Blog

Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early Retirement Requests

Wednesday, May 27, 2009, 8:01 AM

On April 1st, in the context of writing about a newly appreciated shortfall in Social Security funding by the CBO, I wrote this (with the part I wish to discuss in bold):

Here’s a prediction – [the sharply reduced Social Security surplus] will be revised to the worse in about 6 months. I base this prediction on my belief that more people will opt for retirement than are currently projected and that entitlement program tax receipts will be below current projections. Also, nearly every prediction by the CBO has been revised to the worse over the past year, so I am “riding the trend” with this prediction.

At the time, several people commented that they thought this prediction faulty and saw the possibility of the exact opposite as being more likely.

I based my prediction on two concepts:

  1. With jobs hard to find and credit tightening, many folks would simply opt for early retirement as a means of securing any sort of cash flow at all.
  2. Many folks would (rightly) conclude that sooner or later the government would change the rules - perhaps moving the retirement date out a few years or reducing benefits or both - and opt to retire early as a means of grandfathering in their own position.

I can't say for sure which of these reasons is most responsible here, but it looks like #1 is the winner for now:

Early retirement claims increase dramatically

Reporting from Washington -- Instead of seeing older workers staying on the job longer as the economy has worsened, the Social Security system is reporting a major surge in early retirement claims that could have implications for the financial security of millions of baby boomers.

Since the current federal fiscal year began Oct. 1, claims have been running 25% ahead of last year, compared with the 15% increase that had been projected as the post-World War II generation reaches eligibility for early retirement, according to Stephen C. Goss, chief actuary for the Social Security Administration.

Many of the additional retirements are probably laid-off workers who are claiming Social Security early, despite reduced benefits, because they are under immediate financial pressure, Goss and other analysts believe.

Goss said it remained unclear whether the uptick in retirements would accelerate or abate in the months ahead. But another wave of older workers may opt for early retirement when they exhaust unemployment benefits late this year or early in 2010, he noted.

The ramifications of the trend are profound for the new retirees, their families, the government and other social institutions that may be called upon to help support them.

On top of savings ravaged by the stock market decline and the loss of home equity, many retirees now must make do with Social Security benefits reduced by as much as 25% if they retire at age 62 instead of 66.

Despite a major hit to benefits, amounting to a full 25% for only four more years of employment, many people have opted to retire early.

This means that my prediction of another sharp downward revision to the table below is on track:

Next, it was only last year that I was writing about the impeding fiscal calamity that was awaiting us all in 2017 when the outlays for Social Security were slated to exactly match receipts. Now that date could be as early as 2010, apparently.

In the chart above (source), I want you to note the extreme deterioration in surplus funds between the 2008 and 2009 forecasts. Can you spot the trend?

I might speculate that the next version of this table will have a minus 20 where the plus 3 currently sits in the 2010 position.  But I happen to think that the real, final number for 2010 will be closer to minus 50.

Given how small these numbers are, compared to the current fiscal deficits, why are they important?  Two reasons:

  1. The Social Security surplus represents hard cash that is used to fund current government operations.  Hard cash behaves differently than new deficit money in that it simply comes in one door and leaves out the other.  There is no impact to overall money supply.  Government deficit spending, on the other hand, is strongly correlated with future inflation.
  2. A Social Security shortfall represents a long-term liability.  That is, it is not just a shortfall this year, but next year, and the year after that stretching dimly off into the far future.  This means that the difference between a plus 3 and a minus 50 in one year will translate into a collective shortfall with a net present value measured in the hundreds of billions.  It's the difference between receiving a modest one-time tax rebate check and sending a child to college for the next 30 years.

Amidst all the supposed green shoots, the fact remains - the US government is completely and utterly insolvent because of the entitlement programs.  Period.  End of story.  Or, rather, beginning of story.  This should be topic number one in DC, with our foreign creditors, and with the US bond market.

Instead, we seem content, for the moment, to whistle past the graveyard, pretending that it doesn't exist. 

Related content

35 Comments

RNcarl's picture
RNcarl
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: May 13 2008
Posts: 361
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

Chris,

This is exactly the information we need!

