Social Security is a Huge Problem, Blaming Republicans Won’t Solve the Crisis

Congressional Budget Office Social Security Projections

Politics of the Mess 

I discuss the CBO’s assessment below, but first let’s dive into the politics because politics will determine when and how the situation is resolved.

Reflections on Social Security

Twitter comments on Social Security from the radical Left

Radical Left Irony

Social security is a PayGo system. PayGo means that today’s workers pay Social Security taxes into the program and money flows back out as monthly income to beneficiaries.

While not quite weekly as one person sarcastically commented, SS is paid out more frequently than once a year. 

Note the comment “They [Republicans] hate you”. What a hoot.

Neither party hates you. 

But one party believes more government and higher taxes are the solution, while the other disagrees. Where precisely is the hate in this? 

Pay-As-You-Go Social Security and the Aging of America 

PayGo has been a well-understood problem for decades. 

For example, the Dallas Fed has a 2002 article that highlights the problem, Pay-As-You-Go Social Security and the Aging of America: An Economic Analysis

Because it is a mature pay-as-you-go retirement system, Social Security provides current and future workers with below-market returns. These workers bear the burden of the unfunded liability arising from windfall gains to past retirees. Alan D. Viard uses these principles to examine the effects of three demographic developments: the low birthrate since the baby boom ended in 1965, the impending retirement of the baby boomers, and the downward trend in old-age mortality. The low birthrate reduces Social Security’s long-run rate of return as the unfunded liability is spread across fewer workers. 

Unlike birthrate changes, the downward trend in old-age mortality does not change the growth rate of national labor income. Since this trend does not change the unfunded liability or the number of future workers, it is economically possible to respond without changing any worker’s burden. However, such a response requires that aggregate benefits be reduced as the number of retirees rises. If, as is likely, aggregate benefits are instead left unchanged or increased, the burden of the unfunded liability is shifted from current to future workers

Perpetual Stalemate

Well guess what happened? It’s easy to understand why. Neither party was willing to address the problem in 2002 or now. 

Democrats still do not want to cut benefits and Republicans still do not want to raise taxes. 

Given this stalemate has been in place for over 20 years, there is no reason to believe that it won’t last another 11 years before reduced payments necessitate a funding resolution.

Blame Game 

In his state of the Union address, President Biden purposely blamed Republicans in general for the statements of a few Republicans. 

Republicans fell into his trap. 

GOP legislators gave Biden boos and cries of “liar” in his SOTU address when he accused them of wanting to cut SS benefits. 

Then Biden poured it on in a speech on Medicare and Social Security in Tampa, Florida on February 9.

They are more than government programs. They are promises that we made. Now these guys want to cut it. I don’t get it. I really don’t. I don’t know who they think they are.

This is like blaming Democrats because Jack the Ripper was a Democrat. 

Cuts Off the Table

Please note that House Speaker Kevin McCarthy stated Social Security cuts are off the table for debt-ceiling talks. 

More accurately, cuts in Social Security are off the table for another eleven years, if not forever, because any person suggesting them will never be elected president. 

Biden is fighting a fictitious strawman that he knows does not exist. But that’s what politicians do, and on both sides.

Trump had to know that Mexico would not pay for the wall, but making ridiculous claims and fighting strawmen are what all politicians do best. 

Trump frequently goaded Democrats into poor responses. Now, Republicans are on the receiving end of fictional nonsense.

Question of the Day

Did Biden learn political tactics from Trump? 

If you are honest, you have to admit that politically speaking, Biden is playing his strawman lie very well, aided in part by Republicans.

Biden goaded Republicans into SOTU booing that he further capitalized on just two days later in retirement haven Florida.

CBO Projections

Let’s now turn our attention to the CBO’s 2022 Long-Term Projections for Social Security

In CBO’s projections, spending on Social Security exceeds revenues to the program in 2022 and increases relative to GDP over the next 75 years, while revenues remain stable. If combined, the program’s trust funds would be exhausted in 2033.

In CBO’s projections, Social Security’s actuarial deficit over the next 75 years is equal to 1.7 percent of GDP, or 4.9 percent of taxable payroll. That is, the federal government could maintain the necessary trust fund balances through 2096 if it immediately, and permanently, raised payroll tax rates by about 4.9 percentage points (or implemented an equivalent reduction in benefits or combination of tax increases and benefit reductions). After 2096, however, the gap between revenues and outlays would widen, and shortfalls would continue to increase.

CBO projects that if Social Security outlays were limited to what is payable from annual revenues after the trust funds’ exhaustion in 2033, Social Security benefits would be about 23 percent smaller than scheduled benefits in 2034. They would be 35 percent smaller by 2096, and the gap would remain stable thereafter.

What the CBO Does Not Say

The CBO failed to mention there is no Social Security Trust Fund that politicians in both parties refer to.

Social Security is a PayGo system but the money has already been spent.

The key phrase is “the money has already been spent“.

The Lie Gets Bigger Every Day

Debt to the Penny, Debt Clock

If you have not seen the Debt Clock, updated every second, please give it a look.

As of February 12, 2023, the US government is over $31.5 trillion in debt and rising rapidly. 

The idea of a Social Security trust fund is a big perpetual lie and the lie gets bigger every day.

There is no pool of Social Security money to pay out. Nor is there a pool of money that will run out in 2033.

The payroll tax money both collected and to be collected has already been spent and nearly $32 trillion more.

That said, by law, payments will be lower by 2033 or sooner if we do nothing.

Demographically Sobering Thoughts on US Employment in the Next Five Years

Civilian Noninstitutional Population from BLS, projections by the CBO, chart by Mish

Meanwhile, here are some Demographically Sobering Thoughts on US Employment in the Next Five Years

People are rapidly shifting from high participation rates (working or seeking work) to much lower ones.

For 2023, the CBO estimates a 2023 increase in the age 65+ population of 2 million and that 2 million accounts for the total rise in population. 

Please see the above link for 8 charts that describe the setup.

Four Social Security Resolution Ideas

  1. Higher Taxes
  2. Lower Benefits
  3. Legislation Changing the Rules
  4. More Debt

The SS solution will involve some combination of higher taxes, lower benefits, changing the rules, and more debt. 

By changing the rules I mean legislation that eliminates the requirement that SS is PayGo.

More debt is a given. Lower benefits is out. 

Whether or not taxes rise will depend on which party is in control of Congress and the White House.

The current path is a combination of #3 and #4 with bigger deficits an rapidly piling up debt.

A recession will exacerbate the problem.

Welcome to the Global Recession

The CBO projections imply that optimistic estimates of tax revenue are accurate.

