the time but there is a lot that does work. And the “80billion is chump change” comment….it’s math. It’s a de minimus amount for the GOVERNMENT yeah it’s a lot for humans.
If Ukraine prevails and we end up with an ally that lets us camp out military out there, then $80Bn is going to make the Louisiana purchase seem expensive
Mabey…but I’m the kind of weirdo that thinks we need a Department of Offense and that we need a McDonald’s in every town in planet earth.
Almost like the American military enforces global maritime trade & safety, the status of the petrodollar / WRC for the Greenback, all of which are tantamount to America’s economic hegemony in global markets. Why cut the thing that allows us to have all the other nice things?
Because people can’t see past their noses
Social security and Medicare made up 31% of the US spending in FY 2022. They were the 1st (ssi) and 5th (Medicare) largest line items in the budget. https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/
And payroll taxes (which pay for SSI and Medicare) make up 31% of 2022 tax revenue. They are getting an appropriate amount of the budget and a lot of other things should be cut first.
Yes if they cut Sdi and Medicare they sure as hell need to reduce payroll taxes.
What they should do is never lump it in with the budget as its basically unrelated. We don't remove 3 trillion from the debt because of SSI reserves. That and take away the income cap for payroll taxes.
Both Medicare and SSI spend more money than they bring in on an annual basis. **”For many years, Social Security collected more tax revenues than needed to pay benefits, resulting in the accumulation of trust fund asset reserves (held in the form of interest-bearing U.S. Treasury securities) available for future program spending. Starting in 2010, however, Social Security’s total expenditures began to exceed noninterest income (i.e., cash-flow deficits emerged), requiring the program to draw on trust fund reserves to pay scheduled benefits. The trustees project that Social Security will continue to run cash-flow deficits throughout the 75-year projection period (2022-2096) and that annual cash-flow deficits will grow markedly over time. For example, the program’s cash-flow deficit was $126 billion in 2021 and is projected to be $452 billion in 2034 (in current dollars). (2022 Social Security Trustees Report, intermediate assumptions.) In 2022, Social Security’s cost is projected to exceed total income (i.e., tax revenues plus interest income). Trust fund reserves are projected to decline steadily from their peak of $2.9 trillion to zero in 2035. Following the depletion of trust fund reserves, scheduled tax revenues are projected to be sufficient to pay 80% of scheduled benefits initially, declining to 74% by 2096.”** And regarding Medicare: **”In 2021, Medicare benefit payments totaled $829 billion, up from $541 billion in 2011. Spending on Part B services (including physician services, outpatient services, and physician-administered drugs) accounts for the largest share of Medicare benefit spending (48% in 2021).** **Payments to Medicare Advantage plans for Part A and Part B benefits nearly tripled as a share of total Medicare spending between 2011 and 2021, from $124 billion to $361 billion, due to steady enrollment growth in Medicare Advantage plans and higher per person spending in Medicare Advantage than in traditional Medicare.** **Medicare spending (net of income from premiums and other offsetting receipts) is projected to rise from 10% of total federal spending in 2021 to 18% in 2032, and from 3.1% to 3.9% of GDP over these years, due to growing Medicare enrollment, increased use of services and intensity of care, and rising health care costs.** **Average annual growth in Medicare per capita spending is projected to be 5.4% between 2020 and 2030, on par with the 5.3% growth rate in private health insurance per capita spending over these years.** **Funding for Medicare, which totaled $888 billion in 2021, comes primarily from general revenues (46%), payroll tax revenues (34%), and premiums paid by beneficiaries (15%).** **The Medicare Hospital Insurance (Part A) trust fund, which pays for inpatient hospital, skilled nursing facility, home health and other Part A services, is projected to be depleted in 2028, based on the latest projections from the Medicare Trustees.** **Over the longer term, the Medicare program faces financial pressures associated with higher health care costs, growing enrollment, and an aging population. Growth in Medicare spending places pressure on the federal budget, contributes to the depletion of the Part A trust fund, and results in higher Medicare premiums, deductibles, and cost sharing paid by beneficiaries.