Sorry, but I must take exception to this post, especially point 2.
I'm not in favor of handing over the SS income stream to Wall Street, but this post is as misleading as a post at Red State. Implying that drawing on the SS trust fund (which exists only in the world of accounting) is like Gates cashing in a bond is a disservice to readers.

sparky, I'm happy to respond if you'll clarify what you mean.

One thing I'll say now is, sure, the SS trust fund exists only in the world of accounting. But so do any government bonds that Bill Gates owns. That's what bonds are.

Correction on that. We don't have to start cashing in bonds until around 2030.

In 2018, all we do is reach a break even point for cash flow to the trust. From 2019 through 2030 or so, the trust has to collect part of the interest on the bonds held by the trust.

By 2018, the trust will hold about $6 Trillion of bonds - all of that reflecting excess taxes paid in to Social Security since 1983. And anyone who says those are not backed by the full faith and credit of the US treasury is trying to steal part of that $6 Trillion.

And anyone who says those are not backed by the full faith and credit of the US treasury is trying to steal part of that $6 Trillion.

Yeah, and... What's your point exactly? ;-)

Also, I think the point sparky was trying to make is that while Social Security doesn't have a looming cash flow problem, the treasury as a whole is fucked big time (albeit not by SS so much as some other expenses that seem to have accumulated).

Calling Jonathan's analogy as misleading as a post at the wingnuts' Batshit Central is hyperbolic, not to mention a disservice to readers ;-)

On one hand, there's Jonathan, who actually knows things. On the other, there's a gaggle of hysterically self-indulgent wingnuts, whose wingnut lifestyle constitutes the strongest possible argument in favor of a monstrous, smothering Nanny State.

folks, folks. There is a MUCH easier way of fixing Social Security. this started out as kind of a joke, but dammit, it makes all the sense in the world, especially to someone such as myself and others whom I suspect are sick to death of the corporate mouthpieces who parade as elected officials, either side of the aisle.

the fix is this:
Take Congress off of their saWEET retirement package, (each Congressperson recieves half of their annual federal paycheck until they die, once they leave office)
and put THEM on social security.
Then all we have to do is sit back for 15 minutes while they fix it.

Seriously. it's kinda funny, but it's also the only thing they will understand. They're like retarded, evil children (no disrespect to the mentally challenged) who only understand blunt force trauma.
If THEY have to live with OUR social security, they will fix it. as long as they have their OWN retirement fund, paid for by you and me, they will continue to screw us out of retirement.

Social Security doesn't need to be fixed. It's doing fine.

Didn't I warn y'all about this a couple of weeks ago? Although I find Charlie Rangel very charismatic.

The American government is trillions of dollars in debt and is incinerating billions of dollars per month to reenact the crusades, so future financial troubles are inevitable.

But don’t worry, Pharaoh won’t have to end the crusades or cut social programs like putting people in cages for violating prohibition. Due to the ‘legal’ ability of the Federal Reserve to counterfeit, the debts can be paid with an infinite quantity of worthless pieces of paper. So your bread and circuses are safe, as long as you don’t mind offering yearly tribute and having consumer prices doubling every few years. And if you do mind, remember those cages I mentioned earlier…

Let's link Social Security benefits changes with the retirement benefits lavished on public officials.

The first step is to establish parity by rolling back their benefits to a level comparable with the Social Security benefit scale.

The next step would be to eliminate all increases in public retirement plans that exceeded those in Social Security from, say, 1975 to the present.

The next step would be to make changes in the public retirement benefit schedule only when the SS schedule changed, and to limit changes to the same proportion as taxpayers get.

Finally, of course, all other benefits not enjoyed by taxpayers should be eliminated from the benefit packages enjoyed by public officials, like the wonderful health care plans and care they enjoy at hospitals like Walter Reed, etc.

Only when everybody is on the same page, so to speak, can we have a reasonable dialogue about the real need for health care coverage.

And I'm sure nobody could argue that the people who finance the system, i.e., taxpayers, should have worse coverage or fewer benefits than their employees (public officials).

Let's put this item front and center as soon as the Democrats take office in January.

ELIMINATE ELITISM AND FAVORITISM IN AMERICAN PUBLIC POLICY!!!!!

who are these "some" that rangel's talking about and how can i get in on the action (of the massive pinochet-ization of SS for profit)?