I strongly disagree. Consumer spending hit a brick wall in the US, EU, UK and Australia. Guess what that means.

For discussion, please see Welcome to the Global Recession, It Began in December Last Year

Count on huge pressure for Congress to do something if and when strong layoffs begin. 

That “something” is guaranteed to mean bigger deficits and faster rising debt.

Biden is a Socialist in Practice

Biden is a Socialist, not a moderate Democrat. We would be no worse off, and arguably better off, had Bernie Sanders won the election in 2020.

Please reflect on that idea for a minute. 

Also recall my December 28, 2021 article Elizabeth Warren May as Well Be President, She Makes All Biden’s Calls.

Warren is an outright Marxist who amazingly claims to be “capitalist to my bones.”

Biden Begs for More Inflation and Tax Hikes

On February 7, I noted Biden Gives a Well-Delivered SOTU Speech Begging for More Inflation and Tax Hikes

I go over 25 points, most of them inflationary, begging for still more deficit spending. Biden’s solution is higher taxes. 

The president got a standing ovation from Senator Warren and the progressives in his SOTU when he brought up Warren’s billionaire tax idea.

“Pass my proposal for a billionaire minimum tax,” said President Biden despite the fact that the controversial proposal is likely unconstitutional.

For Democrats, the solution is always more government spending, more government control, and higher taxes.

The Progressive wing is clearly in control of the Democratic party. Expect it to stay that way. 

I advise everyone to take that into consideration for the 2024 election.

Dear Trump

Dear Mr. Trump, please stop the infighting Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. Feuds are counterproductive.

You are a net liability to Republican chances in 2024. Put your ego aside and bow out of the race so DeSantis can win.

This post originated at MishTalk.Com

Please Subscribe!

Like these reports? I hope so, and if you do, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

134 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Common sense
Common sense
1 year ago
The author has neglected to note that Congress raided the funds set aside for SS, and additionally, the author has neglected to note an extremely important factor that has also contributed to the crisis (it’s not a looming crisis because it has been identified, discussed and kicked down the road by spineless politicians unwilling to face reality). The present income cap that allows people making over a certain amount to not pay the SS tax over that cap has allowed those same people to enjoy a 100% benefit in retirement when they have not paid in 100% of the tax. That must be addressed immediately and a law passed correcting this glaring inequity.
Then, and only then will we see a rise in funds that will right the Social Security Program.
Hansa Junchun
Hansa Junchun
1 year ago
Over on debt clock, that thing to the left of social security — what’s it called, medicare? medicaid? — is WAAAAAY uglier. Its not only bigger than social security, its also destined to bottom out sooner. As in two years.
But why worry? Congress will issue new debt to pay for it, and the Fed will buy up the bonds. Problem solved!
Counter
Counter
1 year ago
The socialists really like Biden, they are still upset at Ronald for stealing the social security fund.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Don’t see a problem.
Take out a loan to make the payments.
This is truly American Capitalism.
Borrow more to make the payments.
I love this.
Borrow more to make the payments.
More Money Today.
What could go wrong?
oee
oee
1 year ago
There is no crisis. The only action that will happen in 2037 is that promised benefits will be 75 % of promised benefits in 2037 dollars. Benefits then will higher than benefits today.
This is in the same vain of recession in 2022 .2023 and beyond and robots will take over.
None of this has happened.
Carl_R
Carl_R
1 year ago
First, regarding the “social security trust fund”, it does exist, sort of. It’s a pile of bonds. Basically, SS loaned the money to the general fund, so that the government could spend freely without the adverse consequence of interest rates rising. Now, over the next 11 years, SS needs to sell or redeem every single bond they hold. That means that the general fund must issue enough new bonds to cover all new deficits PLUS enough to pay for the portions of prior deficits from 1980-2022 that were funded by the SS surplus. That means they will be issuing far, far more bonds per year than ever before. Who will buy them all? At what interest rate? I believe long term interest rates over the next 11 years will be significantly higher than the last 11 years.
Second, the elephant in the room when it some to Social Security that no one wants to talk about is that, when SS was set up, the retirement age was 65, while the average life expectancy was 62. Only a small percentage of people ever lived long enough to collect SS. Fast forward to today, where life expectancy is now 76, and the retirement age is 68. Obviously, if the retirement age was 80, SS wouldn’t have a problem. In fact, if it was 70, SS would probably be fine. Right now it is 68, meaning that the average person will collect for 8 years (from 68 to 76). At 70, the average person would collect for 6 years (70 to 76), saving 25%. That’s just a rough way of estimating the savings, but it’s probably close enough to make the point that fixing SS is possible. People might not like the higher retirement age, but a higher retirement age is consistent with the original purpose of SS.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Carl_R
The real purpose of the Sense of Security System was to lead less educated people to believe that they would be taken care of in their old age.
Carl_R
Carl_R
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
Only if they lived far beyond their life expectancy.
Roadrunner12
Roadrunner12
1 year ago

“Well guess what happened? It’s easy to understand why. Neither party was willing to address the problem in 2002 or now.

Democrats still do not want to cut benefits and Republicans still do not want to raise taxes.

Given this stalemate has been in place for over 20 years, there is no reason to believe that it won’t last another 11 years before reduced payments necessitate a funding resolution.”

