Obama: Debt Dispute Threatens Social Security

Lamarr

Star
Registered
President Obama said today he can't guarantee that Social Security checks will go out after Aug. 2, unless Congress agrees to increase the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling.

"This is not just a matter of Social Security checks," Obama also told CBS News. "These are veterans' checks; these are folks on disability and their checks. There are about 70 million checks that go out."

When CBS anchor Scott Pelley followed up by asking, "can you guarantee as president those checks will go out on August the 3rd?," Obama said: "I cannot guarantee that those 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."

The interview airs tonight on the CBS Evening News.

Aug, 2 is the date on which the Treasury Department says it can no longer borrow money to pay the nation's bills; that could lead to a default and an inability to mail out government checks.

Obama spoke about Social Security just hours before another meeting with Republican and Democratic congressional leaders on raising the debt ceiling -- and just minutes after GOP leaders blasted him for offering a proposal that is more specific about tax increases than budget cuts.

"In my view the president has presented us with three choices," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., referring to efforts to raise the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling. "Smoke and mirrors, tax hikes, or default."

"Republicans choose none of the above," McConnell said. "I had hoped to do good; but I refuse to do harm."

Republicans, including those who run the U.S. House, say they won't vote for a debt ceiling without offsetting budget cuts.

Obama and the Democrats say any debt reduction plan must be "balanced," including new revenues from the elimination of unfair tax breaks.

Asked about Obama's Social Security comments, White House spokesman Jay Carney said the administration remains confident the debt ceiling will be raised by Aug. 2.

"So this is speculative," Carney said.
 
Fuck raising the debt limit.

Remember, Obama voted against raising it when Bush was in office.

Cut the spending.

Republicans need to force Obama to deal with the shit he has implemented. Plain and simple!

Don't raise taxes, or the debt ceiling. Make Obama cut some of his shit. Bottomline....


I know Thought, and Que are ready to pounce. Remember kids, your side could of stop this back in 09. BTW, why all the sudden we need to raise taxes when Obama could of veto the Bush tax cuts? I swear the economy isn't back up to par. I need an explanation....
 
lol-25.jpg
 
Why don't they just tap into that Social Security Trust fund that supporters of the govt. intervention say, is solvent?

It should be clear, by now, that SS = Ponzi scheme
 
Last edited:
Why don't they just tap into that Social Security Trust fund that supporters of the govt. intervention say, is solvent?

It should be clear, by now, that SS = Ponzi scheme


The republicans have been tapping in to that since the Reagan administration. Social Security is among the most solvent of all government programs. Social Security has nothing to do with the national debt.. The government has been borrowing from Social Security since 1983. The corpitists want that tranche of money!

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

The Trust Fund will gradually be drawn upon to cover the difference between tax receipts and benefit payments. It will be completely depleted by 2042 (according to the Social Security Administration) or 2052 (according to the Congressional Budget Office). However, if the US economy performs better than the economic assumptions and projections used by the SSA and CBO, the trust funds may remain in surplus indefinitely.

Again, the reason for debt is the massive increase in the so called national security budget and the reduction of federal revenues

It should be clear, by now, that SS = Ponzi scheme

Don't be so proud of your ignorance. Go read a book about history.
 
Social Security is among the most solvent of all government programs.

Just a question. Hopefully you will answer this exact question directly & without insults or accusations thrown at any person, party, or ideology. I'm not trying to insult you or anyone else. I just want you to answer this question since you and some others say Social Security is solvent.

If Social Security is solvent, then why did President Obama say that if the debt ceiling is not raised by Aug. 2, then Social Security recipients may not receive their payments?

Thanks Thought. Peace.
 
If Social Security is solvent, then why did President Obama say that if the debt ceiling is not raised by Aug. 2, then Social Security recipients may not receive their payments?

Thanks Thought. Peace.

no answer yet............he aint gon touch this one.
 
Just a question. Hopefully you will answer this exact question directly & without insults or accusations thrown at any person, party, or ideology. I'm not trying to insult you or anyone else. I just want you to answer this question since you and some others say Social Security is solvent.

If Social Security is solvent, then why did President Obama say that if the debt ceiling is not raised by Aug. 2, then Social Security recipients may not receive their payments?

Thanks Thought. Peace.

If Social Security is solvent, then why did President Obama say that if the debt ceiling is not raised by Aug. 2, then Social Security recipients may not receive their payments?


I can't answer for Obama, but:

Source: Wikipedia (Social Security Trust Fund)


The trust funds are "off-budget" and treated separately in certain ways from other Federal spending, and other trust funds of the Federal Government. From the U.S. Code:
EXCLUSION OF SOCIAL SECURITY FROM ALL BUDGETS Pub. L. 101-508, title XIII, Sec. 13301(a), Nov. 5, 1990, 104Stat. 1388-623, provided that: Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the receipts and disbursements of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund shall not be counted as new budget authority, outlays, receipts, or deficit or surplus for purposes of - (1) the budget of the United States Government as submitted by the President, (2) the congressional budget, or (3) the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
The trust funds run surpluses in that the amount paid in by current workers is more than the amount paid out to current beneficiaries. These surpluses are given to the U.S. Treasury (and thus become part of the general federal budget) in exchange for special U.S. government securities, which are deposited into the trust funds. If the trust funds begin running deficits, meaning more in benefits are paid out than contributions paid in, the Social Security Administration is empowered to redeem the securities and use those funds to cover the deficit.