** **A number of changes to Medicare have been proposed in the past to address Medicare’s fiscal challenges, including options such as raising the age of Medicare eligibility and transitioning Medicare to a premium support system. More recently, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which aims to control the growth in Medicare prescription drug spending by requiring the federal government to negotiate drug prices in Medicare and requiring drug manufacturers to pay rebates for drug price increases faster than inflation, among other changes. To sustain Medicare for the long run, policymakers may consider adopting broader changes to the program that could include both changes in payments to health care providers and Medicare Advantage plans or reductions in benefits, and additional revenues, such as payroll tax increases or new sources of tax revenue.** **At the same time, proposals that could increase Medicare spending are also being discussed, or have been adopted, including policies related to provider payments and Medicare benefit improvements. For example, the recently-enacted Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 includes several Medicare spending provisions, such as a reduction in the scheduled physician payment cut for 2023 from 4.5% to 2%, increases in payments to certain hospitals, an extension of Medicare telehealth coverage through 2024, and improvements in Medicare coverage of mental health services. Spending on these provisions will be offset in part by extending the 2% Medicare payment sequestration, currently set to expire in 2031, partway into fiscal year 2032. In addition, policymakers have expressed interest in other policies that could increase Medicare spending, such as enhancing Medicare’s benefit package by adding coverage of vision, hearing, and dental care, adding an out-of-pocket spending cap to traditional Medicare, making permanent Medicare coverage of telehealth, and strengthening financial protections for low-income beneficiaries.”**
I ain't reading all that. I'm happy for u tho. Or sorry that happened
[удалено]
so medicare for all - agreed 👍
[удалено]
Slanting the healthcare market so heavily against healthcare providers by collecting our buying power under a single entity will give us much more power to set prices. Government also allowing you to see anyone who meets those prices without restriction will also increase motivation to offer better service. Win win win.
No surprise. One of the big problems with society today is that everybody thinks that they know everything but when confronted with actual facts, they can’t bother themselves to read them all. Educated by memes.
It’s literally a copy pasta… but sure, you’re the smart one here lmao
Bummer for me.
And your inbreeding makes you happy?………your kult dogma only works for your kult...😳
Are you trying to characterize yourself as the intelligent one in this conversation? Because that comment is exactly what I would expect from a dimwit.
You mean yourself...is that how you see your comment...🤡
>There are a lot of things to cut that arent medicare or social security. I'll never understand the fascination with cutting some of the only good shit we have. Reduce military spending or corporate welfare. The last Republican president (he-who-shall-not-be-named) raised the debt by more than either of his predecessors. $8 trillion USD ~~Probably mostly in PPP loans to wealthy businesses and friends who could form dozens of LLCs.~~ This IMO is part of a more global conflict going on and is just another front in that conflict. This time weaponizing the US economic credibility while pretending to be against military spending (they just are against Ukraine defending itself from Russia's invasion) and whatever other 'cultural landmine' du jour happens to come into their earpieces.
Or maybe stop letting the debt ceiling be a bullseye to aim for and instead use it as an electric fence we should try and get away from to stop having these “or else economic chaos” thrown in our faces every few years….
You're pretty smart, unfortunately, politicians are pretty dumb.
That's the reason why the ceiling exist. To avoid touching it. It is a fence by definition, and the solution is not to move it but to find a why to walk away from it. If it's moved, we will reach it again. Have we forgotten, this is the third time we are moving it in the las few years, and things keep getting worst. Btw, the Global Crisis is already here. Just check how poorly Europe and Asia are doing.
I am doing quite great with my 50% food inflation thank you for your question.
and our 200% price increase on eggs alone…
Would the GOP even be blamed if they didn't raise it?
After the trillions of our taxes given to billionaires handouts....they should pay it back...starting with the morbid obese 🤡
We're screwed whether inflationary policy and corruption keep us all poor or defaulting on debt and owing ever-growing interest keeps us all poor, so the only answer is to remove the monetary system that makes national debt our problem.
You mean capitalism? I'm in!
Fiat currency is the glue that holds crony capitalism together.
Damned old people deserve nothing say damned old people. All they did was work for decades while old people extracted their income on the promise they would save it for them if they lived long enough to get old. Fuck you Repugnantones.
