From the President's Panel on Social Security.....

Re: From the President's Panel on Social Security.

I am quite ambivalent about the AARP in general.
I belong and they have helped me, but some of their leftist leanings make me cringe. Same with the ACLU.
I often agree completely with them, and other times Iam horrified by their positions. About the only organization to which I belong and virtually
always support their positions/methods is the NRA.

JG
 
Re: From the President's Panel on Social Security.

Just noticed this comment in an article in Money Magazine - I hadn't seen this CBO estimate before:

"Unless something changes, Social Security will have to start making up the difference by tapping its treasuries. By 2042, they will be tapped out, at which point Social Security will only be able to pay out around 75 percent of its obligations based on the tax revenue it takes in, according to a report by the Social Security trustees. Another report, by the Congressional Budget Office, offers a somewhat more optimistic projection. The CBO estimates that Social Security will exhaust its treasuries supply by 2052, at which point the tax revenue it takes in will be able to pay out 81 percent of its obligations. By 2100, the CBO projects Social Security will only be able to pay out 71 percent of benefits."
 
Re: From the President's Panel on Social Security.

By 2042, they will be tapped out

Politicians won't wait until then. They have been spending surplus SS funds for years on pork, and don't want to stop. Rather than divert pork spending over to redeeming SS treasuries, they will come up with a new scheme to fund pork projects. Borrowing $2 trillion in the name of SS privatization, and diverting part of it over to pork projects, fits the bill nicely.
 
Re: From the President's Panel on Social Security.

By 2100, the CBO projects Social Security will only be able to pay out 71 percent of benefits.

Amazing these retirees aren't born yet.

Actually, the change in intial benefit is a blow but is nothing in comparision to what will happen if the algorithm for colas is also changed to a slower growing index. If one lives too long, SS may buy a candy bar. Don't you love how only hints string out but not a complete picture?
 
Re: From the President's Panel on Social Security.

Hi Tadpole! Re. 2100, who cares? and even if I did
care, I have no control over it. I suppose it's
fine to debate and conjecture..........I don't get overly
concerned as I will have croaked by then. You too,
Tadpole :)

JG
 
Re: From the President's Panel on Social Security.

Hi Tadpole!  Re. 2100, who cares?  and even if I did
care, I have no control over it.  I suppose it's
fine to debate and conjecture..........I don't get overly
concerned as I will have croaked by then.  You too,
Tadpole  :)

JG

Frogs believe in reincarnation. Its all in knowing the proper use of a croak.

I wonder what the longetivity prediction is for someone born in 2100.
 
Re: From the President's Panel on Social Security.

Regarding a national sales tax--
 -- If we end up with a total sales tax rate (fed plus state plus local) of 20-25% or so (entirely possible), I think the underground economy will explode.  With increased black marketeering will come the increase in crime/corruption/legal and incarceration costs etc that we've seen with the war on drugs.

The "Fair Tax" folks (www.fairtax.org) are proposing a 30% national sales tax.  Add to that any state or local sales taxes and you could be pushing 40%.  That's just to cover the current level of government revenue which is already insufficient to cover the massive federal budget deficits.
 
Re: From the President's Panel on Social Security.

Some level-headed thinking about Social Security from Scott Burns:

http://www.dallasnews.com/business/scottburns/

--------------------------------

System fails the Rotary 4-way test
Social Security doesn't meet ethical standards, club member says

09:52 PM CST on Monday, January 3, 2005

By SCOTT BURNS / The Dallas Morning News

--------------------------------
We're going to hear a lot about Social Security – probably a lot more than we want to hear. We'll hear dozens of sophisticated arguments from major think tanks of the left and right. Some will argue to continue the largest and most important social program in our history unchanged. Others will argue that it needs a drastic overhaul.

Few will begin, as Charles Ramsey does, with a fundamental idea – that Social Security fails a widely known ethical test.

The test is called the Four-Way Test of fairness.

If you're a member of Rotary International, you know all about it. If you aren't a member of Rotary, this is a good time to learn.

The Four-Way Test of fairness is a vital part of Rotary International, having been created in 1932 by Herbert J. Taylor.

