Category: “The Floggings Will Continue Until Morale Improves”

  • Social Security’s Finances: Follow Up on a Question

    A few days ago, I wrote an article discussing Social Security and its finances.  In the comments, one of TAH’s regular readers (ex-OS2) asked two questions – one of which stumped me royally.

    So I got curious, and decided to poke around a bit and see if I could find an answer.

    While I didn’t find the precise answer, I did find the answer to a couple of similar and related questions.  And the questions seemed to be ones that might be of general interest, so I decided to post the answers here.

    The question I couldn’t answer was, “What fraction of Disability payments are made to those who never contributed?”  That in turn raises a bigger question:  “What fraction of Social Security recipients overall (Disability, Old Age, Survivors) fall into the ‘never contributed’ category?”

    Yes, that’s indeed possible.  Social Security pays benefits to spouses, survivors, and dependents under many circumstances.  Sometimes those beneficiaries in fact never have paid FICA taxes themselves.  But they still qualify based on the worker’s earnings history.

    As I surmised might be the case, Social Security doesn’t make it particularly easy to find this information, and I can’t say with that I found the precise answer to either the question concerning disability or the larger question for Social Security overall.  But I do think I found enough information to answer a closely-related question:  “How many people are receiving benefits based on someone else’s earnings history, and how much do those benefits total?”

    It turns out that Social Security does publish one report monthly that gives useable data here:  their monthly “snapshot” report.  The latest one I could find was for July 2016.  Apparently it takes a bit of time to get the necessary data, because August’s report doesn’t yet seem ready.

    Here are the pertinent numbers in table form.  The snapshot for July 2016 can be downloaded, in PDF format, here.

    July 2016 – Social Security Benefits Paid, Summary  Number of Beneficiaries (x 1,000) Percent of Beneficiaries  Benefits Paid (x $1M) Percent of Benefits Paid Average Monthly Benefit
    Grand Total 60,505 100.0% $74,854 100.0% $1,237
    Old Age/Survivors – Total 49,841 82.4% $63,890 85.4% $1,282
    Retirement Benefits – Total 43,831 72.4% $57,167 76.4% $1,304
    Paid to
         Retired Workers 40,817 67.5% $55,086 73.6% $1,350
         Spouses of Retired Workers 2,369 3.9% $1,660 2.2% $701
         Children of Retired Workers 645 1.1% $421 0.6% $652
    Survivor Benefits – Total 6,010 9.9% $6,722 9.0% $1,119
    Paid to
         Children of deceased workers 1,852 3.1% $1,542 2.1% $833
         Widowed mothers/fathers 134 0.2% $126 0.2% $943
         Nondisabled widow(er)s 3,763 6.2% $4,866 6.5% $1,293
         Disabled widow(er)s 260 0.4% $186 0.2% $717
         Parents of deceased workers 1 <0.002% $1 0.0% $1,142
    Disability Benefits – Total 10,664 17.6% $10,965 14.6% $1,028
    Paid to
         Disabled workers 8,861 14.6% $10,335 13.8% $1,166
         Spouses of deceased workers 138 0.2% $44 0.1% $323
         Children of deceased workers 1,666 2.8% $585 0.8% $351

     

    In looking at the table above, it’s pretty apparent that some of those individuals receiving benefits are receiving those benefits based on another individual’s Social Security record.  For disability, that is benefits paid to spouses and children.  For Old age And Survivors, that would be those benefits paid to spouses and children of retired workers.  By definition, it also includes all forms of survivor’s benefits that Social Security pays regarding deceased retirees.  All of these categories of persons are eligible to receive benefits from Social Security based on the worker’s earnings history under the proper circumstances.

    Doing the math, I came up with an approximate answer to the question for disability.  Social Security paid disability benefits to roughly 10,664,000 persons in July 2016.  Of those, 1,804,000 – or a bit more than 1 in 6 – were NOT disabled workers; the vast majority of that number (1,666,000) were children.  It’s a virtual certainly that they never paid a dime in FICA taxes.  The remaining 138,000 were disability benefits paid by Social Security to selected spouses of disabled workers; these are paid based on the worker’s qualification to receive disability benefits, and thus were due to the disabled worker’s earnings record.  However, it’s possible that some of these spouses indeed worked and paid FICA taxes at some point in their lives – so I can’t say with certainty that they “never paid into” Social Security.