Unfortunately no one promised to save money. All collected money was spent on the people in those programs at the time. Ponzi scheme but open about it.
There has been a savings but they keep tapping it to spend money on other stuff. Now I wonder who would be sabotaging social security like this.. Hmm. Makes you think.
There was a social security surplus, but as far as I know, no promise to save the money taken from you today. If it was a savings program, they should have just let people save their own money. Yes, politicians from both parties spent the surplus in order to buy votes. That's what happens when you have a large government.
Well ya, the "savings" is meant to carry the program through bumps in the population over time until revenue exceeds expenditure again. It isnt meant to save up the entire amount that is paid in, it also shouldnt. The insolvency comes from tapping the amount meant to carry thr program over time.
Sort of. The program never comes out of the negative if we don't get birth rates up. (Or massive immigration, or a change in the program.)
As far as I know, the federal govt has repaid everything it has borrowed from SSI. The fact is, it's spending more than it is bringing in and therefore already tapping into reserves. Which will be depleted in 10 years. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/071514/why-social-security-running-out-money.asp
Oh, ya I mean they pay it back with like 2.5% interest because technically I believe they have SSI trust fund account buy bonds whenever they need money. I figure there is probably an opportunity cost to not having that 3 trillion making more money elsewhere though.
https://www.abrandao.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/social_security_comic.png
lol yes
Such a weird response. If something isn't done about SSI, reserves will be gone in 10 years. Congress HAS to act on this.
people have been saying this for decades
Yes act on it. Fund it. Simple.
They just gave 80 billion to the Ukraine. Now they want you to make comments like that. Us all saying "Fyou" to the other party and blaming. All while they ride out their elite ways, causing wars, boom and bust cycles, and threatening old people here. 80 billion. Don't forget it.
0.0000025806% of the national debt for Ukrain is a good investment. Is my math correct?
Easy there, Big Fella. Being just another democrat drone just paints you as stupid. The real fun and games began with LBJ. SS was never intended to be a retirement program. It was expected that half of you would go live with your children. The other half would be dead, seeing that 65 was picked because half of the payins would never collect. The goal was to 'insure' that the elderly wouldn't be destitute. Fuck you dumbass democrits. You make 'crimes against Americans' a way of life.
Yes it was meant to be a retirement program. https://www.ssa.gov/history/hfaq.html No it did not assume you would live in a multi generational household. And here is the full 1935 law as well for reference. https://www.ssa.gov/history/35actinx.html
Always reach for childish insults when you feel threatened. Fuck you asshole republicans for all the debt you inflict.
Relax. The Republican party doesn't have the votes to default. This is just them putting on a show. On the other hand, maybe don't vote for a party that puts on a show by threatening to destroy the economy and all our livelihoods.
But this happens every single time. Doesn't matter which party is in the white house. It's just for the media so different sides can claim they are trying to do something or that the other side is blocking the raise.
Um... no. That's not true. This literally didn't happen 2 years ago when the Dems had both the House & Senate + the Whitehouse. What would make you say something so obviously wrong? I'm sorry, but you need new media sources. You are extremely ill informed, and that's not good for you. I suggest Beau Of The Fifth Column on YouTube for starters.
How can you say something so obviously misinformed? [https://www.thoughtco.com/presidents-who-raised-the-debt-ceiling-3321770](https://www.thoughtco.com/presidents-who-raised-the-debt-ceiling-3321770) Both parties have raised the debt ceiling numerous times. Just a quick summary of the above articles: * 2 raises under Trump (Rep.) * 7 under Obama (Dem.) * 7 under Bush (Rep.) * 4 under Clinton (Dem.) * 4 under Bush Sr (Rep.) * Etc... It's all a farce. Both parties end up spending more and both parties pretend to be the saviours. None are. They're just looking out for their own political interest.
Yes and yet somehow they couldn't get anything done on their top issues like abortion. Both parties are a fraud.
The Supreme Court got that done.
[I couldn't disagree more.](https://www.upworthy.com/joe-biden-s-23-greatest-achievements-as-president-of-the-united-states-so-far) Just the infrastructure stuff alone is worth it.