I know that the #1 reason is the most likely. I agree that it is BOTH reasons you pointed out. If it were me, I would want to start getting SOME of "my money" back. And, I would as you pointed out, need the cash flow. 75% of something is better than 100% of NOTHING.

I have looked at this equation many times. While I am a long way off of receiving (if ever) SSI I can tell you, I plan on taking the reduced amount at age 62 (if it isn't gone). It takes many years to make up what you have lost by waiting.

This trend is no surprise to me. Reporting it is dangerous stuff I am afraid. Politically, it is the "third rail" so I seriously doubt much will be done. I remember in the 1980's we were told SSI wouldn't be there for us when we retired and how we should all have our "own" retirement accounts.

Now we are being fleeced on both ends.Wall Street has raided our personal accounts, and .gov has raided (for years) our public accounts.

FWIW - C.

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

Amidst all the green shoots, the fact remains - the US government is completely and utterly insolvent because of the entitlement programs. Period. End of story. Or, rather, beginning of story. This should be topic number one in DC, with our foreign creditors, and with the US bond market.

Instead, we seem content for the moment to whistle past the graveyard pretending that it doesn't exist.

+++++++ 1

Somehow I think that unemployment will factor into this mess [as in less money paid into the system].

Mike Pilat's picture
Mike Pilat
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 8 2008
Posts: 929
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

This will be a very interesting trend to watch. For now, social security is getting drawn down because people simply need money. But this surge in withdrawals will make the funding problems even more apparent. Later on in the game, I think the primary driver will be a lack of faith in the government and the expectation that retirement accounts and social security will be attacked. If and when this becomes a strong movement to "cash out while you can," I would think (hyper)inflation pressures would skyrocket. If the government does not address this issue right now, these trends will continue to play out and austerity will likely be the future "solution" the government pursues. This is troubling, because retirement accounts represent so much to so many. It seems the Tea Party movements are not going to stop.

leweke1's picture
leweke1
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 18 2008
Posts: 99
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

Large corporations (including my employer and several I work with) are under pressures to decrease compensation costs by reducing head count.  Having already cut the "lowest performers" by traditional termination, they are offering early retirement packages, rather than cutting deeper into the productive workers who will have the largest impact in future years.  I have many friends who have opted for the attractive terms of early retirement, and I believe this phenomenon may be adding to the several other factors you've cited as stressing Soc Sec. this year.

Doug's picture
Doug
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 1 2008
Posts: 2763
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

There is another aspect to the Social Security debacle that isn't mentioned much, but contributes to the whole bankruptcy problem.  The "disability insurance benefits" program is another entitlement with its own so-called trust fund.  In addition to early retirements, you can bet that claims will rise a lot when people are unemployed and looking for additional revenue streams.  There are many who will inflate whatever medical problems they have into disabling impairments that would entitle them to benefits based on what they have contributed to the fund over the years.  Although benefits are paid out of the trust fund, the costs of administering the program come out of general revenues. 

Then there is the "supplemental security income" program.  This is a poverty program that provides income for those who are disabled or elderly and poor.  This all comes out of the general revenues and is used by the states to shift their welfare burden onto the Federal gov't.  Eligibility for SSI also makes the recipient eligible for Medicaid, also paid by the Feds.

I don't know the numbers involved, but suspect the total costs are in the hundreds of billions.

LogansRun's picture
LogansRun
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2009
Posts: 1373
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

Chris,

This doesn't surprise me and you called it perfectly. 

I had a feeling this would happen back in late 08' in a discussion with my parents.  Both just turned the age to start collecting and they were thinking that they would wait (because they really don't NEED the money) and that if they waited another couple years their payment would be a bit more per month.  I sat them down and did the calculations.  It came out that it would take 14 years at the INCREASED amount to equal what they would get over these next 5 years!  (hope that makes sense, I could do an equation for y'all;-) 

Needless to say, they both applied as well as all of their friends that are in the same boat.  First, there's no guarantee you're going to live that extra 5 years/10yrs.  Second, you paid into it for your whole life....USE IT!  Third, it may not be around much longer so get what you can. 

