B) Your post makes no logical sense. How do you proceed from the demostrably false premise that I lied to the conclusion that I can not say that someone else lied?
C) You have yet to show that there is a trust fund. You showed that there's something refered to as a trust fund refered to in a law related to Social Security, but you did not show that there was any money therein, and thus a fund.
D) You didn't respond to a single point I made. Do so, please.
[ August 28, 2001: Message edited by: Omega ]
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Why should the Federal government have ANY surplus? Is a government a giant corporation, that it's supposed to turn a profit? Governments are not people, they do not need to 'put aside money for a rainy day.'
A well-run, efficient government has zero surplus and zero deficit, much like a well-run, efficient household, once spending and savings are taken care of. A government which has a deficit is spending too much. A government which has a surplus is taxing too much.
Any excess money should be returned whence it came, that it might be used for more practical purposes by the people who earned it in the FIRST place.
The government's money is not their money, it is MY and YOUR money. We earned it, we deserve it back in proportion to how much we gave.
Let me make my OWN "Trust Fund." Let me put it in the bank, where I know it is more likely to still be there, with interest, in 35 years.
The fruits of my labor should be my own.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
posted
In our next episode of The Conservatism of the Criminally Insane Show we have this to deal with:
quote: C) You have yet to show that there is a trust fund. You showed that there's something refered to as a trust fund refered to in a law related to Social Security, but you did not show that there was any money therein, and thus a fund.
Social Security Act, Title II, SEC. 201. [42 U.S.C. 401]
quote:(a) There is hereby created on the books of the Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the "Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund". The Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund shall consist of the securities held by the Secretary of the Treasury for the Old-Age Reserve Account and the amount standing to the credit of the Old-Age Reserve Account on the books of the Treasury on January 1, 1940, which securities and amount the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to transfer to the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, and, in addition, such gifts and bequests as may be made as provided in subsection (i)(1), and such amounts as may be appropriated to, or deposited in, the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund as hereinafter provided.
Reactionary Boy, star of The Conservatism of the Criminally Insane Show likes to have others do the research because he can't be bothered. Rumor has it that he hates being bothered to look this up when he can just post things that just aren't true.
It's so much easier. Conservatism doesn't need to be bogged down by all those weighty facts.
Want to see how money is allocated to the Trust Fund by law without doing the research for yourself? Good, then you have come to the right place. Go here
And in the next episode of The Conservatism of the Criminally Insane Show, we deal with "National Debt: Yes It Really Is As Bad As A Bad Hair Day. Maybe Even Worse."
[ August 28, 2001: Message edited by: Jay the Obscure ]
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Oh goody, a post about imaginary numbers. Don't forget to divide zero by the square root of one!
Who do we owe the national debt to... ourselves?
Hey, man, I owe me 50 bucks! When am I gonna pay up?
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
posted
Again, Jay. You have yet to show that there is a trust fund. You showed that there's something refered to as a trust fund refered to in a law related to Social Security, but you did not show that there was any money therein, and thus a legitimate fund.
As for First of Two, who are you and what have you done with Rob?
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
posted
You can not proceed logically from my having a document refering to my having had a bank account at one point, to my currently having an account with vast amounts of money in it. Hardly splitting hairs.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Omega, is your head burried in the sand or up your ass? Unless I took your grievously incompetent person to Scrooge McDuck's Money Bin in person...
Seriously, what is your point? There is a Social Security trust fund but no money in the trurst fund. Which makes the people currently getting from Social Security invisible and the checks delivered by ferries.
Your point (the one your are dead in the water with) and now stuck with (painting you ever greater with the brush of a loud mouth who hasn't a clue) is so incrediblly dumb.
quote: Table III.A1.--Operations of the OASI Trust Fund, Fiscal Year 2000 [In thousands]
Total assets, September 30, 1999: $762,170,038
....
Total assets, September 30, 2000: 893,002,527
Fo2:
quote:Who do we owe the national debt to... ourselves?
What are you, doing down at Omega's level of stupidity.
Do you not think that the big old bad government borrows money for private organizations and persons from all over the world? Those private people who invest in big bad old government bonds?
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
posted
No, I was serious. I was having trouble finding information on that part of the budget.
Okay, I can see how the interest on govt. bonds would be counted as deficit, although the bonds themselves should be counted as income when they're purchased, and not as deficit until they're paid back.
However, I find it difficult to buy that the entire federal deficit is made up of government bonds.
Incidentally, my Almanac says that there was a surplus in 1998, 1999, and 2000, as well. Whered's this surplus go?
posted
I don't know. Interesting it dissapeared 'round the time you-know-who got into the White House, isn't it, tho? Gee, think maybe the tax cut was a tad too big, ya' think?
posted
If only we could make national debts go away by claiming they don't exist.
