define('DISALLOW_FILE_EDIT', true);
define('DISALLOW_FILE_MODS', true);<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: PolitiCrap &#8211; Social Security Solvent?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://norunnyeggs.com/2010/09/politicrap-social-security-solvent/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://norunnyeggs.com/2010/09/politicrap-social-security-solvent/</link>
	<description>The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger).  The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 26 Sep 2010 04:34:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: steveegg		</title>
		<link>https://norunnyeggs.com/2010/09/politicrap-social-security-solvent/comment-page-1/#comment-38931</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[steveegg]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Sep 2010 04:34:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://norunnyeggs.com/?p=9464#comment-38931</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://norunnyeggs.com/2010/09/politicrap-social-security-solvent/comment-page-1/#comment-38929&quot;&gt;J. Strupp&lt;/a&gt;.

That would be from 4.84% of GDP this year to 5.90% of GDP in 2070.  Need I remind you that an increase in terms of GDP is by definition above and beyond the effects of inflation, and indeed, above the effects of wage growth?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://norunnyeggs.com/2010/09/politicrap-social-security-solvent/comment-page-1/#comment-38929">J. Strupp</a>.</p>
<p>That would be from 4.84% of GDP this year to 5.90% of GDP in 2070.  Need I remind you that an increase in terms of GDP is by definition above and beyond the effects of inflation, and indeed, above the effects of wage growth?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: steveegg		</title>
		<link>https://norunnyeggs.com/2010/09/politicrap-social-security-solvent/comment-page-1/#comment-38930</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[steveegg]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Sep 2010 04:26:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://norunnyeggs.com/?p=9464#comment-38930</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://norunnyeggs.com/2010/09/politicrap-social-security-solvent/comment-page-1/#comment-38928&quot;&gt;J. Strupp&lt;/a&gt;.

It&#039;s actually 2040 for the OASI portion and 2018 for the DI portion, at least according to the &quot;intermediate case&quot; in the 2010 Social Security Trustees report.  I haven&#039;t fully-analyzed that yet (mostly because the main part of the &quot;gain&quot;, an assumption that a significant portion of compensation that currently goes toward health insurance will instead go to wages, is a bunch of bullshit), so I&#039;ll go back to the 2009 numbers, which had OASI running out of money in 2039 and DI running out in 2020.

What you, and the AARP, fail to take into account is nearly $9 trillion in nominal dollars (or if you prefer, over $5 trillion in constant 2010 dollars) will need to be monetized by the federal government just to get each of the two halves of Social Security to their nominal &quot;Trust Fund&quot; drop-dead dates.  The funny (as in scary-clown &quot;funny&quot;) thing is, there isn&#039;t dollar one to do that, just a promise to do it.

One more thing; the OASI part of Social Security no longer is taking in as much in taxes as it is paying out on an annual basis.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://norunnyeggs.com/2010/09/politicrap-social-security-solvent/comment-page-1/#comment-38928">J. Strupp</a>.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s actually 2040 for the OASI portion and 2018 for the DI portion, at least according to the &#8220;intermediate case&#8221; in the 2010 Social Security Trustees report.  I haven&#8217;t fully-analyzed that yet (mostly because the main part of the &#8220;gain&#8221;, an assumption that a significant portion of compensation that currently goes toward health insurance will instead go to wages, is a bunch of bullshit), so I&#8217;ll go back to the 2009 numbers, which had OASI running out of money in 2039 and DI running out in 2020.</p>
<p>What you, and the AARP, fail to take into account is nearly $9 trillion in nominal dollars (or if you prefer, over $5 trillion in constant 2010 dollars) will need to be monetized by the federal government just to get each of the two halves of Social Security to their nominal &#8220;Trust Fund&#8221; drop-dead dates.  The funny (as in scary-clown &#8220;funny&#8221;) thing is, there isn&#8217;t dollar one to do that, just a promise to do it.</p>
<p>One more thing; the OASI part of Social Security no longer is taking in as much in taxes as it is paying out on an annual basis.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: J. Strupp		</title>
		<link>https://norunnyeggs.com/2010/09/politicrap-social-security-solvent/comment-page-1/#comment-38929</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[J. Strupp]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Sep 2010 14:03:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://norunnyeggs.com/?p=9464#comment-38929</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;I admire Mr. Roosevelt’s family loyalty, but this graph from the very first page of the Congressional Budget Office’s “Long-Term Projections for Social Security: 2009 Update” debunks Roosevelt’s claim.&quot;

What?  That Social Security outlays are scheduled to go from 5% of GDP to a whopping.........6% in 60 years?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I admire Mr. Roosevelt’s family loyalty, but this graph from the very first page of the Congressional Budget Office’s “Long-Term Projections for Social Security: 2009 Update” debunks Roosevelt’s claim.&#8221;</p>
<p>What?  That Social Security outlays are scheduled to go from 5% of GDP to a whopping&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;6% in 60 years?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: J. Strupp		</title>
		<link>https://norunnyeggs.com/2010/09/politicrap-social-security-solvent/comment-page-1/#comment-38928</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[J. Strupp]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Sep 2010 13:55:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://norunnyeggs.com/?p=9464#comment-38928</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;If the AARP study claims that the Social Security Trust Fund could pay UP TO 78% of benefits, it ain’t &#039;sound.&#039;&quot;


...In 2043.  If nothing is done between now and then.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;If the AARP study claims that the Social Security Trust Fund could pay UP TO 78% of benefits, it ain’t &#8216;sound.'&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8230;In 2043.  If nothing is done between now and then.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: PolitiCrap &#8211; Social Security Solvent? &#171; Try 2 Focus		</title>
		<link>https://norunnyeggs.com/2010/09/politicrap-social-security-solvent/comment-page-1/#comment-38926</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[PolitiCrap &#8211; Social Security Solvent? &#171; Try 2 Focus]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:54:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://norunnyeggs.com/?p=9464#comment-38926</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[...] over at No Runny Eggs adds this tidbit. Things got even worse since the 2009 CBO report, with the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance portion [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] over at No Runny Eggs adds this tidbit. Things got even worse since the 2009 CBO report, with the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance portion [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>