Probably selfish thinking but really, if you paid into a pension fund and expected to be paid at a certain age do it.  Social Security is essentially a pension fund that we're all paying into.  I'm happy they're getting it.  I'm sure I won't as it won't be around!

Thanks for the info as usual!

Septimus's picture
Septimus
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 19 2008
Posts: 200
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

It also seems the assumption in the article covering this is that people are "retiring" early to get the benefits. I may be wrong here (please let me know if I am) but, who says the people are actually retiring? I know if I was 62 and had a good job I would keep working AND start claiming the social security benefit. My understanding is that currently you must pay income taxers on the social security income if you are under 70 and make enough to have to pay taxes but that once you are 70, the social security is tax free no matter how much you make. Is this correct? If so, I doubt it will be tax free much longer.

cannotaffordit's picture
cannotaffordit
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 12 2008
Posts: 273
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

Chris,

I love it when you're right, because, for one thing, it means I'm right in honoring what you tell us.

You continue to amaze me!   I'm so happy that we have found a voice we can trust, amid the delusionary comments, and personal agendas, of so many others who speak so loudly and get so much coverage in MSM.

mpelchat's picture
mpelchat
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 10 2008
Posts: 214
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

An old saying comes to mind "take when the taking is good, before it is all gone".

Seems like a lot of  people see the big picture and know the end of these services are in sight.

memorrison's picture
memorrison
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 16 2008
Posts: 90
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

Septimus wrote:

I know if I was 62 and had a good job I would keep working AND start claiming the social security benefit. My understanding is that currently you must pay income taxers on the social security income if you are under 70 and make enough to have to pay taxes but that once you are 70, the social security is tax free no matter how much you make. Is this correct? If so, I doubt it will be tax free much longer.

Good thought, but you have a couple of things mixed up.  Taxation and the amount of benefits you can receive.  At 62 you can start receiving benefits if your income from employment is less that 13,560k.  Before full retirement you lose $1 of benefit for every $2 of earnings above that amount.  After full retirement age, no limit on "earned income".  If you were born in 1942, full retirement is at 66.  The taxable part of your social security is based on your income regardless of your age.  For instance, someone who is 62 and not working can collect social security.  If they have income (pension, dividends, interest....) over $44k, 85% of the social security benefit will be included as taxable income. To you last point I am not aware of any law that makes social security "tax free" above 70.

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

LogansRun wrote:

First, there's no guarantee you're going to live that extra 5 years/10yrs.  Second, you paid into it for your whole life....USE IT!  Third, it may not be around much longer so get what you can.

To add to LogansRun's pertinent synopsis, let me add a fourth consideration. This is especially pertinent for those planning to retire overseas, but applies domestically as well. Namely --

4. The purchasing power of the 'dollars' paid out by SocSec may drop sharply. Therefore, the net present value of your benefits is likely to be maximized by front-loading them -- that is, taking them as early as you possibly can.

The higher inflation goes in the future, the more essential front-loading becomes. And to the rejoinder that SocSec is inflation-indexed, I say -- 'I, TOO, BELIEVE IN A STRONG DOLLAR.'

In a post in the U.S. news section of the forum, I provided an example of my 60-year-old brother-in-law's sudden change in retirement plans thanks to an unexpected layoff.

sensei's picture
sensei
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 30 2008
Posts: 26
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

...

isjrb029's picture
isjrb029
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 16 2009
Posts: 51
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

Chris I had not thought of the things that you have pointeed out and they are very important. My thoughts were if the government gets the health care process going there will be many that retire because alot of people continue to work until they get some kind of heath benefit.

joe2baba's picture
joe2baba
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2008
Posts: 807
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

the race is on..........................will it be social security or medicare that goes belly up first?

i am putting $2 on medicare by a nose

stay tuned

rowmat's picture
rowmat
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 15 2008
Posts: 358
Australian has just announced increase in the retirement age.

WORKERS will be forced to delay retirement until they turn 67 instead of 65 under a plan to make the aged-pension system financially sustainable and avert a "demographic time bomb".