    In dollar terms, these disability payments to spouses and children appear quite modest.  They represent only about 5.7% of Social Security’s total disability outlays.

    The situation is somewhat different for Social Security retirement and survivor benefits.  These payments are both more numerous and proportionally more costly than payments made to children and spouses of disabled workers.

    Spouses and children of retired workers receiving benefits from Social Security on the basis of the retired workers earnings histories totaled 3,041,000; benefits were also paid to 6,010,000 survivors of deceased workers.  The total of these categories – 9,024,000 – represents 20.6% of those receiving Old Age and Survivor’s benefits from Social Security – or just over 1 in 5.  These payments constitute approximately 15.4% of all Social Security Old Age and Survivors benefits paid.

    Summing both categories (Disability and Old Age/Survivors), it turns out that a bit less than 18% (17.9%) of those receiving benefits from Social Security are receiving benefits on the basis of another individual’s work history.  Those benefits represent 12.6% of all Social Security benefits paid.

    A caveat:  many of these spouses receiving benefits on the basis of a spousal work history indeed may have paid FICA taxes themselves.  A person can qualify for Social Security based on both their own work history and that of their spouse.  They’re allowed to choose to receive whichever benefit that is more advantageous financially.  So in many cases, the individuals would be entitled to a benefit – but a smaller one – based on their own work history.

    I hope someone besides me finds this information interesting or of use.

  • Immigration Fraud? DHS: “Not necessarily.”

    We already knew that DHS has some real problems managing immigration.  Just look at some of the issues found with in connection with the foreign-born spouse involved in the San Bernardino shooting (here and here and here and here), along with issues relating to Syrian “refugee” immigration (here and here and here and here).

    But you’d think they could get at least the “common stuff” right. Like run-of-the-mill, everyday immigration.

    Unfortunately, you’d be wrong.  From a recent news report (emphasis added):

    The U.S. government has mistakenly granted citizenship to at least 858 immigrants from countries of concern to national security or with high rates of immigration fraud who had pending deportation orders, according to an internal Homeland Security audit released Monday.

    The Homeland Security Department’s inspector general found that the immigrants used different names or birth dates to apply for citizenship with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and such discrepancies weren’t caught because their fingerprints were missing from government databases.

    DHS said in an emailed statement that an initial review of these cases suggest that some of the individuals may have ultimately qualified for citizenship, and that the lack of digital fingerprint records does not necessarily mean they committed fraud.

    The report does not identify any of the immigrants by name, but Inspector General John Roth’s auditors said they were all from “special interest countries” — those that present a national security concern for the United States — or neighboring countries with high rates of immigration fraud. The report did not identify those countries.

    Yeah, no need to worry.  The DHS IG says that even though the individuals used an alias or other false data during application, that that “does not necessarily mean they committed fraud”.

    Really, Mr. IG?  Can I come visit the planet on which you’re living?

    So, ICE is going after these folks – right?  They’re being tracked down and prosecuted for fraud, then stripped of their ill-gotten US citizenship – right?

    Hardly.  Two have been.  Prosecutors declined to prosecute another 26.  32 remain under investigation by ICE; they’ve closed 90 investigations.  The status of the remaining, oh, 700+?  Damned if I know.

    Oh, and this might be just the tip of the iceberg with respect to the problem.  The DHS report that found the above issue indicates that digital fingerprints are missing from Federal databases for 315,000 immigrants having final deportation orders on file.  I’m guessing some of those either have or will “slip through the cracks” soon.

    Yahoo News has an article on the subject; it’s worth a read.  Don’t read it if you’re already angry or having a crappy day.

    Unfortunately, I’m guessing if you read it and weren’t already having a crappy day . . . you’ll be having one afterwards.

    Trump’s gotten a lot of grief on various issues, including immigration.  And I can’t say I necessarily like all of his positions or public statements.

    But his recent calls for increased scrutiny of those asking to immigrate to the US certainly seem to me to be on the mark.

  • “Nothing to See Here. Move Along”

    Looks like a couple of other “non-terrorist events” happened yesterday.