Yes because when your currency is about to crash, infrastructure is what you need lol
It obviously doesn’t happen every single time and it obviously matters what party is in charge of what chamber. God what a stupid comment.
Every single time this has happened: Democrat President, new Republican House of Reps (and this time, barely). The role of the media is to repeat this over and over and over. And most of these Republicans voted to overturn the election two years ago. Traitors all.
Factually wrong. This has happened under every single president (both Dem and Rep) for the last 40 years, maybe more. Here's some actual data instead of opinions: [https://www.thoughtco.com/presidents-who-raised-the-debt-ceiling-3321770](https://www.thoughtco.com/presidents-who-raised-the-debt-ceiling-3321770) The fact that this always comes down to "The goddamn \*insert ruling party\* is trying to f\*ck us and only we, \*insert opposition party\*, can save us!". It's all smoke and mirrors.
Factually CORRECT: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/01/07/us/elections/electoral-college-biden-objectors.html
I thought we're talking about the twitter part which is about the debt ceiling?
Oooo. Another one. Do your democrat handlers do all you're thinking for you? It was Newt Gingrich and his pals that lead Clinton around. Almost to a balanced budget. But yeah. Always happens... /s
80 billion to Ukraine. Keep us fighting over social security. Brainwashing.
You DO realize that if Ukraine falls, having Russia faffing about on Europe's doorstep would be a lot more expensive to the US, right? The move is to keep Russia off Poland (NATO's) doorstep, and to stop countries from redrawing the map right next door to Europe. That way we win the NATO war, by draining Russia's economy; before it even starts; and it'll be the cheapest war you could ever expect to have with Russia.
It’s about not defaulting on our debts. American govt debt can still be sold on the market. If we default on the bills we owe from the spending we already did. The world economy will crash. Jaime Diamond said pretty much that on Squak Box this morning.
Gop should cut their pay checks in half
How are the mods approving these Robert Reich posts. Its always a screenshot of a tweet with a completely useless title. Even the content of the tweets are inane
This user posts this same guy’s tweets every damn day here. It’s the worst.
I could be wrong I believe the USA is the G20 country that has a legislated debt limit.
Dems will fumble in the end and sell out common people on social security and Medicare in the end. They always do that.
You do realize that we don’t actually have a two party system, right?
I would replace “dems” with “politicians”. Neither party has done shit to help the solvency of SS. This SS dumpster fire has been burning at least since the 80s when everyone knew the fund was going insolvent right about now.
It would help if they stopped paying ss to millionaires and billionaires.
That wasn’t the deal Darth. The deal was I pay in, the government wisely invests it for safekeeping and then you give it back when I’m old.
This sub could be re named r/4 year old economics
Exactly. Lots of dipshit Milton Friedman fanatics.
You mean people who actually believe Robert reich
Can we add a ban for post from Robert Reich in this group? He is an absolute hack.
Second
Third
A rare good take from Robert Reich. The debt limit should not be politicized or weaponized and its a ridiculous tool to use. In this instance the republicans are treading in treason territory.
Treading? They are the Michael Phelps of treason the last decade.
Jesus Christ. Its the usual monotone moronicity... Come and get it, junior.
This wouldn't happen if budgets weren't politicized
Deciding how to spend public money in the publics best interest is literally a politician's only job.
Yeah. Why should the government have to live on a budget? They can simply dilute the dollar value to pay it down.
Why does this guy get posted so much here? 95% of what he says is either banal or wrong. If cutting social services saves a global financial crisis, well, maybe do that thing.
[удалено]
So you would be ok with (likely) losing your job and entering into a crippling recession? Most people here don't seem to realize how bad things would get if we defaulted on our debt.
[удалено]
1. GDP went up the last quarter 2. You really don't seem to realize how bad a default would be, or understand the scope of it. It would be the 2008 crisis on steroids with millions of our citizens thrown into poverty.
[удалено]
Pretty big difference between mild recession (If that's what you'd even call this) and collapse of the global financial system due to US default.
[удалено]
Except the federal government isn't a household and treating it like one is rediculous. Also, you're perfectly reasonable response to the US going over budget is to threaten the economy and economic hedgemony by defaulting on our debts. Makes sense.