Faced with an ageing population and massive increase in pension payments, Wayne Swan said the Government would begin increasing the aged-pension age from 65 in 2017 to 67 by 2023.

The Treasurer said yesterday the unpopular change - the first time in a century the 65 benchmark has been lifted - was an "essential reform which recognises this demographic time bomb that Australia faces"...

More here.... http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25471039-5017014,00.html

And a video... http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200710/r190483_715918.asx

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

MachineHead wrote:

4. The purchasing power of the 'dollars' paid out by SocSec may drop sharply. Therefore, the net present value of your benefits is likely to be maximized by front-loading them -- that is, taking them as early as you possibly can.

+ 1!! (Well +2 if you count Faber -------

                                                               |

                                                               |

                                                              \/

U.S. Inflation to Approach Zimbabwe Level, Faber Says (Update2)

May 27 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. economy will enter “hyperinflation” approaching the levels in Zimbabwe because the Federal Reserve will be reluctant to raise interest rates, investor Marc Faber said.

Prices may increase at rates “close to” Zimbabwe’s gains, Faber said in an interview with Bloomberg Television in Hong Kong. Zimbabwe’s inflation rate reached 231 million percent in July, the last annual rate published by the statistics office.

“I am 100 percent sure that the U.S. will go into hyperinflation,” Faber said.

Nichoman's picture
Nichoman
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 1 2008
Posts: 420
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

Something else to ponder (from James Quinn)...

dmasker's picture
dmasker
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 20 2009
Posts: 3
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

Another reason people are tapping their SS early could be that they do not want to tap their IRA/401k after a 43% drop.They figure the longer they can leave their savings alone, the better chance of a recovery.

Dave

joemanc's picture
joemanc
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 16 2008
Posts: 834
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

Tucked in this story is a quote from Richard Fisher, head of the Dallas Federal Reserve, about the size of unfunded liabilities:

Quote:
The Oxford-educated Mr Fisher, an outspoken free-marketer and believer in the Schumpeterian process of "creative destruction", has been running a fervent campaign to alert Americans to the "very big hole" in unfunded pension and health-care liabilities built up by a careless political class over the years.

"We at the Dallas Fed believe the total is over $99 trillion," he said in February.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/5379285...

Enron - Here we come!

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

99 Trilllllllllion?!

Mr. Fri's picture
Mr. Fri
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 21 2009
Posts: 208
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

Chris,

It amazes me how clueless people are about our economy. And I mean smart people.  I work in the semiconductor industry and there are some very smart engineers and scientists that I work with.  However, everyone sees the current situation as "It's going to recover." When I point out the situation with high unemployment, a debt based economy which needs growth each quarter to be healthy, government overspending, China buying the US debt, more mortgage problems starting this summer, (not to mention social security/baby boomers, food shortages around the world, peak oil, etc, etc.), all I get is, "It's going to recover...but slower than the last downturn." I can't even get anyone to admit that we are going into a recession.  And, often I get a funny look (or comments) like I don't understand how our economic system works.  I just don't understand why smart people don't see what's happening?  Are they too afraid to consider the ramifications?  Is an economic crash something that they've been told can't happen so they don't even consider it?  It's frustrating to not be able to have an intelligent conversation with intelligent people.

><>Larry

lacourre's picture
lacourre
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 11 2008
Posts: 38
US Congress to Debate What Comes After Trillion

I'm still trying to get my mind wrapped around the concept of Trillions...

http://www.dotpenn.com/index.php/U.S/Congress-To-Debate-What-Comes-After-Trillion.html

cwixom's picture
cwixom
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 44
Re: US Congress to Debate What Comes After Trillion

What is a trillion?  This might help you get your mind around it: 

A million seconds ago was 12 days ago. 

A billion seconds ago it was 1977. 

A trillion seconds ago we still had 20,000 years to go before the ice age ended.  It ended 11,000 years ago so about 31,000 years ago in total.