    Jonn’s already mentioned one of them – that “intentional” explosion in NYC, along with the discovery of a possible pressure-cooker bomb 4 streets north – that NYC’s mayor says isn’t related to either terrorism or the New Jersey bombing earlier that day.  So I’ll discuss the other.

    In Minnesota yesterday, a guy with a knife sliced and diced eight people at a shopping mall.  (All but one of his victims have been treated and released by medical authorities, and all are expected to survive.)  He was wearing a private security company uniform at the time of the attack.

    The incident ended when the low-life bastard perp was shot and killed by an off-duty cop from a different legal jurisdiction who by chance was in the mall at the time.  That off-duty cop was authorized to carry concealed, and was indeed carrying at the time of the incident.

    The low-life bastard reportedly asked at least one of his victims if they were Muslim.  He was also reportedly heard referencing Allah during his attack.

    Local authorities have so far “declined to call the attacks an act of terrorism, saying the suspect’s motive isn’t known yet.”   Gee, that seems mighty . . . nice of them.  I guess that means there’s no reason to be concerned.

    “Nothing to see here, sheeple.  Move along.”

    Yeah, I’m thinking my leg feels wet again.  And it hasn’t been raining.

  • Social Security’s Finances: Can You Say, “House of Cards?”

    There are a plethora of misconceptions out there regarding Social Security.  Some of the more common ones:

    1. I have a retirement account with Social Security.
    2. Social Security has plenty of money.
    3. I paid into the system, so I own something and am guaranteed payments.

    Plus many, many more other mistaken ideas.

    The truth is far different.  Regardless of how many people have claimed otherwise, Social Security is in effect the biggest Ponzi scheme ever run.  It has the false appearance of a retirement plan by design – indeed, that was only one of the lies told to get the US public to accept it.  But it’s not a retirement plan in any way.  If it were done by private industry, it would almost certainly be illegal.

    However, until recently I didn’t know that much about the details of Social Security financing.  Yes, I knew it had something called  “Trust Funds” (more on why the quotes are there later in this article).  But I realized I didn’t know much at all about how they worked.  So I decided to see what I could find.

    What follows is the result of that research.  This one’s rather long – so if you’re going to read it, keep that in mind.

    Overview.

    Here’s a brief overview of how Social Security operates.  It’s not complete, and is lacking some details.  But it hits the main points. It was also compiled from various documents on the Social Security Administration web site.

    1.  Social Security is funded from multiple sources; those will be further identified below, but are generally identified in footnotes and/or explanatory text here and here. Those funding inputs are mingled and “laundered” through two so-called Social Security “trust funds” – which in reality are general purpose “slush funds” that receive every dollar that Social Security takes in, and from which all Social Security expenses get paid.  Thus, everything Social Security receives goes into one of two such “pots”:  one called “Old Age and Survivors,” and a second called “Disability”.  Everything Social Security must pay out is paid from one of those two common “pots”.   Anything left over at the end of the year “rolls over” and remains in the applicable “trust fund”.

    2.  Those Social Security   slush funds    “trust fundsbuy “special” Treasury securities not available to the public. These “special securities” are always redeemable at face value.  They also accrue interest annually.  (Being government debts, the interest of course comes out of other Federal tax revenues or from borrowing by Uncle Sam.)

    The Social Security      slush funds     “Trust Funds” buy these special securities on a daily basis. All Social Security expenses are paid by redeeming some of those “special” securities.

    Since the same fund is used to receive current income and pay current expenses, this means that the “trust funds” are not investment funds.  Rather, they’re merely temporary buffers – just like an interest-bearing checking account (if you can still find one of those these days).   Benefits are still primarily paid from incoming tax receipts, but because these “trust funds” have a nonzero balance there’s a time lag between receipt of taxes and outlay of those same dollars due to the “trust fund’s” providing a buffer.  The length of this time lag has varied over time and depends both on the fund’s balance and the average benefits dispersed monthly.  Currently the Old Age and Survivors     slush fund      Trust Fund has a “buffer length” of somewhat over 3 years.  The Disability      slush fund      “Trust Fund” has much less of a reserve on hand; it’s in serious trouble.