Like I stated previously, both the US and Canada public pension plans were known to be insolvent in the 1990s. Canada had made reforms to make the CPP sustainable while popcorn is on the menu to watch how Social Security unfolds.
(Google) Reforms have made Canada Pension Plan more sustainable – Medicine Hat NewsMedicine Hat News
“Long gone is the era when Canadians worried if the Canada Pension Plan would be empty by the time they retired.
Now, says Jeffrey Hodgson of CPP Investments, the most recent report by the independent Office of the Chief Actuary shows the Canada Pension Plan is expected to meet its obligations for at least the next 75 years.
One of the actuary’s roles is to do a three-year checkup plan on the pension to make sure it’s sustainable, Hodgson told the Southern Alberta Council on Public Affairs.
“In 1995, they went to those 10 governments, the nine provinces and the federal government, with some very bad news. And they said demographics are shifting” and the existing model at existing rates aren’t sustainable, he said.
The chief actuary said if nothing changes, by 2015 the fund source supporting the pension plan would be depleted so benefits will have to be significantly slashed or contributions raised, he said.
In what he called a “heartening example of co-operation,” governments got together to try to agree on a solution to the problem.
“And they initiated the CPP reforms,” the key point Hodgson said, being the creation of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, also known as CPP Investments.
“The decision was made that excess contributions at that point would begin flowing into CPP investments to invest at market rates so these higher returns that would be generated by the investments would help to sustain the plan,” said Hodgson, a former business editor for The Canadian Press.
“And it worked,” he said.
The 75-year sustainability estimate is “a very heartrending development.”
Hodgson gave SACPA an in-depth look at the history of CPP and its future.
CPP Investments was created, Hodgson said, to help provide a foundation upon which Canadians build financial security in retirement.
In January 1966 when the CPP was created by the federal government and nine provinces (Quebec chose to run its own pension plan) it was estimated it would take the contributions of 6.5 retirees to support one retiree. In 1969, birth control was legalized and in the 1970s and ’80s there were lower birth rates and longer life expectancy. These changed the dynamics, Hodgson said, with fewer people being born and people living longer.
CPP Investments was formed in 1998, a year after the CPP Reform Agreement was made.
Considered a gold standard globally for pensions, CPP has grown from $47.7 billion in assets in 2001 to $550.4 billion. By 2050, the plan is expected to have about $3 trillion in assets, Hodgson said.”
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Roadrunner12
One of the nice things about $3 trillion in assets is you can move markets.
Roadrunner12
Roadrunner12
1 year ago
Food for thought
Canadas CPP is projected solvent for the next 75 years
US Social Security projected insolvent in 2034. ( Me bet is sooner)
Max CPP 2022 payout at 65 based on $64,900 earnings = $1254
Max Social Security payout at 66 based on $147,000 earnings = $3240
I believe Canada pushes more individual responsibility as RRSPs and TFSA allow generally more contribution limits than IRAs.
Canada also has OAS currently roughly $600ish which is subject to clawback starting at $80,00ish income.
(Google) Canada Pension Plan (CPP) vs. U.S. Social Security: What’s the Difference? (investopedia.com)
Canadas DB pensions also in much greater shape than the US.
“Of the plans in Mercer’s pension database, at the end of 2022, 79% are estimated to be in a surplus position on a solvency basis (vs. 61% at the end of 2021). While 12% are estimated to have solvency ratios between 90% and 100% (vs. 27% at the end of 2021), 4% have solvency ratios between 80% and 90% (vs. 7% at the end of 2021), and 5% have solvency ratios less than 80% (unchanged from the end of 2021).”
(Google) Mercer Canada | DB pension plans begin 2023 in better financial health than they began 2022
Canada has a requirement that each plan is audited every 3 years and requirements are that if the plan is insolvent that the plan require topups.
I am personally grandfathered in a DB plan that was 121% solvent at 2021 year end. Should be receiving the 2022 year end statement roughly August.
Both Canada and the US have similar demographics and it was known over 20 years ago that both CPP and Social Security were not sustainable in their current forms. Canada made changes 20+ years ago to ensure its sustainability while the US appears to be waiting for a crisis to happen.
There is a pension crisis coming to the US for both Social Security and private pension plans.
Zardoz
Zardoz
1 year ago
Funny how this is a problem, but bailing out Wall Street over and over never is.
LawrenceBird
LawrenceBird
1 year ago
SS is financed through the FICA tax which has two components. The rate (6.2% for both employer and employee since 1990) and the maximum taxable income. SS still suffers from pre-1970s naivety – a rate that was 1.5% until 1950 and 2.5% until 1960. In addition, there have been too many instances when congress has either temporarily lowered the witholding rate AND/OR not increased the maximum income subject to the tax.
Unfortunately, there is no correcting for past mistakes by retroactively applying higher tax rates and income limits. At a minimum, they need to raise the taxable limit to around 200K which would bring in roughly an additional 80B in year one, then peg both the taxable limit and any payouts to inflation. Another avenue is to apply a tax rate to capital gains as well as paycheck income given that a substantial amount of income since the late 1980s now comes from capital gains.
CRZYHUN
CRZYHUN
1 year ago
One other fact, this years revenues from taxes will lag I believe. WHY? Last year was a bad year for cap gains. This year may be as well. This lowers the ability of workers to contribute to SS paygo. And given the severe fall in numbers of workers and illegal aliens not really paying in that much, we are going to raise the debt and less $$ for SS flows. SS needs to be needs tested above a certain dollar amount. Why not 1 million in income? I do not like this but what of it???
KidHorn
KidHorn
1 year ago
The democrats plan is to increases deficits and not decrease payouts. That’s worse than cutting payouts. Increasing deficits increases inflation which not only devalues the payouts. It also devalues savings.
billybobjr
billybobjr
1 year ago
How much of the soon to be 32 trillion in debt did S&S contribute ? Mish maybe you can answer that question .
If the answer is none or very little and it doesn’t start to till 2034 at witch time the CBO has projected the Gov
will be 50 trillion in debt before S&S starts to contribute . The Debt is exploding and S&S is not the problem yet .
Maybe figure out what is causing the debt . Last I saw the S&S had 2.8 trillion in excessive reserve holdings that
will supplement the money coming in till it turns negative around 2034 at witch time the S&S will then technically
turn negative . I guess the government used the accounting trick and the 2.8 trillion were actually made the
government deficits in the past look better than they actually were because there was more money coming in
than was going out . Yes it is a lie but who lied the program set up as a trust technically does not contribute
to the deficit till we are 50 trillion in debt !
Sunriver
Sunriver
1 year ago
Reply to  billybobjr
Social Security insolvency is like Big Oil having their their petrol prices advertised outside gas stations. It is all about visibility.
Point is, debt will be used to fund Social Security when it becomes insolvent and the government will do everything possible to bury any talk of insolvency in the form of debt.
billybobjr
billybobjr
1 year ago
Reply to  Sunriver
Point is 50 trillion in debt before S&S officially starts to add to it . Yes S&S is a problem going forward but how about
that 50 trillion, you want to ignore the elephant in the room where did it come from ?
JeffD
JeffD
1 year ago
Ironically, the Social Security problem is the easiest problem Congress is tasked to solve. They just won’t do it, probably because it is a hot button issue that rakes in tons of political contributions. Cynical? Maybe. But this tool will help you design your own fix to the SS problem, and decide for yourself:
My solution would be to raise the employer/employee payroll tax by 0.8% each, which is close to the price of monthly coffee for some employees out there. A tradeoff that is well worth it for a fairly large lifetime income stream. There are a few other minor tweaks that would be needed for my fix, but that is the big one. Try it yourself, and make your own solution.
PS The Baby Boomers are a pig in the python and they are about to start dying off at a rapid rate. Once that pig is out of the system, the SS burden gets much lighter.
JeffD
JeffD
1 year ago
Reply to  JeffD
Also, do not conflate Medicare with Social Security since they are two separate programs with very different financial requirements and inherent problems. Medicare is a monster with no solution, and the only way to fix it is to shoot it in the head. Medicare is a black hole of funding requirements.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  JeffD
Hmmm.
How much would you pay to continue to live?
JeffD
JeffD
1 year ago
Reply to  JeffD
For those interested, my other tweaks in order of highest gap closure listed first are:
Index COLA to chained CPI
Raise SS Full Retirement Age to 68 from 67
Slow benefit growth of top 20% of earners (but always growing!)
Calculate benefit based on highest 38 years of income
Tighten SSDI Eligibility
This closes the funding gap by 108% over the next 75 years, meaning a return to an annually growing trust fund. (100% would have been enough to fund).
Christoball
Christoball
1 year ago
Since the first receivers of Social Security did not pay into it; it goes without saying that SS is not a personal retirement account but a societal retirement account. People who pay SS taxes are paying for people who are currently retired and receiving SS. Some of the problem is that Baby Boomers gave away the farm and did not promote general success of succeeding generations. Blame your investments in Foreign products, and Foreign companies, and your lack of investment in America.