Or this:  Light travels around the earth about 8.5 times per second. It takes 8.3 minutes to travel from the sun to the earth.  It takes light 62 days to travel a trillion miles.

Broadspectrum's picture
Broadspectrum
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 14 2009
Posts: 66
The Social Security Scam

Yeap, that's a whole lotta bread.

Try this one out for size  http://mises.org/story/3469

"As long as a lot of people die before collecting any benefits, or die without collecting many benefits, the system is financially sound. In 1950, the worker-to-beneficiary ratio was 16.5-to-1. With people living longer, the worker to beneficiary ratio has fallen to 3.1-to-1 and within 20 years it's expected to drop to 2.1-to-1. Due to this falling ratio, over the years the feds have raised tax rates and now must consider further adjustments".

I wonder if that ratio is under 3 to 1. 

Cycle9's picture
Cycle9
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 10 2009
Posts: 31
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

It amazes me how clueless people are about our economy. And I mean smart people.

Larry,

I've thought a lot about this.  I work at a large well-known university, with some really smart people around.  But they have no clue about this stuff, whatsoever.  Two years before the recent financial problems started, I was trying to warn my department to prepare.  I volunteered to start a committee to make a "plan B" for when things turned south.  Nobody paid attention.  Even now, people think this is a minor blip.  Or, they think that Obama's election will fix all.  Or they believe that the tooth fairy will leave $1M under their pillow one night....

I've ceased wondering about it. I have come to the conclusion that Americans are simply far too sheltered, which has prompted a very deep rooted case of "linear thinking".  They think that because America has done so well in the past 40 years, that we will "obviously" continue to do so.  Since they haven't experienced any economic shocks themselves in recent memory, they conclude that they won't in the near future.  It is a sad human trait, but very few people (even so-called intelligent ones) seem to be able to learn from others' experiences, or from history.

They need to read the report by Rogoff that shows countries defaulting on debt (either outright default, or rampant inflation) is an extremely frequent occurrence.

The good news from that report is, that while we can all be afraid of what is going to happen as this economy crashes, we can know that we will join countless other peoples all across the globe and all across history who have experienced similar episodes.  And maybe, just maybe, the living generations will learn something from that and not repeat those mistakes in their lifetimes (unfortunately, future generations probably will).

Morgan

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

This entire people reaction to the "economy" 'thing' has me totally perplexed and subsequently it has caused me to give it a lot of consideration in an attempt to better understand why this is.

I have found it is a great way to politely and abruptly get out of a conversation. (I'm pretty introverted).

4 words: "Gonna be a depression." Worked great at the local garden center this past weekend, I'd still be there talking if not for that. If I had yelled FIRE he wouldn't have ran off so fast.

Chris I think posted the 6 stages of grief. Denial, anger acceptance etc. I think that has a lot to do with it.

But, in truth, I'd equate this to the poor souls who didn't leave the Twin Towers. Watching that event [airliners flying into buildings] was stranger than fiction, but what was even stranger was they didn't get the heck out.

I stood there, in awe watching and wondering why. It was maddening.

I look at the S&P and the DJIA as if they are the Twin Towers of today. 

To me the gloom: I look at unemployment, housing, zombie banks, zombie insurance companies, real estate (residential and commercial) sub-prime, prime, alt a and ninja's, wave 2, manufacturing, global in scope, debt, obligations (hidden off balance sheet), Enronesque GDP, faltering tax revenues - and everything else are to me akin to the two planes on top of the S&P and the DJIA.

And anyone inside the not evacuating...

Anyway, I started looking up why people stayed inside at work.

The authorities told them to, that it would be okay. When I saw the black sheep who owned the security company it made a lot of sense. Like his brother, another genius. Apples don't fall far from trees. I relate all this to the experiment in the movie the corporation, where authority is basically substituted for any and all common sense. More voltage, fine, a torturing amount of voltage? well okay, a lethal dose voltage, well yah said so, so here we go.

There was one ex-Vietnam security guy who lead a now defunct investment house of workers out, cursing at the insanity of the decision and defying and condemning it on the radio as he did so - he died, they lived.