    3.  The Federal Government – not retirees – owns these “trust funds”. Technically, they are financial accounts belonging to the US Treasury.  All benefits are paid to qualifying individuals from these “trust funds”, as are other program expenses.  As noted above, it does this by redeeming those “special” Treasury securities you or I can’t buy.

    4.  Individuals receiving benefits actually own nothing. Since Social Security is a government benefit and not something you own, Congress can change qualification requirements, benefit amounts, or even cancel the program outright if it so desires.  Don’t believe me?  Well, then you might want to read the SCOTUS case Fleming v. Nestor (1960).  There’s a link to that case later in the article.

    5.  Social Security is primarily (at present, around 88% – and dropping) funded by payroll taxes on income below a certain level. These payments are not “retirement contributions”; they are taxes that are legally mandatory.  You do not have a “Social Security Account” with a calculable balance; all you have is an earning history.  That earning history is used – in a rather convoluted manner, which by design grossly favors career low-income wage earners at the expense of those earning a large income – to calculate the amount of the benefit the law deems you deserve.

    6.  Benefits are paid, as defined by law, to those who qualify to receive them. Federal law defines who qualifies and what must be done to qualify.  Qualification requires two things:  meeting an age or disability threshold, and having enough “qualifying quarters” of work under Social Security for which you’ve paid your Social Security taxes.  Currently, one calendar quarter of coverage credit is given for each $1,260 earned in a calendar year; earn $5,040 in a year, and you’ve got a year’s coverage.   That number was lower in the past.

    7.  Under current Federal law, 40 quarters of coverage over your entire working lifetime – in other words, 10 years – are all that is required to be “fully covered” and receive a benefit when you retire. Benefits based solely on age can be received as early as age 62 if not for disability, and earlier for disability.  Nonworking spouses receive benefits based on their spouse’s earning history.  These benefits continue should their spouse predecease them.

    8.  Those retiring for disability generally do not require as many quarters of “credit” under Social Security, but must have varying amount of Social Security employment “credit” based on their age.

    9.  Not all income is subject to Social Security taxes. Only the first $118,500 of earned income (the amount changes periodically) is subject to Social Security taxes; this is called the Social Security Wage Base.  This is because, regardless of income, there is a maximum possible benefit that can be paid to anyone receiving Social Security Benefits.  That maximum monthly benefit is currently $2,639 for someone retiring at their full retirement age of 66 (this will rise to 67 over the next few years).  Receiving this benefit requires earning at least the Social Security Wage Base for 35 or more years. In contrast, a person working full-time at a minimum wage job for 40 years at age 66 gets a monthly benefit of $924.

    10.  Under some conditions, Social Security benefits are taxable income. When this happens, these income taxes are returned to the applicable Social Security “trust fund” which paid them the benefit, not kept by the Treasury to pay Uncle Sam’s bills.  Don’t ask me why.

    OK, that’s a rather long overview.  Though it hits the major points, it’s missing a fair number of details.  So I think you can see already why there are so many varied misconceptions regarding Social Security.  It’s complex as hell – and we’ve been lied to about it for years.

    What Social Security Is Not.

    1.  Social Security is not a retirement plan. This is the biggest and oldest lie about Social Security – right up there with “3% of your income” being “the most you will ever pay” (see the paragraph here titled “Your Part of the Tax”).  While it was sold as a retirement plan by FDR and his cronies, it is not.  You do not own anything.  Your payments are not “retirement contributions”; they are legally mandatory taxes you must pay to avoid going to jail.  You do not have any kind of “retirement account”, nor are your payroll taxes invested on your behalf.  Rather, they’re used to pay benefits to others – currently, with about a 3 year delay between the time you pay them and the time they’re paid out. (In late 1983, that lag was around 2 months.)

    What Social Security is is an income transfer program, funded by payroll taxes, that transfers income from those who are working to others eligible by law to receive benefits.  Period.

    2.  Social Security is not property; you own nothing. I mentioned this before, but it merits repeating.  Unlike an earned pension, you have no legal property right to receive Social Security benefits because you paid into the system.  The SCOTUS ruled that Social Security was a government benefit, not a pension in which you have ownership rights, in Flemming v. Nestor (1960). (You can read the full SCOTUS opinion here.)  If Congress wants to change the rules, lower benefits, or terminate the whole Social Security program tomorrow, it can – and you’re SOL.  All you did when you paid those FICA taxes was do what was necessary to stay out of jail:  obey current tax laws.