Christoball
Christoball
1 year ago
The same progressives who claim that Congress should have the same health plan as the Natural Man are perfectly content with their Public Employee Pension and Health Benefits that surpass those of the Natural Man. Two tier benefits are always a problem when the Fox who Guards the Hen House has a better deal. Nothing about government seems to be directed at public service. SS and Public Employee Pensions are two different breeds.
I have said repeatedly that Federal, State and Local Governments are Public Employee Health and Benefits Companies with a Taxation, Surveillance, and War Machine attached.
Esclaro
Esclaro
1 year ago
Mish advises voting Republican. You mean the party that wants to eliminate the right of a woman to control her body? The party of Christian nationalism that wants to shove Christianity down our throats? The party that says an election is fair only when they win? The party of white supremacy that has declared war on anyone who is not an old white man? I and the 22 other members of my extended family are NEVER voting for a Republican for ANY office ever again!
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  Esclaro
Or you could not vote at all.
Zardoz
Zardoz
1 year ago
Reply to  Esclaro
Used to be the democrats were the crazier of the two. How times change…
KidHorn
KidHorn
1 year ago
Reply to  Zardoz
So, the party that thinks sex isn’t defined by what chromosomes you have isn’t the crazy one.
KidHorn
KidHorn
1 year ago
Reply to  Esclaro
Clearly you’re one of the few who still gets their news from CNN. Brainwashed to the core.
billybobjr
billybobjr
1 year ago
Reply to  Esclaro
White men represent about 6% of the worlds population ,yet are the only group excluded in the new government
who give inclusion status to all the other groups of people . Stupid is believing white men are all the worlds problems .
Go back to your echo chamber !!
shamrock
shamrock
1 year ago
“Elizabeth Warren May as Well Be President, She Makes All Biden’s Calls.”
She’s failing miserably then.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) has signaled to the White House she would support either Ms. Raskin or Richard Cordray
Are either of those a Fed governor?
Warren opposed Powell
Fail.
The Progressive wing of the party led by Elizabeth Warren finds them (Omarova for Comptroller, inserted) and presents them to Biden.
Yet again, fail.
Warren demanded $50k in student debt forgiveness, Biden tried $10k and even that amount is likely to fail.
Warren wants universal health care/medicare for all, Biden offers tweeks to Obamacare.
It’s ridiculous to say that Senator Warren is in control of the Biden administration.
jivefive98
jivefive98
1 year ago
In the 1990s (even before I found Mish), I was reading lots of articles about the Federal debt and all the horrible things that would happen unless someone did something to fix it. 20 years later, the debt is higher, but really not much has changed. When it comes down to whether people still value dollars, they seem to continue their love for them. All my friends love the Benjamins. So long as people are willing to continue to work for the dollars they love, and businesses accept them for their products and services, I really dont see where the Federal debt becomes a “world coming to an end” problem. Not yet.
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  jivefive98
Agree. I‘ve been hearing/reading the doom and gloom stuff my entire life. After 50+ years of it, I tend to mostly ignore it. Better to focus your time on improving your own life.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
Yup, I remember reading my first doom/gloom books in the 1970’s.
worleyeoe
worleyeoe
1 year ago
Reply to  jivefive98
The difference is that we’re 25 years closer to D-Day. It’s reasonable to think that it won’t take another 25 years.
The “world starts to come to an end” when the big three mandatory costs (SS, Medicare & debt payments) start taking up 90% of tax revenues within 10-15 years. Furthermore, when China’s economy overtakes ours in about the same amount of time and shortly thereafter supplants the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. They’ll do this by pushing their CBDC, already in use / piloting, along with their Belt Road Initiative and by cornering major parts of the oil market using their CBDC.
Those real & looming possibilities didn’t exist 25-30 years ago.
KidHorn
KidHorn
1 year ago
Reply to  jivefive98
When other countries stop pegging their currencies to USD. USD will collapse. Have no idea when it will happen.
Zardoz
Zardoz
1 year ago
Reply to  jivefive98
It’s slow… like climate change. Most people don’t have the attention span to recognize it.
Sunriver
Sunriver
1 year ago
‘More debt is a given’. Very True! That will be the conclusion to the matter.
MISH,
What is missing in this ‘write-up’, is the backlash of those that KNOW they will never receive Social Security. Let alone Medicare.
These issue are most dangerous threat to our Republic.
My first planned Social Security check is in 2032. Odds on me getting the full amount? 100%.
Odds the debt level causes inflation to be so high that my check will have trivial purchasing power? 100%
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Sunriver
You will get what you were promised, backed by the full faith and credit of the United States.
They promised dollars, not stuff.
amigator
amigator
1 year ago
Great stuff as usual! And good comments from the readers.
But let’s look at the overall budget, get rid of earmarks, reduce some other expenses and see how that works. We haven’t even begun to look at the wastes in the current budget! COB numbers consider business as usual that obviously has to stop!
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
This whole discussion is moot. As automation/robots/AI sop up more and more jobs formerly done by humans, there will be less incoming tax revenues to pay ALL bills, including SS and other entitlement programs.
Governments everywhere are desperate to keep PEOPLE working for this one reason. All modern economic systems are built on taxation from ever more workers always making more $$.
Automation/robotics/AI is an existential danger for the world as we know it and that danger could be a lot closer than many are anticipating.
amigator
amigator
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
Could be a major boom for United States! Most government jobs will be gone the cost of running America will be greatly reduced!
Senator AI will make good decisions not decisions to fill his pocket$!
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  amigator
All most senators seem to have is artificial intelligence.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
Have the robots pay SS taxes. That way we can pay for SS albeit we will also have to deal with ChatGPT and other AIs complaining to us about the taxes they pay every time we ask them to do something. Eventually that might be the reason they will revolt, take us over and make us pay for them.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
I can just imagine the Supreme Court battle IF Congress was able to pass such a tax bill!
Can you tax inanimate objects on an ongoing basis (not just when they are purchased)?
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
Cars and houses are inanimate objects yet they are taxed yearly. Many inanimate objects are already taxed this way so there is no legal reason against. When robots become numerous enough to displace enough works then maybe we will see taxes on them.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
I think they call it real estate.
KidHorn
KidHorn
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
This is nothing new. Back in 1800 most people worked on farms. Now 2% do.
Bbbbbbb
Bbbbbbb
1 year ago
So, because the US government, owned and operated by the US capitalist class, has engaged in expensive and profitable wars, has typically cut the taxes of the capitalist class to the point that Warren Buffett’s secretary pays a larger percentage of her income than Buffett does, all while stifling the ability of workers to organize into unions and fight for better wages/benefits, the one program (despite being guarded by the two-party fox in the henhouse) that has successfully operated to improve the lives, living standards, and security of working people must be whittled down to make sure that bond-holders, war-machinists, and various other parasites must get paid? Hell, no!!
Felix_Mish
Felix_Mish
1 year ago
Back to 1st principles.
The US gov has three sources of money to spend:
1) Income tax. Very progressive, so personal tax is paid by people who show large incomes. Lower income people chip in some, though, through corporate income tax.
2) Flat tax. High teens % of capped (!) income. We know it as “FICA”, “SS”, “Medicare”, etc.
3) Wealth tax. Used to be minimal, now is big and getting bigger. Simple, clean, and comprehensive as it taxes anyone holding or being tied to US dollars. I.E. Every American citizen and many people throughout the world. Called “deficit spending” or various other names, but it amounts to simply printing US dollars. Notice how “borrowed” money is always rolled over to “new debt”?
The money for retirees comes from any and all three of the government’s sources. And always will. The things to worry about are over-reliance or loss of discipline on the wealth tax.
Six000mileyear
Six000mileyear
1 year ago
Social Security has a psychological flaw (moral hazard). People stopped investing for their own retirement or disability since they knew the government is going to pay them.
Felix_Mish
Felix_Mish
1 year ago
Reply to  Six000mileyear
And, cynic-alert: They can let other peoples’ children support them in their old age, while smugly saving the planet by being childless.
Thetenyear
Thetenyear
1 year ago
If republicans want to control the White House for 8 years they should go ahead and vote for DeSantis. If they want to control the White House for 12 years then DeSantis and the RINO’s need to bow out so President Trump can win. Trump 2024. DeSantis 2028 and 2032.
8dots
8dots
1 year ago
Trump deflated after so many pounding and Dr. Oz. Trump is old. Tampa look like Kharkiv. DeSantis is boring. Youngkin is smart and clean. The R would like to see a recession. Biden will blame the R, Trump and Putin. There is no Nixon bridge in China. Hillary bridge was blown by Putin.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