Don't panic: The psychology of emergency mass evacuation (PPT)

Important! The biggest predictor of survival is time taken to recognize the emergency and move!

The "panic model" suggests that the crowd:

  • Is less intelligent than the lone individual
  • Will be driven by simple emotions
  • Responds with irrational behavior
  • Is a source of ‘contagion’

Which brings me to the heart of the matter. Blogs vs. where people get their information and the ability for people to take some time and think for themselves.

When I first started tuning into blogs I was chastised by friends and family for listening to loons.

Sorry, but watching Maria whats her name on CNBC or Cramer and then seeing Chris on YouTube, the blog or PBS it is pretty clear to me in 2 seconds who is the brainiac and who knows about economics.

Maria? or Chris!

To me that is like listening to Marvin or the grunt who came back in once piece from Vietnam.

Just my 2 cents.

Septimus's picture
Septimus
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 19 2008
Posts: 200
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

memorrison wrote:

Good thought, but you have a couple of things mixed up.  Taxation and the amount of benefits you can receive.  At 62 you can start receiving benefits if your income from employment is less that 13,560k.  Before full retirement you lose $1 of benefit for every $2 of earnings above that amount.  After full retirement age, no limit on "earned income".  If you were born in 1942, full retirement is at 66.  The taxable part of your social security is based on your income regardless of your age.  For instance, someone who is 62 and not working can collect social security.  If they have income (pension, dividends, interest....) over $44k, 85% of the social security benefit will be included as taxable income. To you last point I am not aware of any law that makes social security "tax free" above 70.

Thank you memorrison,

Clearly I need to go to the SS web site and read the various rules to know the best scenarios for a given situation. Of course, if anything is still there when I am 62, the rules will probably be different!

idoctor's picture
idoctor
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 4 2008
Posts: 1731
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

Davos this is priceless4 words: "Gonna be a depression." Worked great at the local garden center this past weekend, I'd still be there talking if not for that. If I had yelled FIRE he wouldn't have ran off so fast.

I see it as a good thing since it buys us more time.

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

Thanks iDoctor! I agree, we can be a good bit away from "that door" when everyone realizes that TSHTF.

Take care

martagill's picture
martagill
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: May 28 2009
Posts: 1
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

I fail to understand why Social Security is called an Entitlement Program and people gleefully say it should be gutted or abolished.  That is insanity.  WE HAVE PAID ALL OUR LIVES FOR THIS "ENTITLEMENT PROGRAM".  Do you call your life insurance an "entitlement program"?  Is your annuity an "entitlement program"?  Just because it's a government program does not mean it's a free program.  We contribute all of our working lives to it to the tune of thousands of dollars and we deserve to get full Social Security benefits when we retire.  As promised.  As a self-employed business owner, I contribute 15% every single month to it.  FIFTEEN PERCENT.  You bet I want my "entitlement".  After all, I've earned every penny of it!

SamLinder's picture
SamLinder
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 10 2008
Posts: 1499
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

QuantumEconoBiology wrote:

It amazes me how clueless people are about our economy. And I mean smart people.

Larry,

I've thought a lot about this.  I work at a large well-known university, with some really smart people around.  But they have no clue about this stuff, whatsoever.  Two years before the recent financial problems started, I was trying to warn my department to prepare.  I volunteered to start a committee to make a "plan B" for when things turned south.  Nobody paid attention.  Even now, people think this is a minor blip.  Or, they think that Obama's election will fix all.  Or they believe that the tooth fairy will leave $1M under their pillow one night....

I've ceased wondering about it. I have come to the conclusion that Americans are simply far too sheltered, which has prompted a very deep rooted case of "linear thinking".  They think that because America has done so well in the past 40 years, that we will "obviously" continue to do so.  Since they haven't experienced any economic shocks themselves in recent memory, they conclude that they won't in the near future.  It is a sad human trait, but very few people (even so-called intelligent ones) seem to be able to learn from others' experiences, or from history.

They need to read the report by Rogoff that shows countries defaulting on debt (either outright default, or rampant inflation) is an extremely frequent occurrence.