    3.  Your benefits are not guaranteed. Congress can change the rules at any time – and indeed has several times over the life of the program.  Just ask anyone affected by the 1970s “notch” – if you can find anyone still alive who was affected, that is.  Or you can anyone who’s had to delay retirement due to the rise in Social Security retirement age.

    4.  You didn’t “pay into the plan” or “earn it”. What you did was pay your taxes as required by law.  That’s it.  You earned nothing, and there was no “plan” to “pay into”.  You pay taxes because the law says you must.

    5.  Social Security is not “insurance. Insurance involves paying premiums in exchange for a defined payment in the event a certain event occurs.  Social security involves paying taxes required by law, along with – if you’re lucky – getting whatever benefit Congress deems you deserve when you retire or become disabled.  Big difference.

    6.  The “Trust Funds” contain investments that have real value.  Not really.  As explained above, they’re more like interest bearing checking accounts.  They earn little value – not nearly enough to pay annual benefits.

    Plus, those “trust funds” are “guaranteed” by Uncle Sam, not by real assets.  Uncle Sam is so broke these days that if it cost a quarter to take a dump he’d probably have to upchuck instead if he couldn’t find someone to loan him a nickle.

    7.  Finally, I’ll say it again: Social Security is not a retirement plan.  Bluntly, it’s an intergenerational income transfer program – or in plain language, a means of redistributing income from workers who earn it to others who in general no longer work.  In plain language, it’s a welfare program that by design provides an unearned income to elderly and disabled persons as recipients, and is funded by taxes levied on those currently employed.

    The Social Security “Trust Funds” – What They Are, and How They Work.

    OK, above there’s an overview, followed by a list of some things Social Security is not.  So, how does it work?  How does the money get from taxpayer to beneficiary?  Where does it all come from, and where does it all go?

    In what follows, I won’t be addressing Medicare; that also has a trust fund, but though there are some similarities it’s a different beast and appears to be run somewhat differently.  I also haven’t researched that one in enough detail to be able to write anything about it that would be reasonably accurate.

    The “Trust Funds”.  Social Security has two so-called “trust funds”.  The quotes are there because in reality, these are merely two temporary holding accounts – or, if you prefer, “laundry bins” or “slush funds” – that allow income to be held temporarily (and earn a bit of interest) before it is spent within a relatively short period of time.  These funds are called the “Social Security Old Age and Survivors Trust Fund” and the “Social Security Disability Trust Fund”.  (Though it’s technically in the name, I refuse to include the term “Insurance” in the name of either trust fund – because Social Security IS NOT FREAKING INSURANCE, no matter how many times people have lied through their teeth claiming that it is.  It’s a damned tax-funded government income transfer program mandated by law; neither payments nor participation are voluntary, and taxes are not insurance premiums.)

    While the two funds (Old Age and Survivors, Disability) are distinct, they both operate virtually identically.  So a single discussion of how they operate suffices for both.

    Income.  All income for Social Security is glommed together in the applicable    slush funds    “trust funds”.  It’s held there until it’s needed to pay expenses, at which point it’s spent.

    On receipt, this income is used to buy interest bearing “special” Treasury securities.  These are different Treasury securities than those available to the public.  They generally earn some interest between purchase and redemption.

    These sources of income for Social Security’s “trust funds” come in 3 basic “flavors”.  The first, and largest, income “flavor” is payroll taxes.  This is the 12.4% of all earned income below the Social Security Wage Base (for 2016, that’s $118,500; a history of the Social Security wage base can be found here) that is required to be paid as the OASD portion of the total 15.3% FICA or SECA taxes.  Since 2000, of that 12.4% of payroll income roughly 1.8% has gone to the Social Security Disability fund; the rest  has gone to the Old Age and Survivors fund.