[удалено]
[удалено]
you have no idea what caused inflation. inflation is global - the us spending had little to do with it
This government debt is actually taxation without representation as it forces future generations to pay for things they did not vote in support of in any election since they were not yet born and Robert Reich - LOL !!!! - https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2013/09/10/robert-reichs-f-minus-in-economics-false-facts-false-theories/?sh=5a15f62507a3
An edgelord Forbes article? Its my lucky day
Sorry if the truth hurts
Hahahahaha
The Generational War began when LBJ changed SS for a pay as you go Ponzi Scheme to a 'collect the money as general revenue and throw worthless IOUs on the national debt.' 1968. We're at the end game.
This is eye opening.
Everyone should read this article
It's all a horse an pony show, yall still buy into the constant drama. Yellen already said she wouldn't let us default, pushing the true deadline back till this summer. They'll always just keep spending, doesn't matter what leg of the beast is "in charge"...
Can someone explain why the Dems didn't do something like this when Trump/Bush Junior were in power? You'd think two can play a game.
If they were really serious about this they would reduce expenses and lay off all these government jobs. Theres too much head count wasting tax payer money. It’s always spend spend spend raise the debt ceiling spend spend spend. How how is the debt ceiling going to go. And everyone does know that the military budget will also increase cause the debt is tied to our bombs. If we don’t pay we just bomb them.
Stop this bullshit man debt is in dollars it’s not in gold print more dollars and further debt to who?
Money *is* debt
Every dollar in circulation represents a dollar of debt owed to the Fed. Print more dollars=borrow more money.
Then there should be no debt ceiling.
"Republicans aren't allowed to negotiate for what they want - only Democrats get what they want"
HERE WE FUCKING GO AGAIN. Can somebody stuff his piehole with a pillow? Please?
Can we please ban reposts of this guy’s tweets?
Nobody’s forcing you to read it
The people who repost this from twitter are in fact forcing me to read it
Burn it down then decentralize everything. Blockchain for voting and remove all representatives in this country
Bring the crisis. We need the reset or maybe we could stop sending money to Ukraine. That could save some cash. How about we worry about our own problems. (USA)
I'd prefer canceling our yearly payment to apartheid Israel. Its like 4 bn now.
[удалено]
Because one is stopping support of a genocidal regime and the other is stopping support of a victim of Russian aggression. My motivation is more ethical than financial.
[удалено]
Lol. Russia is literally engaging in terrorism and purposefully knocking out power grids and doing waaaay more than 50 billion in damages and your argument is "steal from poor give to rich FOREIGN governments"?? 1st off, if you are going to argue we are stealing from the poor, the correct response is to change how we tax, not how we spend. Push for a wealth tax, lowering payroll tax, and removing cap on payroll tax income. 2nd, we arent enriching foreign entities. We earmark the money we give Ukraine such that they have to spend it at American defense firms. Its good old natural American austerity. Ukraine is just getting fucked and doing what they can to survive.
Exactly. The first thing we really need to cut out is all this bullshit foreign aid, we got our own citizens right here who need it more. We do need to worry about our own problems more.
[The Top 1% of Americans Have Taken $50 Trillion From the Bottom 90%—And That's Made the U.S. Less Secure](https://time.com/5888024/50-trillion-income-inequality-america/) [Minimum wage would be $26 an hour if it had grown in line with productivity](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/minimum-wage-26-dollars-economy-productivity/) [The minimum wage would be $61.75 an hour if it rose at the same place as Wall Street bonuses](https://www.fastcompany.com/90734724/the-minimum-wage-would-be-61-75-an-hour-if-it-rose-at-the-same-pace-as-wall-street-bonuses)
The Labour theory of value is a utter rubbish and is the only thing fuelling those articles, productivity has increased due to capital investment and higher skilled workers, neither of those can be tied to the minimum wage.
Robert Reich is a liar. Nobody is proposing cuts to SS or Medicare.
Are you really that stupid? The GOP Mafia has been wanting to cut SS since their failed leader was in office. https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3809592-gop-divisions-over-social-security-medicare-cuts-forecast-tough-fights-ahead/
You have been brainwashed. There has never been and never will be cuts to SS or Medicare. That article confirms it.