Social Security has been borrowed against since the Reagan administration to fund unpaid for tax cuts. If we just return to pre 19997 defense spending and the Clinton tax format, the debt would shrink.
Answer your question?
 
I can't answer for Obama, but:

Source: Wikipedia (Social Security Trust Fund)




Social Security has been borrowed against since the Reagan administration to fund unpaid for tax cuts. If we just return to pre 19997 defense spending and the Clinton tax format, the debt would shrink.
Answer your question?

No it doesn't answer my question unfortunately because the question was, since the Social Security is solvent as you and others say, then why did President Obama say SS recipients may not get paid if the debt ceiling isn't raised? You linked to a Wikipedia article about the Social Security trust fund and then spoke about the Reagan admin borrowing against it and then suggested how to shrink the debt. I know you said that you can't speak for Obama but you chose to ignore the obvious implication that he made in his statement that Social Security payments are somehow linked to the government's ability to borrow more money. If Social Security is indeed solvent then Social Security recipients can get paid without the debt ceiling raised. The President is either ignorant of even basic information about Social Security, one of our country's largest social programs, or he was flat out lying. So which one is it Thought?

As the Wikipedia article on the Social Security Trust Fund explains:

Recent attention to the Social Security Trust Fund

On February 2, 2005, President George W. Bush made Social Security a prominent theme of his State of the Union Address. One consequence was increased public attention to the nature of the Social Security Trust Fund. Unlike a typical private pension plan, the Social Security Trust Fund does not hold any marketable assets to secure workers' paid-in contributions. Instead, it holds non-negotiable United States Treasury bonds and U.S. securities backed "by the full faith and credit of the government". The Office of Management and Budget has described the distinction as follows:

These [Trust Fund] balances are available to finance future benefit payments and other Trust Fund expenditures – but only in a bookkeeping sense.... They do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits. Instead, they are claims on the Treasury that, when redeemed, will have to be financed by raising taxes, borrowing from the public, or reducing benefits or other expenditures. The existence of large Trust Fund balances, therefore, does not, by itself, have any impact on the Government’s ability to pay benefits. (from FY 2000 Budget, Analytical Perspectives, p. 337)


Look, I'm using your link. As you said, these are facts. Hopefully it won't take you another two days to formulate & response. & hopefully you'll actually respond to what was asked & presented to you. Peace.
 
Last edited:
You need to direct your question to the president.

There was much in my last post for you to respond to. Your silence speaks volumes and you actually have answered the question by choosing not to. Now I know that you know so no need to speak to the president. Good looking.
 
There was much in my last post for you to respond to. Your silence speaks volumes and you actually have answered the question by choosing not to. Now I know that you know so no need to speak to the president. Good looking.



Your silence speaks volumes and you actually have answered the question by choosing not to.

No more than in the thread where you asked me where was the evidence that iit stated that corporations didn't pay any taxes, then I pointed where it specifically said so and you evaporated from that thread. Long forgotten.


I can't answer why he said that. Negotiation tactics?

Actually, I don't know why the debt is such a big issue now any way. For thirty years the republicans increased the national debt from under $1 trillion dollars to $13 trillion dollars. Again, Clinton had issues, but he did succeed and slowing the debt, balancing the budget and putting us on track to reducing the federal debt. We spent a whole thread back in 2007 discussing it (U.S. Economy). I repeatedly brought up how Cheney and Reagan claimed that deficits didn't matter, with nary a peep from the self professed conservatives and libertarians. This was GW's excuse for doubling the debt with their tax cuts and wars. Now president Obama is playing along with the republican Tea Baggers and giving this subject more attention than it currently deserves. I have no idea why he is allowing the right to set the agenda. I thought jobs were issue 1. The debt is an issue, but it will not get solved unless the employment problem is addressed.
 
No more than in the thread where you asked me where was the evidence that iit stated that corporations didn't pay any taxes, then I pointed where it specifically said so and you evaporated from that thread. Long forgotten.


I can't answer why he said that. Negotiation tactics?

Actually, I don't know why the debt is such a big issue now any way. For thirty years the republicans increased the national debt from under $1 trillion dollars to $13 trillion dollars. Again, Clinton had issues, but he did succeed and slowing the debt, balancing the budget and putting us on track to reducing the federal debt. We spent a whole thread back in 2007 discussing it (U.S. Economy). I repeatedly brought up how Cheney and Reagan claimed that deficits didn't matter, with nary a peep from the self professed conservatives and libertarians. This was GW's excuse for doubling the debt with their tax cuts and wars. Now president Obama is playing along with the republican Tea Baggers and giving this subject more attention than it currently deserves. I have no idea why he is allowing the right to set the agenda. I thought jobs were issue 1. The debt is an issue, but it will not get solved unless the employment problem is addressed.

Jobs been the issue since he was elected.
 
Conyers Calls Out Pres Obama

“We’ve got to educate the American people at the same time we educate the President of the United States. The Republicans, Speaker Boehner or Majority Leader Cantor did not call for Social Security cuts in the budget deal. The President of the United States called for that,” Conyers, who has served in the House since 1965, said.

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Op66HTJdf-U?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Op66HTJdf-U?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>
 
Hasn't been an issue for the GOP run House. Still waiting on the first jobs bill or any bill that addresses employment.


The party of no!


<IFRAME style="WIDTH: 303px; HEIGHT: 230px; OVERFLOW: hidden" border=0 src="http://www.dems.gov/sites/all/files/job_counter/widget.html" scrolling=no></IFRAME>


 
Back
Top