Social Security currently is projected to be able to pay full benefits until around 2039, at which point current projections say it will start only paying seniors around 80 percent of what they should be getting. One would think having a program projected to be on a solid footing for the next 30 years would be more than sufficient for anyone.
For some reason though, Republican politicians, Democratic politicians, cranky old reprobates appointed by Obama, and beltway pundits are actually claiming this is a serious problem that needs to be dealt with NOW because they think the program must have a full 75 years of projected solvency.
Of course, the entire principle premise on which these demands is based is beyond absurd. To even be able to achieve their stated goal, you must first confidently assume we can, with a fairly high degree of accuracy, predict over 60 years into the future. Any scientist or, better yet, science fiction writer would find that idea truly laughable.
The number of conceivable events that could happen by 2070 that would totally throw off any current Social Security budget projections are too numerous to count.
- The growing Hispanic vote could result in the country, starting around 2018, adopting a much more open immigration policy, so resulting in a massive surge in new, young, immigrant workers paying taxes.
- Several cures for serious, age-related diseases found in 2030 could in a matter of a few years add an average of 20 years to our life spans.
- The passage of the 2022 “pro-motherhood act” that, among other things, heavily subsidizes paternity leave and child care, could cause, by 2038, a modest but significant 20 percent increase in the number of children born to American women.
- The 2024 health care reform law could finally control health care costs, ending middle-class wage stagnation for most Americans, producing higher payroll tax revenues.
- Epidemics caused by drug-resistant bacteria in 2020 could kill a disproportionally large number of seniors.
- A breakthrough in high-energy-density electronic capacitors in 2023 could cause an electronic car explosion, slashing world oil use by 2035. Combined with global warming dramatically increasing the demand for American food, the result is America starts running a massive trade surplus.
- As a result of World War III in 2039, America ends up losing several major cities, but also soon admits dozens of countries with large youth populations as states into the union.
- Advances in gene-therapy and nanotechnology could, by 2050, start allowing us to practically rebuild our entire bodies at a cellular level, radically changing the entire concept of “retirement” as people gain the ability to live centuries with the body of a 25 year old.
- By around 2060, the exponential growth in computing power could result in humanity reaching the technological singularity giving us almost god-like powers to control ourselves and our environments to an extent that is unimaginable.
Sure, a few may sound outlandish, but would anyone have predicted in 1950 that, by 2010, millions would be carrying around super computers in their pockets that could anywhere at anytime access basically any piece of information, news article, music, movie, or TV show that exists?
The point is accurately predicting this distant a future is impossible. Any 75-year projection of Social Security solvency is based heavily on trying to guess how much in taxes will be paid by people fifty years from now, when many of those people who will be paying taxes won’t even be born for another few decades.
What politicians claim they are trying to achieve with any plan to “strengthen” Social Security is a make-believe goal that isn’t even really achievable.




40 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Just out of curiosity, what is the 75 year forecast for the defense budget?
Over the last decade, we’ve gotten involved in a new war every two years or so
(Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Pakistan, Libya). And we never leave.
By 2086 we should be up to about 43 or so, which sounds pretty expensive.
Its a crock of course Jon. Social Security is a significant pot of money belonging to working Americans. The assholes who own our government want that money for themselves. They intend to steal our pensions and there does not appear to be anything we can do about it.
And wretched…what can be the pushback? Even with opposition, the VietNam war went on forever. There must be a better way.
IF these greedy selfish CROOKS were *truly* “concerned” about Soc Sec’s ability to continue paying appropriate amounts to Seniors in 30 years, THEN there’s a very very very very very *simple* solution: raise the income cap. Problem solved. Case closed.
Anything else that’s said is a lie of epic proportions. There truly isn’t any “problem” with Soc Sec. It’s just that the CROOKS & LIARS on Wall St want to force average citizens into gambling away their retirement funds in the giant sucking Ponzi Scheme called “Wall St.”
Don’t believe any other explanation. That’s all it is.
Thanks for the post.
Agreed!
If they would consider raising the cap and put America back to work there would be no problem for at least 200 years! Besides, the HCR laws are in infancy and will continue to be changed. We may get to a place that all progressives agree upon and that is single payer.