    Yes, I did say 12.4% and 15.3%.  That’s not a mistake.  If you’re working as a payroll employee, you don’t see that much deducted from each paycheck.  However, that’s because payroll employees only pay half of that tax; their employers pay the other half.  Self-employed individuals pay SECA taxes vice FICA taxes; these “lucky” folks get boned royally, because they’re responsible for paying that full 15.3% total out of their earned income.  (The “extra” 2.90% is Medicare taxes – which are not limited to the first $118,500 of annual earned income.  Payroll employees generally only pay half of those as well, with the other half paid by their employer.  Self-employed individuals pay the full amount.)  In 2015, those OASD payroll taxes totaled nearly $795 billion in income for Social Security, divided between the two “trust funds”.

    The Social Security “trust funds” also receive interest from the US Treasury; that’s the second “flavor” of income received by these slush funds.  This is the interest earned by those “special” Treasury securities the “trust funds” buy between the time they’re bought with payroll taxes/other income and the time they’re redeemed to pay benefits or expenses.  In 2015 that amount was also significant, totaling over $93 billion – again, divided between the two “trust funds”.

    The third “flavor” of income for Social Security “trust funds” is payments Social Security receives from the US Treasury’s general fund.  Most years, this consists mainly of the return of income taxes paid on the taxable portion of Social Security benefits; those are transferred by the Treasury to the appropriate Social Security “trust fund” vice retained by the Treasury.  (As I said previously:  do not ask me why this occurs.)  There are a few other reasons why the Treasury would transfer money to Social Security (or, even more rarely, where money would flow in the opposite direction).  However, with the exception of special reimbursements that occurred in 2011 and 2012, these other reimbursements are generally dwarfed by the other types of Social Security “trust fund” income.  (In 2011 and 2012, the Treasury “made up” the 2% temporary reduction in Social Security OASD withholdings by paying the Social Security “trust funds” the difference – which was a huge amount both years.)  For 2015, these Treasury payments were around $32 billion – with returned taxes accounting for nearly 99% of that total.

    OK, that’s where the money comes from.  These “trust funds” thus have their hands in the American taxpayer’s pockets 3 different ways:  direct seizure of income (payroll taxes); interest from the Treasury (which taxpayers pay for as well, through other taxes); and diversion of income taxes paid on taxable Social Security benefits that are returned to the fund vice being kept by the Treasury (which taxpayers again must make up through paying other offsetting taxes).

    So, that’s where the Social Security “trust funds” get their coin.  Where does that money go?  Glad you asked.

    Expenses.  Like income, Social Security has three “flavors” of expenses.  The first is Social Security’s own administrative expenses.  These currently total somewhere around $6 billion annually, and come out of the “trust funds” vice the Treasury’s general fund.  When you’re talking an enterprise that takes in and spends close to $900 billion annually, that’s not really too much in the way of overhead.  It’s around 0.67% or so of income.

    The second “flavor” is reimbursements to the Federal Railroad Retirement program.  By law, Social Security and Part I Railroad Retirement are coordinated, with railroad retirees guaranteed the equivalent of Social Security as their Part I Railroad Retirement benefit. (Part II railroad retirement is funded differently, is optional – and to my understanding is actually backed with some real assets besides Treasury IOUs – just like Social Security should have been funded from day 1.)  What that means is that whenever the Railroad Retirement Old Age and Survivor and/or Disability “trust funds” have insufficient income to pay Part I railroad retirement benefits . . . the Social Security “trust funds” transfers them funds to bail them out.  That has happened every year but two since 1960 for both railroad retirement Old Age and Survivors and Disability benefits (for railroad retirment Old Age and Survivors benefits, it’s happened every year since 1958).  However, this is also a relatively small item; in 2015, that total was less than for admin expenses, coming in at a bit less than $4.7 billion – maybe a bit over 0.5% of income.

    The last “flavor” of expense for the Social Security “trust funds” is the “biggie”:  benefits payments.  In 2015, the combined benefits paid by Social Security for Old Age and Survivors benefits and Disability benefits totaled over $886 billion – exceeding payroll tax receipts by over $91 billion.  Only the other two sources of “trust fund” income (interest payments, returned taxes/other Treasury payments) kept the “trust funds” from collectively losing money for the year.  Indeed, the Disability fund DID lose money last year – bigtime.  In contrast, last year the Old Age and Survivors fund showed a net surplus.