Mr. Taylor was also a business leader who wanted Rotarians to practice the highest possible ethical standards in their professional lives.

He believed that high ethical standards were the key to business success – and to the survival of a nearly bankrupt company he was asked to manage.


32 important words

The test is remarkably simple. We would do well if every business in America replaced overwrought "mission statements" with these 32 words.

"Of the things we think, say or do:

Is it the truth?

Is it fair to all concerned?

Will it build goodwill and better friendships?

Will it be beneficial to all concerned?"


Knowing priorities

Mr. Ramsey is a member of the Rotary Club in Athens, Texas.

Now semi-retired, he was educated as a petroleum engineer and became president and chief executive of May Petroleum, a publicly held Dallas oil company that was acquired by another company in the mid-1980s.

You don't have to talk with Charles Ramsey very long to figure out that he combines the best analytical skills of engineering with the priority sense of a good executive.

I called him after he sent me a copy of his Rotary speech, wanting to learn how club members had reacted.

Mr. Ramsey told me his main goal was to spur people to want to learn about the issues with Social Security.

"They were truly amazed by the numbers. That was the main reaction," he said.

And what about the Four-Way Test?

"No one thought it passed any part of it."

Here is how he posed the Four-Way Test for Social Security:

On truth: "How many of you feel that the federal government and our media have consistently and completely told us the truth about these programs, including their fiscal and generational imbalances?"

On fairness: "How many think it is fair to vote for ever-increasing benefits for people over 65 and leave the whopping bills for people who can't even vote or have not even been born?

"How many think it is fair that many corporate executives are going to jail today for misstating their financials and our federal government is not being held to the same financial accounting standards that it requires of businesses?"

On goodwill and better friendships: "How many of you still working feel a lot of goodwill knowing that 15.3 percent of your payroll is going to pay for Social Security retirement and Medicare benefits for Warren Buffett, Ross Perot Sr. and Boone Pickens, just to name a few?

"How much goodwill do you think your children and grandchildren are going to feel toward you when their payroll taxes take off towards 20 percent so that you can enjoy these benefits?"

On being beneficial for all concerned: "Will it be beneficial to all concerned if these entitlement programs eat up a third or three-quarters of all income taxes, resulting in massive cuts in our budget for national defense and homeland security or a massive increase in our national debt?

"Will it be beneficial to all concerned if funding these programs takes such a large share of our GDP that our economy stops growing, our debt gets out of control and the prime rate gets back to 18 percent?"
 
Re: From the President's Panel on Social Security.

"How many think it is fair that many corporate executives are going to jail today for misstating their financials and our federal government is not being held to the same financial accounting standards that it requires of businesses?"

Oh yeah! - I lay awake at night worrying about the poor corporate executives behind bars! - I can't name any though!

Which Government official, do you want to throw in the slammer. G.W. Bush ? - I'll vote for that :D
 
Re: From the President's Panel on Social Security.

Mr Ramsey doesn't even pass the smell test - I hope Rotarians nationwide don't share his abililty to distort ethics.

I'll wait until the numbers/simulation models get posted on the internet and also see what Burns, Bogles, Bersteins AND Pete Peterson have to say.

To paraphrase a Republican I may actually like - Deepthroat - "Show me the numbers" and let the internet community fire up their spreadsheets and nitpick the data.

Hope springs eternal - I'd like to see a decent sim model.

Talks cheap - show us the data.
 
Re: From the President's Panel on Social Security.

I cant take anything seriously from any panel sponsored by a president who says "nucular" and things like "I know how hard it is to put food on your family".
 
Re: From the President's Panel on Social Security.

Oh yeah! - I lay awake at night worrying about the poor corporate executives behind bars! - I can't name any though!
Martha Stewart. And her team just lost the prison's holiday decorations contest.

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/37180.htm

I'm sure there are a few more "Whatever Happened To..." alumni still in Club Fed!

As for throwing govt officials in slammers, I think it's cheaper to leave them in office. They'll probably do less damage, too.
 
Back
Top Bottom