The teaparty and it’s leaders behind the curtains are pushing hard to take everything away from America except their ways of confiscating our tax dollars for themselves.
I could not agree with you more.
Three years from now, funeral services will be a growth industry. My prediction.
Don’t worry: Barry’s just gonna tweak ‘er.
If people had jobs they would be paying into SS and the problem (if there is one) would be solved. These loonies can’t think past the end of their noses.
Hey the Fed, Treasury and Wall Street are one (link)! Aren’t you happy about that? /s
Destroying the social safety net, however weak it may be in this country, is an unworthy motive. Publicly admitting that as a goal might lead to consequences, even for those who look only forward, not back.
How much better it is to destroy Social Security and Medicare by trying to save them. That is praiseworthy, if flawed, opening up no criticism except incompetence, bad luck, or insufficient time or resources.
Most of all, it avoids admitting to criminal or vicious intent. That is the first skill learned by any elected or appointed official, after having memorized the perjury-avoiding line, “I have no recollection of that, officer, Senator, Congressman, Mr. President, Ms. Voter…”
The folks at FDL are a smart bunch. We can see very clearly what is going on. But we aren’t any smarter than the Crooks and Liars. They know exactly what they are doing. They have been killing Americans for decades either through war or lack of health care or lack of oversight or etc. The elected officials are the terrorists.
I want my flying car! I read all about it in when I was a kid the mid-60′s in Popular Mechanics and it was supposed to be here by now. All I’ve got is a motorcycle and a Prius, and while they both get better than 45mpg, only the motorcycle flies and then only for a brief and thrilling moment.
Non-fantasy: I’m with onitgoes, just eliminate the cap.
hey my all knowing super machine I carry everywhere is pretty cool
You left out “humanity practically extinct due to resource depletion and environmental degradation”. Die-off practically inevitable at this point. Any projections past 20 years are a joke.
The entire SS issue boils down to simply: the Republicans don’t want the wealthy to pay enough tax to redeem the bonds in the trust fund (or any of our other debt). Redeem the bonds, adjust the tax cap, and this drops off the bottom of the priority list.
Yet another case of a problem that is trivially solved by raising taxes.
Reaganomics == National Suicide
Simple slogan, fits on a bumper sticker. Will we ever have politicians who will say it?
Looks like some folks have been reading Chinese history:
(excerpt from “Zhibin Gu: history of China’s Communist dynasty: corruption, wealth, politics & terror“)
Yes unpredictable things can happen, but you plan with the best you can assuming the information you have right now. And the best information you have right now is that it will run a deficit in the near future. Yes things can change for the better or worse but when they do happen, we can adjust course. What you’re saying “Lets just stay the course even though we are heading into trouble because anything can happen” makes no sense.
I’d buy that bumper sticker if I owned a car
Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, whatever…….. can always pay full benefits, from now for as long as the U.S. is the sole issuer and regulator of the currency goods and services are paid in!
I am so tired of this fake austerity bond vigilante boogie man bullshit,
enough already,
if politicians got pimp slapped everytime they lied, and fraud banksters got sent to sure enough real federal prisons……this shit would cease in a bout 3.5 seconds
Since when is 2037 the “near future?”
“Advances in gene-therapy and nanotechnology could, by 2050, start allowing us to practically rebuild our entire bodies at a cellular level, radically changing the entire concept of “retirement” as people gain the ability to live centuries with the body of a 25 year old.”
YES! Please let it happen before I die. I’ll be 95 in 2050. Please let it be affordable for me too. Also make it so when we rebuild from the cellular level we can do gene therapy and I can get rid of that pesky Y chromosome and get another X one, grow my own ovaries, fallopian tubes and uterus so I can be a genetic fertile woman and bear children instead of the male to female Transsexual woman I am now.
I’ve been looking forward to this ever since I read Heinlein.
What they’re doing is starting with a preferred outcome — namely, reducing benefits — and coming up with retroactive justifications for it, complete with meaningless charts with exponentially absurd projections.
It’s just the Shock Doctrine, in everyday practice.
Hell by then all of us DFH’s will be looking for a comfortable urn to hang out in…./s
The other thing is that the Trustees habitually operate under grossly unrealistic worst-case-scenario projections. They assume average economic growth of 1.9% per year over a 75-year period, which if that were ever to occur would literally mean the complete and utter collapse of the US economy and a turn to starvation and cannibalism. Bear in mind that during the 75-year period from 1929 to 2004, years that encompassed the whole of the Great Depression, average economic growth was 3.6% — and all Social Security needs to be fully funded over that time are growth rates of 2.7%.
Book Salon up with Nicholas Saxon’s Treasure Islands: Uncovering the Damage of Offshore Banking and Tax Havens hosted by Yves Smith
There is no social security crisis. There is no deficit crisis. There is a plan to strip the American middle class naked and beat it to death. (Don’t bother to seek support from the Democrats. They’re in on it.)
There has been a lot of noise about Baby Boomers seriously depleting the fund; perhaps true, however, no one seems to be factoring in the new wave of Baby Boomers — the post Iraq babies. I have read many articles claiming there really is a new baby boom. Thus, we have a huge population of young uns that will hit the job market to bolster our current 40-year olds who will then be in their 60s. The 2039 figure they keep using is based on stagnant population growth, which isn’t the case. They need to redo their hypotheses.
Our elected officials should be good stewards of our money, not act like it is theirs. Jimmy Hoffa helped himself to pension fund money to transact other business — he went to prison. Every President since Dwight Eisenhower has stolen our money (you can’t use the term borrowed because that infers it is paid back) Dwight first robbed us to build the Interstate system and justified his actions under the 1952 Civil Defense Act.
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes.
Oh your wrong there is in fact lots we could do but aren’t going to. They know were all cowards so they’ll steal with immunity.
75 years out…..
well, first we’d have to figure out what we could possibly do to better prepare for the future.
at the macro level it’s not saving dollars. dollars can be created by the fed govt. whenever they are needed.
here are some REAL things we could do now in preparation of taking care of seniors not yet born:
* universal and excellent education of all residents from preschool to grad school for anyone who wants and is capable of doing the work
* care for our planet home: address climate change, habitat loss, biodiversity and all natural resources (clean water and arable topsoil especially).
* universal health care
* massive investment in r & d to build knowledge base
* peace and a nuclear free planet
…… and many many more.
we are governed by idiots and crooks.
They already stole the money they just don’t want to pay it back, plus with the payroll tax holiday that will be extended forever SS is well on it’s way to being under funded and causing a problem.
Not to worry. By 2037 the USA will be no more. Maybe the USA will be part of China.
“They already stole the money” is a right-wing myth. A rather nonsensical one when you stop and think about what the Social Security trust fund really is. Hint: it’s not a vault filled with gold.
Well said Selise!
The austerity crowd likes to keep the argument in spreadsheet/dollar form rather than talk about physical realities.
They used the money for other things and replaced it with bonds. Why else would they be trying to get rid of the program and cut the revenue stream with the tax holiday. I call it theft and just to clarify I am not right wing. :)
But predicting climate 75 years into the future — that’s consensus science.
I was only refering to the myth.
And it is a myth. Nothing has been stolen. Yes, they want to find a way to more or less steal it. But to date, they have not been able to do so.
If the government had stored the funds as bags full of cash in a vault, would that somehow have been better than storing bonds?
excellent point… because
wei shouldn’t fall for it.Yes it would be better if there were bags of cash in a vault. I believe it’s more of an accounting function if what I have read is true. Since the U.S. has never defaulted on it’s debt the bonds are as good as cash. My point was that they are tying to find a way to not pay back the money. I guess I am pissed off that the SS is even being discussed as having a problem. I concede the point to you. :)
75 years ago it was 1936 and jackboots were preparing to march across Europe as authoritarianism ran amuk. How far have we come, really?
Most of the talk on economics is nonsensical. Everyone in the congress should read the blog
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=332
for an explanation of modern monetary theory and why “deficit” is really a misnomer. A nomenclature change to “funding source” or “investment” would be better because deficit has unfortunate connotations for households and the government is not similar to any household. It is the source of money which it can create as much as is necessary to maximize the economy which occurs at full employment. All the talk about “deficits” and “crisis” is absurd. “Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, whatever…….. can always pay full benefits, from now for as long as the U.S. is the sole issuer and regulator of the currency goods and services are paid in!”