    After all is said and done, anything not spent at the end of the year is retained in the “trust funds”.  The balance rolls over to the next year.  Last year there was a net increase in the OAS fund of around $51 billion.  In contrast, the Social Security Disability fund decreased by nearly $28 billion.

    Unfortunately, the gap I referenced above between payroll tax receipts and benefits paid is getting larger every year.  In the relatively near future, both funds will have more outgo in terms of benefits paid/other expenses than income received from all sources – hell, the Disability fund is already in that state, and has been for several years.  When that happens, the “trust fund” concerned spends down its assets to pay those legally-mandated benefits.  When the fund balance drops to zero, payments then get dramatically reduced – when that happens, then by law payments will be limited to available income  (though it’s unclear if that applies by fund or overall).

    Observations Based on the Data – and the “So What”.

    1.  Many readers may remember the late 1970s/early 1980s “Social Security Crisis”. Yeah, that crisis was real. The Old Age and Survivor’s portion of Social Security damn near went broke.

    In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the Social Security Old Age and Survivor’s “Trust Fund” went into a downward spiral.  At the end of 1983, the Social Security Old Age and Survivor’s “trust fund” was low enough that it was in real terms less than  2% of today’s balance; it had lost almost half its nominal value (and far more in real terms) from a decade before.  It had just over 1 1/2 months of average monthly benefits on hand as a reserve.  Since monthly benefits are paid by redeeming securities (and replacing them by immediately repurchasing new Treasury securities with payroll taxes received), this means that the fund was at risk of being unable to pay full benefits if the economy experienced anything but a trivial slowdown.  Absent those early 1980s reforms, Social Security would have almost certainly gone Tango Uniform (in terms of paying full benefits due) within a few years.  In contrast, at the end of 2015 the Old Age and Survivors “trust fund” had somewhere around 3 years of benefits on balance.  (And no – that does NOT mean everything is “Hunky Dory”.  Read on.)

    2.  The Social Security Old Age and Survivors “trust fund” turns over every 3 years or so. It is, in effect, nothing more than a Ponzi scheme that presently has a largish (3 years or so worth of benefits) “slush fund” acting as a 3-year buffer through which to “launder” incoming payments.  The fund has nowhere near enough interest and other income annually to pay annual benefits; those incoming payments are thus used, after being held for about a 3 year or so period, to pay benefits.  Only what ever is left over after current benefits are paid – today, only a tiny fraction of overall fund income – is retained annually to increase the “trust fund” balance.  That ended years ago for the Disability fund.  For the Old Age and Survivors fund, that necessary condition (fund increasing annually) for continued operations will be coming to an end pronto.

    3.  Today’s Social Security “trust funds” are not in any way, shape, form, or fashion funded by tax payments made decades ago. (Remember:  the Old Age and Survivors fund was nearly gone at the end of 1983 – and the Disability fund is damn near gone today.) Those payroll taxes from long ago were spent decades ago to provide bennies.  Rather, today’s “trust funds” were funded by payroll taxes paid during the past 5 years, give or take – as has historically been the case.  Take away income from payroll taxes and the whole thing comes to a screeching halt in about 3 to 4 years, maybe less.  And benefits payments keep increasing each year.

    4.  The Social Security Disability Fund is a “dead man walking”. It will run out of money (e.g., hit zero balance) within 2 years.  I’m not sure precisely what happens then; my guess is that either the Old Age and Survivors fund gets tapped to make up the difference, or perhaps disability benefits get temporarily limited to funds received – with the shortage “to be made up later” (yeah, right).  Or maybe the Treasury makes up the difference – if it can find anyone to lend it the additional money.  Dunno.

    However, any of those options is seriously “bad juju”.  The Treasury “making up the difference” increases the Federal deficit substantially.  The second option cuts bennies substantially for those receiving SSDI benefits.  The first accelerates dramatically the coming crash of the OAS fund, which is already projected to occur within 20 years (2035) as it is.