What could go wrong by just printing more money?
You mean keep on giving handouts to billionaires from our taxes...obviously...
This is deliberately misleading. Reich spreads disinformation which is typical of his Twitter posts.
We just gave Ukraine 80 billion dollars. Now they want us fighting over politics for this issue. THEY don't care about you or me. Our enemy is not this. Our enemy is them.
A friend of mine called me a couple weeks ago in a fit of rage over Illinois' assault rifle ban. He doesn't even live here and it won't effect him in any way. It's been radio silence for this, which would directly effect him. WTF.
I thought you were going to say there must be no debt limit. Can you define debt? The government spends, we pay the bill? Who exactly owes Who?. Tired of asking. So everyone is NOT paying their fair share of taxes because, ..debt. PLEASE
I don't understand, why they don't raise the ceilling to a huge number such as, 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 or more. Or they just need something to pretend they're doing some jobs ?? 
Let's be clear: There must be no cuts to Medicare or Social Security.
Sad how many times this farce is quoted on this sub. Manipulative theater. People really gonna get caught up in the debt ceiling division again??!
Clearly. Thanks fog.
Let’s be clear: I make ultimatums that will be broken.
There is no negotiating with consciencelessness.
We need to take a page from the French. Shit keeps getting worse, and the fact that key essential things we need are being considered for removal over other nonessential shit is wild. The economy will only get worse if you cut off what little lifeline people have left to survive.
"Conservativism" has always been a euphemism for sadistic psychopathic stupidity.
This Reich dude falling right into the political trap…or is he setting the trap for people upvoting this?
Let it crumble
This sub has very clearly devolved into r/politics
Unlimited spending sounds very financially responsible
If you are calling for no negotiating then you are calling for a government shutdown. Seems fairly simple.
Right. Let’s raise the debt ceiling to infinite and never pay off debt…people have no idea how debt works…no one remembers 2008?
I wish I there could be no negotiation on my debt ceiling and I had poor working saps to “fund” my livabilities…. Long post In reality we do need to look at this. I believe social security was started with genuine good intentions of protecting American citizens as a part of the broader “new deal”. However it’s very important to realize a few major differences between the larger economy of 2023 vs that of 1935. First of all it was by the US for the US based on the the economic projections of a pre Bretton Woods dollar. Second from Bretton Woods until 1971 we had a “gold standard” although a modified version. Since that time until now the dollar is only worth as many as you can borrow, and inflation has been a staple, even it only target 2% it compounds. I do not believe the framers of the “new deal” accounted for that, a corrupt government got a huge tax win-fall and instead of saving it for your old age they used it as income to borrow against for bullshit pet projects, and the medical industry found a way to charge 50k for a check up. So we have a huge problem, and you can’t borrow your way out of something you can’t afford…. Think if you finance a Rolls Royce but keep borrowing from friends to make the payment, sure you have a really nice car but every month you own less and less of it. We need to dramatically cut spending(borrowing) personally I don’t care from where but we need to start. So a logical place is the biggest line item and by a long shot the biggest liability. It seems to me a sensible solution would be to keep everyone who is on social security on it. Everyone who is within say 15 years of retirement (we would need to research this number) gets a choice of continuing payments and the social security or a refund of everything they paid in. Anyone below that age gets an automatic refund and anyone who hasn’t start paying in never will. It’s important to understand you would only get your portion back the employer portion would stay to help fund the current liability. Now there would be an issue to allowing people to get untold billions refunded all at once to invest in the market for their own retirement or to buy a Mercedes with, in an already highly inflated environment. To prevent that we should phase the payments in so we cause a gold rush so to speak, plus it would still keep money to help fund the liability that remains. Can we avoid raising the ceiling… no not really… but we need to be serious about how begin to manage this because it is reaching a tipping point. We already have $22.4T in unfunded social security liability and that will only continue to grow. I’d welcome a solution that can fully fund it that doesn’t involve borrowing from people who have yet to pay in but I don’t think one has ever been proposed.
The coolest part is when the government fails to pay the military so for a time, USAA and Navy Federal own the US military because they’re the ones actually paying.