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Interesting it [the surplus] dissapeared 'round the time you-know-who got into the White House, isn't it, tho? Gee, think maybe the tax cut was a tad too big, ya' think?
The surplus is still over $150 billion dollars, even after the tax cut of only $40 billion, and that's far more than any surplus under Clinton. If you don't know these things, then you're not paying attention, and shouldn't be posting in this thread.
As for you, Jay, if you look, you'll find that all social security taxes go straight to the general fund, with all other taxes, and all SS payments come out of it. So where does the supposed money in the trust fund come from? And what is it doing there, if it doesn't get spent? As I said earleir in this thread, the money is a sham. The trust fund was raided, I'd guess to create the supposed surpluses of the Clinton administration, and Congress simply re-recorded the money as an asset. Just because I claim to have money doesn't mean that I do.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
quote:So where does the supposed money in the trust fund come from?
Supposed money? Oh my dear little boy. Ask you not these foolish questions lest not you should look so dumb. All you really need to do is read the previously posted link.
Never fear, I'll post the information for you.
The Law reads:
quote:The amounts appropriated by clauses (3) and (4) shall be transferred from time to time from the general fund in the Treasury to the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, and the amounts appropriated by clauses (1) and (2) of subsection (b) shall be transferred from time to time from the general fund in the Treasury to the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, such amounts to be determined on the basis of estimates by the Secretary of the Treasury of the taxes, specified in clauses (3) and (4) of this subsection, paid to or deposited into the Treasury; and proper adjustments shall be made in amounts subsequently transferred to the extent prior estimates were in excess of or were less than the taxes specified in such clauses (3) and (4) of this subsection.
There. No need now to bother with that nasty research problem.
quote:As I said earleir in this thread, the money is a sham. The trust fund was raided, I'd guess to create the supposed surpluses of the Clinton administration, and Congress simply re-recorded the money as an asset. Just because I claim to have money doesn't mean that I do.
How does one argue with this? The only conclusion I can reach is that you think that the whole of the Social Security Administration is LYING when they post about assets! Every single person who works there.
quote:The OASI Trust Fund was credited with interest netting $53.5 billion which consisted of (1) interest earned on the investments of the trust fund, (2) interest on transfers between the trust fund and the general fund account for the Supplemental Security Income program due to adjustments in the allocation of administrative expenses, (3) interest arising from the revised allocation of administrative expenses among the trust funds, and (4) interest on reimbursements to the trust fund for costs associated with union activities and pension reform. The remaining $475,351 of receipts consisted of gifts received under the provisions authorizing the deposit of money gifts or bequests in the trust funds.
Those fibbing bastards!
Those OASDI Trustees can claim money on those damnable "Financial Operations Of The Trust Funds And Leglislative Changes In The Last Year" reports...$53.5 billion in interest alone but we know that that is just a lie! Toss the lot in jail!!
Should we use facts? Dear Lord Vishnu, no. Make something up and blame it on Clinton!
A long time ago, I went to Washington D.C. Had a good time, visited the monuments ect. Now I've not been back in years. I've seen no physical evidence of its existance before my very eyes. It therefore can not exist. That's a very interesting philosophy you've got there. Simon the Solipcist would love it.
There is no supposed money, no alleged money...there is money in a Social Security Trust Fund.
quote:Assets of the OASI Trust Fund, End of Fiscal Years 1999-2000:
September 30, 1999: 762,170,038,441.29 September 30, 2000: 893,002,527,155.96
Say that with me now. There is money in a Social Security Trust Fund.
893,002,527,155 dollars worth.
And 96 cents.
Will the facts of the law be good enough? Probably not. How about the factual statement of the assets in the Trust Fund? *shrug*
Facts? Cold hearted facts is what he pretends to want. Is there a Trust Fund. Yes. Is it an aligation? No. It is a real thing. Am I presenting new information? Not at all. Both the "Total assets" fact and the factal text of the law came from two previous links I posted.
Did he read them before posting? Obviously not.
Someone conservative mouthpiece somewhere said there is no Social Security Trust Fund and Omega can't believe otherwise. Regardless of the facts, he remains convinced that day is night and night is day. He'll even post his unsustained beliefs IN. BIG. BOLD. LETTERS.
Omega is wrong, has posted misinformation, and spewed forth a distortion of the truth.
Will he retract THAT. BIG. BOLD. STATEMENT. the same way? Now way. It might be a wimper in the middle of some otherwise mindless post.
[ August 30, 2001: Message edited by: Jay the Obscure ]
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
