• It seems social security should be able to move towards righting itself in the next 15-20 years when the heavy senior populace and baby boomers begin to die off. That is, if we can get control of illegal immigration. A limit on survivor benefits would seem to be in order as well.

    November 16, 2010 at 12:06 p.m.

  • Legion357

    I took Greenspan's comments to mean, that eventually we will have to have a bipartisan committee to lower the deficit; we can do it while there is some control, or we can be forced into it with a bond market crisis.

    These are his words; judge for yourself.
    Interview : Alan Greenspan, Former Chairman

    "US Federal Reserve] "Right now we have very low bond prices, the markets are functioning in a reasonably good way. The big, serious problem is whether or not the outlook for the longer term deficit spooks the bond market to a point where long-term interest rates and mortgage rates move up very sharply. If that happens, that will cause the double dip."

    Greenspan is part of a bipartisan panel set up by President Barack Obama to tackle America's ballooning deficit."

    Don't let the Korean global TV throw you because in the above paragraph of the article; it states that these were his words on "Meet the Press."

    November 16, 2010 at 8:42 a.m.

  • If there is a bond crisis looming, wouldn't that further endanger Social Security?

    The way I have understood SS funds, was that the government borrowed the funds for use in the general fund, and used treasury bonds as collateral.

    November 15, 2010 at 5:24 p.m.

  • Observer always jumps the gun to say something about my posts like " In what universe?" to imply I was lying.

    DEMINT: Chris, first of all, we need to remind everyone that Social Security has not added a penny to our debt at this point. As a matter of fact, our country would show a lot more debt if we reported how much the government has borrowed from Social Security, which is trillions of dollars right now.

    I've probably done more work on Social Security reform than anyone in the Senate, and I've put out proposals along with people like Paul Ryan in the House. We don't change anything on anyone who's in retirement or over 55.

    As always I always provide a link to but I will never get an apology but that is par for the course.

    November 15, 2010 at 5:17 p.m.

  • lol... Right wingers always use that talking point "Ponzi Scheme" in describing the Social Security Trust Fund.. That is getting old.... Yesterday, on Fox News Sunday,Jim DeMint said that the biggest problem with Social Security, is that it was added to the general fund...True, In this down period outlays are more than what is coming in; that's not permanent.... This program has lasted for 75 years and will continue to be solvent for another 25 years...It just needs means testing, raising the payroll tax cap and age level and it will be "good to go" for future generations.

    The only scheme, is the one to privatize.

    November 15, 2010 at 4:59 p.m.

  • "Even Sen. Jim DeMint recognizes Social Security was never a burden...". In what universe? At the start of Social Security, there were fourteen workers for every retiree; there are now two workers for every retiree. The Retirement Trust Fund is now paying out more in benefits than is coming in, with no end in sight. Your statement falls somewhere between wishful thinking and whistling past the graveyard. Social Security was, is and, absent major reforms, will always be the largest Ponzi Scheme of all time.

    November 15, 2010 at 4:44 p.m.