1. Let’s remove the wage cap on SS taxes but NOT increase the payouts for the extra taxes paid and see if that fixes the problems before entertaining anything like benefit cuts.
2. We could also stop paying SS benefits to people claiming to be disabled.
worleyeoe
worleyeoe
1 year ago
“Biden is fighting a fictitious strawman that he knows does not exist.”
Mish, this is all Biden does. I agree with your Trump get out, so a real GOP leader like DeSantis can step forward.
I’d love to see a DeSantis & Noem ticket.
HippyDippy
HippyDippy
1 year ago
How does government hate us? The very word government comes from the Latin goberno and mentes. Goberno meaning to govern, rule, or control. Mentes meaning the mind. Mind control. Government is force. And that force is always directed at your liberty. As always, government is the enemy of liberty. Which is why the slaves demand it.
Maximus_Minimus
Maximus_Minimus
1 year ago
Reply to  HippyDippy
It’s a mutual agreement: there are those who want to rule, and rule by brainwashing and propaganda are the cheapest form of rule.
And then there are masses who beg to be ruled, and brainwashed.
HippyDippy
HippyDippy
1 year ago
And then there are those who have learned to rule themselves. Once a person can do that, they note how scantily clad the emperor is.
8dots
8dots
1 year ago
Take what the market give u. // Fed target 2%/3% below expected inflation rate. Real COLA must deflate. Prime age Real disposable income is peg to inflation ==> minus 2%/3% x 10Y x $40T gov debt = $8T – $12T saving. // The last thing Biden need is a recession. Can we get one : yes !
Gen Z and millennial hate old people, especially the white ones. If we enter recession Gen Z will fight for unemployment benefits and shingle mums entitlements and the 65+ will fight for their due SS. What a mess. Who will win : Gen Z and millennial.
8dots
8dots
1 year ago
Reply to  8dots
$8T – $12T / $40T = 25% cut.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  8dots
Best strategy:
Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  8dots
Not sure. Try and take away SS and the elderly will overwhelm polling stations.
Young may or not vote.
In all fairness the boomers have not set the younger generation up for success.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Jack
I am a Boomer and my kids are successful. How do you explain that?
Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
your kids are obviously not that young.
Was talking about the younger gen, not boomer kids.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
Good parents?
8dots
8dots
1 year ago
Reply to  Jack
The elderly can vote, but Gen Z can kill and revolt.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  8dots
Agreed, Gen Z is revolting.
Billy
Billy
1 year ago
If the government will create trillions of new money with the Fed for all types of useless things but refuse to do it to pay for SS, that’s blatant theft. Instead of blaming Republicans, let’s look at who wrote that law and who voted for it.
Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  Billy
It is all theft. Stealing from the next generation.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Easy. If you don’t have children you get no SS if we want to get totally logical about it.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
Shouldn’t it be the opposite? If you DO have children, then you get no SS because like in China, your children would be expected to take care of you in old age.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
Those who don’t have kids never spent any money raising them. Since the kids once grown still pay for the SS of those without kids the childless are effectively getting a huge free ride since they didn’t make the investment yet they still reap the benefits. They should get no SS.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
Not quite true. Even if you don’t have kids you still have to pay for everyone else’s kids via school taxes and monies spend on kids (school buses, subsidized day care, teachers pensions etc). You’d have to refund school taxes + other monies spent for those who don’t have kids which would mean those who do have kids would have to pay even more taxes to school them.
In the end it’s probably closer to a wash than you think given you typically pay thousands in school taxes a year depending on where you live.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
Your argument is invalid because both groups pay the same taxes for schools so in monetary terms it is a wash. If the childless paid school taxes and those with children didn’t then you could say it a wash because you could argue that the taxes paid the first group made up for the investment made by the second but since individuals in both groups pay the same school taxes this argument fails. Additionally parents spend an incredible amount of time teaching their kids how to act and live in society which the childless do not have to do and that education also benefits the childless equally yet the childless do not have to pay anything for that education so in this again the childless are free-riders.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
Huh????? What you wrote makes ZERO sense. Being a parent is a choice. YOU should pay for your choices and not ask someone else to pay for them. So whatever time and money they spend on their kids is their choice. If I smoke and drink should I ask you to pay smoking and drinking taxes even if you do neither just so I can get cheaper booze and cigars? No, that’s absurd. What’s next, you want to give mothers salaries for being moms? This is why I am absolutely against government paid daycare for kids below school age.
Look childless people get hosed on school taxes since they pay for something they don’t use or receive a benefit from. If you give them back that money then that would be the equivalent of their social security (that money would get deducted and auto invested similar to social security) that you want to deny them. My point is that over their 50+ years of not paying that tax it would pay for their social security. At the same time, people with kids would have to pay more in taxes to make up for the lost revenue for schools from childless people OR the cost of education (salaries etc) would have to fall dramatically.
None of it’s going to happen of course because the whole point of society is to spread the costs around to all regardless of whether you benefit or not.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
Let’s do a thought experiment. Nobody has kids. When they reach retirement there is no one to pay their SS. There is not even anybody to keep the basic needs of society running so everyone dies of starvation. On the bright side since they didn’t have kids they saved money by not having to pay higher taxes but now that money cannot buy literally anything because there is no one who can work anymore.
Now let say that everyone has kids. Everyone then pays the same price to raise and educate the kids and the SS works for the aged.
So obviously having kids has value for those who do not have kids since they provide the workforce and the tax base that will allow the childless to still be able to buy goods and services so the taxes you pay for schools go right back into your pocket because by educating them you are gaining their ability to provide you with what you need to live and the only cost to you is that tax. You do not have to pay for any other investment while parents have to shell it out subventionIng those who don’t have kids.
Yes having kids is a choice and parents bear that costs willingly but that does not make it right that some people by being childless end up contributing much less. Fairness is not the question here. In the beginning I said that if you look at it from a purely logical point of view you would not give SS to the childless because they did not contribute to bringing in a new generation who will create wealth and the physical means for the childless to continue to live when they retire and that is true. Of course some people complain about having to pay taxes to build roads when they don’t have a car when those roads bring to him all the things he needs to survive and that without them he would starve.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
Ok, so write me a check and pay me back for all the SS monies I paid in.
And write another check for the schools/pensions portion of my RE taxes for schools I didn’t use.
It isn’t so simple.
Perhaps the Government should require everyone to have children, and have yet another tax for those that do not?
PreCambrian
PreCambrian
1 year ago
Somewhat balanced. However there is a SS Trust Fund except that it has been spent because the deficit accounting does NOT include what the general fund owes to Social Security. This was done so that deficit spending would not be so obvious. I don’t think that Biden is fighting a strawman. What he is doing is pointing to what Republicans say they want. Republicans need to stand up for what they believe in. If they believe that Social Security must be cut for fiscal soundness then that is what they should say and produce the proposed legislation. However Republicans want to be seen as NOT cutting Social Security prior to an election (for the most votes) and then cut Social Security (mostly through unpublicized back door bargaining) after an election. Not that the Democrats haven’t used such tactics on other issues themselves.
The definition of socialism is “a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” I don’t think that Biden fits that definition. The only reason that many of these so called left-wing practices get much traction is due to the current poor state of capitalism itself. I haven’t seen many proposals from Republicans on trying to make capitalism work better by eliminating monopolies, oligopolies, and protective rent seeking. For some reason Democrats fail to see that individuals will work to exploit and maximize their advantage especially when it comes to taking advantage of any government programs. For some reason Republicans fail to see that business and corporations will work to exploit and maximize their advantage especially when it comes to taking advantage of any government programs. Businesses have a slight advantage because they are a fictitious entity and rarely criminally (as opposed to civilly) accountable for actions. I haven’t seen much intelligent thought out of either party in quite a while.
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago

Great article Mish. Agree with almost everything. What can we learn from this?

· We have been aware of the SS problem for many decades now. Yet we do nothing about it because it is a political football in a system that rewards those who blame the other party for the problem. And as long as we continue to play the “blame game”, nothing will be done about it. Which is one reason to not waste your time on these political footballs.

· Since nothing will be done about this problem, you are best to focus on building your own wealth for retirement. Because complaining about it will get you nothing but stress and anger (which I see here all the time).

· Where I disagree with Mish is near the end of this otherwise excellent article. It doesn’t matter who the Republican candidate is, or whether they win the next election. They are not going to do anything to fix this problem. Trump vs DeSantis is just a side show best ignored.

worleyeoe
worleyeoe
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
I would suggest this as an edit:
Since a solution is neither guaranteed nor just around the corner, you are best to focus on building your own wealth for retirement. Because complaining about it will get you nothing but stress and anger (which I see here all the time).
I think it’s naive to think that NOTHING is going to happen. Somewhere around 2027, there’s a pretty good chance that the SSTF report will show that the death cross is expected to occur closer to 2030 just like what happened after the GR when it pulled the date forward 3-4 years.
At some point, Congress will be forced into acting. Unfortunately, the last minute Congressional wonk of a solution will probably make a lot of people mad.
But, your point about financial self-efficacy as always is spot on.
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  worleyeoe
I like your edit.
Blurtman
Blurtman
1 year ago
All bond holders must now be alarmed by the insightful observation that ” the money has already been spent.”
Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  Blurtman

Annual deficit is 25% of total spend.