The good news from that report is, that while we can all be afraid of what is going to happen as this economy crashes, we can know that we will join countless other peoples all across the globe and all across history who have experienced similar episodes.  And maybe, just maybe, the living generations will learn something from that and not repeat those mistakes in their lifetimes (unfortunately, future generations probably will).

Morgan

Morgan,

Let me welcome you as a new poster and also compliment you on your very astute observations. It is obvious that intelligence and common sense are not always compatible in some people.

You are seeing in action the old, but very true, comment, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it," - George Santayana (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Santayana)

Rdan's picture
Rdan
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: May 31 2009
Posts: 1
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2009/05/northwest-plan-for-social-security.html

We have an extensive list of posts on Soc Sec.  CBO stats differ from SSA stats in method and timeframes.  The notion that as a dedicated program SS is in trouble, with or without the trust fund, is not accurate.  Do the numbers.

Doug's picture
Doug
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 1 2008
Posts: 2763
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

As I suggested in Post #5, I heard an NPR report this AM stating that claims for Social Security Disability Benefits and SSI disability payments are up 20%. hastening the day when payments going out will equal and exceed tax revenues coming in.

cmartenson's picture
cmartenson
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 7 2007
Posts: 3509
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

Interesting work but I have a number of issues with the approach and therefore conclusions.  While I think you've got something that could elicit some interesting policy discussions I find it far too narrow of an analysis to be useful in addressing the big picture.

  1. Why are you spending so much time only figuring SS in isolation?  Over here we consider the entire entitlement program suite in the context of the overall government fiscal situation.  Add back in the Medicare/caid and government employee pensions and then let's see how things turn out.  It seems that "fixing SS" with a few tweaks and twiggles is possibly as useful as bailing out the ocean if it turns out the other entitlement programs are going to sink the ship.  Then let's factor in the total liabilities of the government, as though we are talking about a single entity, not one consisting of a an isolated thing called SS and a bunch of other disconnected stuff, and look at these on a cash flow basis.  I hate to say it, but a $1.50/week per worker isn't going to cut it.
  2. It seems that your plan assumes that there such a thing as a SS "trust fund".  There is not.  There are only intragovernmental holdings which, as we all know, are an impossibility and meaningless to the issue of solvency because they have no net value to the government.  Strip these spurious funds out and then examine the whole mess on the basis of cash flow and it tips into the negative in just a few more years.  At that point SS goes cash flow negative and is merely another drain in a very leaky tub of government expenditures and even an infinite number of "trust fund" IOUs will not make a whit of difference.  When that happens SS competes with every other government program for cash.  How will that shortfall be met?  That's right, with additional borrowing/printing which will serve to make fixed SS outlays diminish in value as the dollar erodes which is, in our world, a form of default on the part of the government because it forcibly removes value from a promised cash flow.  While the government may be able to technically meet its obligations, the resulting inflation will make the outcome as unfavorable to pensioners as an outright default.
Doug's picture
Doug
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 1 2008
Posts: 2763
Re: Confirmed - Social Security Deluged with Early ...

While it is true that the SS trust funds are really accounting gimmicks, the nature of the obligations is quite different from most government programs.  The trust funds are set up to fund social contracts not different in kind from private insurance contracts.  Even thought the payroll taxes are mandatory, there is an understanding that we will be "entitled" to the benefits prescribed by the program when we fulfill our parts of the bargain, i.e., pay the premiums (payroll taxes) and reach a certain age or become disabled.  I would expect an insurance company to pay up if I meet my part of the bargain, why would I expect less of a government insurance program?

OTOH, for most other gov't spending, they simply take my money and spend it on whatever they decide is in the public interest, no matter how little the public actually wants or needs the programs.  To me the Social Security insurance programs should have a higher priority than almost any other government spending, simply because they involve actual contracts with individuals that frequently mean the difference between those individuals remaining financially solvent in old age or disability, and becoming some other type of burden on society.  And, it is also true that the Social Security programs, particularly OASDI, require relatively small and predictable fixes to keep the income ahead of the outgo for at least the intermediate term future.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments