MEDIA says NADA as GOP lie that Soc Sec surplus does not grow w/ interest

[papau]

The GOP put out a 75 year budget surplus idea - which contains the assumption that the Social Security Surplus, and the $2 Trillion in "Bush transition to private accounts debt", do not grow with interest -AND OUR MEDIA SAYS NOTHING!

Ryan said: “It’s almost impossible to score this within a
10-year budget window. … We’re talking about systemic change
and actuarial soundness" - when any actuary knows what he is doing is unsound. YET THE MEDIA SAYS NOTHING!

The "actuarial soundness" test that he is refering to is in the SS Trustees report, and while a bit wierd, and while it does not include the time value of money, it is put out by the Chief Actuary Actuary of SS as an easy way to explain financial health of the system - not a good way - just an easy way.

It is the rate surplus/deficit presentation, where for each year in the projection (75 years in the report) they calculate, as a percentage of payroll that is taxed, the projected surplus or deficit. So each dollar of a surplus 75 years from now counts the same as a dollar of deficit now.

That total surplus/deficit over 75 years is the "actuarial deficit"!, and as expressed as a percentage of the projected taxable payroll, the report shows an "actuarial balance"

Now even reporters know that at 6%, a dollar today is worth $79 dollars 75 years from now. But this report pretends they have equal value - the same as saying we can sell 2 trillion of bonds at zero percent interest!

So the harship on the current middle class of the Bush plan is hidden by this lie that surplus today is only worth 100% of its current value in 75 years - a zero rate of return on the assets.

http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/FrontPage/120804/socialsecurity.html
Social Security numbers game
GOP ponders 30-year scoring rather than 10
By Peter Savodnik
Republicans are pushing to rewrite budget rules in an attempt to remove financial obstacles that threaten the GOP’s effort to reform Social Security.

The potential move to craft budget language that would direct the Congressional Budget Office to score Social Security reform legislation over 30 or more years would likely increase the chances that the bill would pass in the 109th Congress.

Republicans could also write budget provisions that would remove the program entirely from the budget process.
file photo
Reform advocate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said traditional scoring was unsuited for Social Security reform.

Reshaping Social Security, deemed the third rail of politics, has long been viewed as an almost impossible task. But with the deficit projected to be $348 billion and the large transition costs of Social Security reform, the legislative obstacles appear even more daunting next year.

In a recent interview with The Hill, AARP President and CEO Bill Novelli said, “I don’t think Congress could ever pass because they don’t have the money to pay for it.”

The transition costs of Social Security reform, which is likely to entail personal savings accounts, could total up to $2 trillion in the short run.

Reform advocates — including Reps. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Clay Shaw (R-Fla.), several Senate and House aides and Club for Growth President Stephen Moore — said traditional pricing, or scoring, of spending items was unsuited for Social Security reform.

Instead of assigning a five- or 10-year price tag, as Congress normally does, supporters of reform say Social Security should be viewed in the context of a 30-, 40- or 75-year budget window that takes into account the program’s impact over a lifetime.

“To look at this in short segments is shortsighted,” said Shaw, who is outgoing chairman of the Ways and Means subcommittee on Social Security. “You need to look at the overall liquidity of Social Security over a long period of time.”

A key GOP Senate aide said the looming Social Security debate — which President Bush has promised will be a centerpiece of his second term — had generated a closely related conversation about the budget process.

“That’s a big debate going on right now: How do you account for the short-term transition issues, costs, today, while somehow recognizing that there’s a long-term benefit?” the aide said. “The administration is working on its budget. I’m sure that the House and Senate Budget committees are certainly thinking about it. This is something that everybody is thinking about. How do we fairly and accurately view Social Security reform in a budget context?”

Proponents of revamping Social Security maintain that, unlike other measures, which generally become more expensive as the years drag on, Social Security reform grows less costly and, ultimately, generates a surplus.

Sen. John Sununu (R-N.H.) projected that his Social Security Savings Act, introduced in September, would lead to “permanent and growing surpluses” by 2030 while eliminating the program’s $10.5 trillion debt.<snip>

[oneighty]

1. Federal Government

Should invest all the SS trust funds into the guaranteed "Get rich Quick" stock market and Guarantee the capital investment AND the return on the investment.

Since they seem assured the stock market is a sure fire get rich investment.

I think.

[The Backlash Cometh]

2. If they give a damn about this country. Those media people need

to start falling on their swords for us.