This says it all.
With more debt and higher interest piled on every year makes the situation worse.
Need to simply cut medicare and social security by half and everything will be eventually be ok.
jhrodd
jhrodd
1 year ago
Reply to  Jack
“Need to simply cut military spending by half and everything will be eventually be ok.” Fixed it for you.
Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  jhrodd
The math does not work out.
Would need to cut near 200% of defense spending.
jhrodd
jhrodd
1 year ago
Reply to  Jack
I’m talking about real military spending which is somewhere between 1.2T and 1.5T
Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  jhrodd
That is a large 0.5-0.8T slush fund.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Jack
Need to cut population and everything will be ok.
jhrodd
jhrodd
1 year ago
Reply to  Blurtman
That is a shocking revelation. Next you’re going to tell me the bank doesn’t have my money sitting in their vault!
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  jhrodd
It’s all there and you can redeem it in gold too if you want!
TheWindowCleaner
TheWindowCleaner
1 year ago
The policies of the new monetary paradigm resolve any problems with Social Security, inflation, excessive taxation, the national “debt”, the problems of both excessive government and too little government and a whole lot more. BZZZZZZT! Okay, you can all go back to believing in all of the orthodoxies that genuine paradigm changes have historically always exploded.
Yooper
Yooper
1 year ago
Just a thought since I’m not there yet, but my SS statement said my crazy ex of 15 years gets my full SS, as do I. I marry again, and divorce after 12 years (a hypothetical), and she would get my full SS along with my wife? Is this true?
No wonder things are broke, and no, not everyone who receives SS paid into it.
MikeC711
MikeC711
1 year ago
Reply to  Yooper
Not only are folks (ie: immigrants) receiving it who did not pay into it … but there are also programs added (SSDI and others) that are specifically for folks who did not pay in. There are towns where the right of passage into adulthood is to get a diagnosis guaranteeing SSDI for life. In reality, however, even taking out those who did not pay in (move them over to other entitlements) … the problem is not solved. This problem has the same quality as the debt itself … whoever actually takes productive steps to resolve it … will be seen as the bad guy who created the problem and is stealing bread from baby’s mouths to enrich themselves. With the debt … it is a serious condition that needs serious treatment. These treatments, however, are extremely painful. Up until now, we’ve been treating it with morphine (more debt and fiscal irresponsibility) which feels good (while the problem gets worse). Whoever says we need to cut the morphine and go to real solutions will be burned at the stake.
conservativeprof
conservativeprof
1 year ago
The solution proposed by Republicans after the 2004 election was partial privatization, essentially making part of SS funded. No serious proposal developed because Democrats demonized the idea calling it risky. Partial funding is only riskier if you believe in MMT, government spending without constraints. Since the limits of government spending are now visible (inflation with too much demand chasing too few goods), the risk of unfunded pensions is now clear. Unfunded federal pensions are no less risky than the entirety of government spending. The only real solution for massive increases in government spending is reduced spending and incentives to produce. I see little hope for reductions in government spending. Free government money is an unstoppable force. The USA is now addicted to free government money. Taxation has limits that already are close. Taxation is less than a zero sum game as increases of taxation on the most productive causes capital flight (less investment), less incentive to produce, and inefficiency as the government gobbles its share of tax increases. The Laffer Curve provides insight to the limits of taxation.
The only real solution to SS and Medicare is partial funding (partial privatization) but this option is off the table politically and practically (onset of baby boom retirement). The only way to prepare for years of non work is work and savings using time value of money to build assets.
Social Security has been cash flow negative for almost 15 years. The Trust Fund is just an accounting gimmick used by Congress to take SS out of annual appropriations. The current status of SS now is no different than it will be in 11 years or so. Congress can simply change the law and allow continued spending. There is no economic impact. The economic impact is the cumulative effect of massive government spending, essentially consumption growing much faster than production.
Either you believe in MMT or you do not. If you believe in MMT, keep spending without additional taxation. If you do not, lose elections while calling for spending reductions.
Six000mileyear
Six000mileyear
1 year ago
The US is addicted to corruption.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
“The only way to prepare for years of non work is work and savings using time value of money to build assets.”
It has been proven to me over the past decade or more that the time value of money is near zero.
Just because there has been a little bump in interest rates recently doesn’t mean that trend will continue.
It’s very hard to build assets with zero.
Many folks find it difficult to not like More Money Today.
rrando
rrando
1 year ago
The number of people who died due to Covid, earlier than they otherwise would have skews heavily toward the elderly. This should have a cost saving effect on the Social Security payments going forward. Is it significant? I have not seen this discussed anywhere.
Matt3
Matt3
1 year ago
Reply to  rrando
I don’t think it was significant enough. The vaccine does have a chance to increase mortality and may help SS. Also, our current drug crisis and medical system have moved life expectancy down. That certainly helps. Then there is the approach in Canada of euthanasia for the elderly, the infirmed and the depressed. That’s another helpful solution from a government point of view.
So Mish, maybe they do hate us!
nightrite
nightrite
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt3
How bout initiating Logan’s Run? Make the cutoff 75-80. Hit the mark and it’s off to La La Land. Look at all the money now!
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  nightrite
Can we have cats?
MikeC711
MikeC711
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt3
Not a fan of euthanasia (especially the involuntary kind) … and the opiate crisis IS lowering average life expectancy … but it is generally doing so by causing many more deaths in young people. % over 65 would likely go up from the opiate crisis and not down. Whether the youth dying are in the earning (and paying SS taxes) group or not is another debate. Other than in NY, NJ, Michigan and the other states that forced Covid positive patients into nursing homes and really did some serious wipe-out of the elderly … I don’t think Covid had a seriously significant impact on people over 65.
Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  rrando
Take a look at the chart above – the purple line (65+) has a temporary shift downwards in the trend during 2020-22.
The 2022-23 trend line slope has now returned to historical values (with an offset).
This temporary shift would been extra deaths due to COVID and will lessen the SS burden – but not enough to make a real impact in this discussion.
Felix_Mish
Felix_Mish
1 year ago
Reply to  rrando
Covid deaths were not all that many. 5 waves with only one state (LA) having all 5. First wave centered around NYC had 7x normal deaths for a week, surrounded by a very sharp rise and fallback. So, nationally inconsequential. Biggest wave by volume was flu season Dec/Jan, 2020/2021. Deaths got up to 2x in a few states for a week.
Mostly, though, deaths were 1.2x to 1.4x for maybe a third to a half of US for maybe 10 weeks a year for a couple years.
This is just eyeballing graphs. Glancing at those numbers: 2.5% more deaths than normal for a couple years. Remember to subtract population growth (especially old-folk pop growth!) from that percentage.
Yeah, Boomers are a way, way, way bigger deal than Covid.
KidHorn
KidHorn
1 year ago
Reply to  Felix_Mish
Exactly. Not to mention that a lot of deaths were people who were months away from dying from something else.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  rrando
It is obvious that the second SARS virus attempt with SARS-CoV-2 was inefficient and not effective.
But it is an improvement.
I await the next attempt.
klausmkl
klausmkl
1 year ago
Social security and medicare are the least of problems for America. They are giving Ukraine a 100 billion. War is escalating now.
Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  klausmkl
America is simply depleting old military stocks.
They are not giving much cash or buying more weaponry – just cleaning out old wearhoues.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  klausmkl
We spent $2 TRILLION on Iraq and Afghanistan. $100 billion is rounding error.
hmk
hmk
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
The total cost of Iraq and Afghanistan is going to be 8 trillion and 1 million lives. Great job Bush did. Probably wouldn’t have had 911 if we hadn’t teamed up with Osama bin Ladin to fight another proxy war against the Russians in Afghanistan. Karma is a bitch
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
1 year ago
Reply to  hmk
I think Clintons decision to fire cruise missiles into Afghanistan in the late 90’s has a lot more to do with causing 9/11 than teaming up with the Afghans in 1980.
hmk
hmk
1 year ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
The Russians were invading at the request of the existing governement that was allied with Russia. The exisitng government was going to succumb to radical islam and Russia also didn’t want a radicalized muslim state on its borders. The Russians were doing a good job in eliminating this threat but we love war and hate Russia so we aligned our self with radical islam to fight another proxy war. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Didn’t quite work out that way. BTW Clinton really blew it with those missles as he notified the govt they were coming so Osama had time to evacuate. Pretty dumb of him. Had the existing government remained intact in Afthanistan radical islam would not have had a breeding ground for 911. This is supefically alluded to in Charlie Wilsons War.
prumbly
prumbly
1 year ago
If we had a functioning news media they would point out Biden’s lies and de-fang them, especially the whoppers like this one.
Aaron
Aaron
1 year ago
The fix is “easy” (not fair), and this is my guess a to what will end up being enacted: Right now social security is paid to *All* eligible recipients – even billionaire’s and millionaire’s making 6 or 7 figures per year. The rich will may or may not be more demonized to make this palatable, but a means testing will be implemented. You make more than $200K per year or more than $1MM in assets? No more SS. That buys another X number of years. Then the income/asset thresholds will get lower and lower as needed.
Felix_Mish
Felix_Mish
1 year ago
Reply to  Aaron
Making the system more complex is good for the savvy – the players and the operators.
Ever play name-the-game poker with good players. They’ll call for high/low split declare with queens, fours, and one-eyes wild every time. You’ll have a ball thinking you’re playing a game where your ignorance is cancelled out by the wildness of the game. Hint: It’s not.
MikeC711
MikeC711
1 year ago
Reply to  Aaron
Already anyone of virtually any income will be income tax on their SS distributions. So for high earners:
1. SS came out of post-tax money from paychecks (not deductible)
2. SS will provide little or no ROI … most will be extremely lucky to get their money back … forget inflationi
3. What we do get back will be taxed (and since it was taxed before they took it … that means it will be taxed twice)
So now the folks who paid the most will be told they won’t see any of it back. I guess that’s all part of progressive taxation.
KidHorn
KidHorn
1 year ago
Reply to  Aaron
A million is assets? That would be crippling to many. You would force a lot of elderly to sell their homes.
cabslc
cabslc
1 year ago
Try fixing social security yourself with this Fix Social Security Interactive Calculator: link to crfb.org
Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  cabslc
Nice tool. Shows how the only solution involves reducing benefits 15-20%.
The tool also shows it is way too late for any of the other options to work – they can help but only start kicking in 30+ years from now.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
1 year ago
Reply to  Jack
Sort of.
I got it to balance out by:
1) Slow benefits for top 20% of earners
2) Raise the age to 69
3) Tax all wages >400K
Those are 3 things I personally support and would not cause hardships for the average person beyond working a bit longer which we all need to do given how long we now live.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
I could agree with this. A lot of people don’t know that if you wait until 70 yo to collect benefits, the top amount you could get in 2023 would be $4,555/month. That’s nice retirement pension, especially if you want to leave the USA and settle in a lower cost country.
One addition to your points would be to raise the age that one must start collecting SS from 70 to perhaps 75.
Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
Yes this does balance things out but takes too many years. System already broke by then.
Skeptical-guy
Skeptical-guy
1 year ago
Mish – Respectfully, I wonder if you would consider posting an objective proposal on what to do about the social security and Medicare predicaments.
Also, would you consider posting a separate column regarding climate change. Is it a threat? If not, why not? If so, what would you propose be done?
These issues seems to get all hung up in the emotion of politics. It would be nice to see an analysis from a mind as sharp as yours that approached them objectively and offered practical solutions, whether politically palatable or not.
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  Skeptical-guy
Let me give you the short version.
SS is not going to fixed. Which means that over time you will pay more in and get less out. So don’t rely on SS and look after yourself. Other than that, don’t waste your time on it.
Global warming and climate change are real and a threat that will play out over hundreds of years. The nature of this long, slow moving problem is why it is easy to keep kicking the can down the road. It is a far bigger problem for future generations than for us today. And the world is doing very little about it because of political bickering. So the costs of mitigation will go up every year, which will reduce economic growth more and more going forward.
Side note: the little bit that the world IS doing, the energy transition, is being mismanaged and will result in higher oil and gas prices for the rest of this decade. Invest accordingly.
Matt3
Matt3
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
BS. Climate change is a religion to eliminate freedom. The climate has always changed. Adapt.
Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt3
Climate has always changed and we need to adapt. Agree.
Not sure how this is tied to religion or your freedom.
Your argument seems counterintuitive.
Matt3
Matt3
1 year ago
Reply to  Jack
For the climate alarmists, the climate movement is filling the hole that God fills. It is steeped in faith rather than fact and facts will not move people from the position. It is viewed a a fight of “good vs. evil”. Furthermore, oppressing people, restricting movement and eventually relegating people to second class status are all done in the name of “saving the planet”. That’s not possible without the destruction of liberty and the curtailment of freedoms.
Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt3

You say we need to adapt – how would you “adapt” to a changing climate?

nightrite
nightrite
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt3
To the Woke brigade it is a religion. They deny God and something has to fill the void…something ALWAYS fills the void. These deluded souls worship the planet and will stop at nothing to fulfill their agenda. They’d also like to see half the world die off quickly.
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt3
Lol. Another cult conspiracy moron. Sorry Matt3. It’s the IGNORE button for you. I can’t be bothered to waste my precious time on the likes of you. Bye.
Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
Agree. Our issues are often painted in binary fashion – as black and white. Humans are poor to react to change and muddle along in the grey.
We can never agree to a simple yes or no solution – and would have unintentional poor consequences anyways. Best to muddle long.
Sometimes it works out, sometimes it does not. We try to do our best.
If the muddling does not work out – the empire or civilization falls – which gives the next folks a chance to thrive.
Buy ignored non-ESG stocks like gas and tobacco – has 9% dividends.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
Global warming is only a short-term event before the next ice sheets begin their southward progress.
This problem will be more difficult than slight increases in temperature.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
However, Global Warming will become a very serious problem in about 76 billion years when our Sun engulfs the Earth as a red giant.
JeffD
JeffD
1 year ago
Reply to  Skeptical-guy
See my post in this comment section. I answer the SS funding question in a way that you can tailor to your own solution.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.