    5.  Finally: the “so what”.  Why do we care about these “trust funds” and how they’re run?  How does it affect us?

    Here’s why we should care.  When Social Security’s “trust funds” are depleted Social Security then reverts to “pay as you go” status, or PAYGO.  That means Social Security benefits payments will be limited to that which can be supported by payroll taxes alone.  Barring a change, it’s estimated that when that happens in around 20 years, income will at the time support maybe 75% of the benefits that otherwise would be paid.  That means everyone receiving Social Security benefits gets a very sudden and (for most) extremely painful 25% financial “haircut”.

    “Bad juju,” indeed.  We should have listened to folks trying to privatize the system back in the early 1980s.

    Unfortunately, we did not. And as a result, to paraphrase the words of Apu Nahasapeemapetilon:  “Oh – now (we) are truly screwed!”

  • Hiding the Truth? Sure Looks Like It to Me.

    The DHS claimed earlier this year that they prevent roughly 81% of adults trying to sneak into the US across the southwestern border from doing that.  Specifically, they claimed an interdiction rate (defined as apprehension or forcing the individual to turn back) of 81.01%.

    Now, having lived in that part of the country for a while myself . . . IMO that claim doesn’t pass the “smell test”.  But regardless, that was their claim.

    If that number seems suspiciously low to you too, well, there may be a good reason.

    It seems in last year’s Fiscal 2016 Omnibus Bill required DHS to provide Congress a report on the matter.  The report still hasn’t been provided to Congress.  DHS says the report “isn’t finished”.

    Sources familiar with the situation say that is bull.

    Instead, those familiar with the subject say such a report was completed last November by a contractor for DHS – specifically, the Institute for Defense Analyses.  Apparently DHS already had such a study underway when Congress demanded one from them.

    Those knowledgeable  further indicate that the report is unclassified and is not marked to preclude public release.  They further say it’s also reportedly the “most extensive survey” of US illegal immigration and enforcement along our southwestern border conducted to date.

    Contrary to DHS claims, the report apparently shows that the actual interdiction rate (apprehension or turned back while attempting to cross) for adults attempting to cross the US border illegally is about 50% – not the 81% DHS claims.   The DHS figure was produced by “padding the numbers”.  It was calculated after including unaccompanied children and those who voluntarily surrendered (likely because they were either lost or in severe distress) vice being apprehended.

    In short, that “81%” number simply isn’t accurate.  DHS did not apprehend or force back 81% of adults attempting to cross the US southwestern border illegally; the actual fraction is far lower.  They’re engaging in intentional spin and dissembling.  Again.

    Gee, you don’t think maybe that’s why they’re “stonewalling” release of the report that exposes the truth – do you?  Why, this Administration would never do something like that!  (I trust the sarcasm in the preceding two sentences was obvious.)

    Fox News has an article giving more details.  It’s worth a read.

    “Most transparent Administration in history.”  Yeah. Right.

     

  • Benghazi

    Don’t much care if the aging leftist Canadian hippie who wrote the original is offended; he can pack up and go back to Canada for all I care.  Fair use and all that.

     

    Benghazi

    Trapped in a seaside town building
    Surrounded by jihadi
    Can’t you hear the mortars crumping
    Four dead in Benghazi

    No way now to stop it
    Islamists gunning them down
    Should have sent help long ago
    They had no chance since State
    Hung them all out to dry
    As SECSTATE surely did know

    . . .

    Help ready but mission canx
    Soldiers told to stand down
    As if nothing was at stake
    Instead all still there were
    Abandoned on the ground
    “What diff-er-ence does it make?”

    There would be no rescue coming
    To that African city
    We did absolutely nothing
    Four dead in Benghazi

    Four dead in Benghazi

    Four dead in Benghazi

    . . .

    The attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi began at approximately 3:40PM EDT (9:40PM local time) on Tuesday, 11 September 2012.  It spread to include the nearby CIA Annex early (local time) the next morning.

    Four Americans died in the attack:  US Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens, Embassy Information Officer Sean Smith, and CIA contract employees Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods.  Smith, Doherty, and Woods were veterans.  Stevens and Smith were members of the US Foreign Service.

    Rest in peace, men.

    The result of some “offensive film”?  Film my ass.  This was a well planned terrorist attack intentionally timed to occur on a date where we should have been on heightened alert:  the anniversary of 9/11.

    Ask the SECSTATE at the time why it was instead apparently “business as usual, no worries” in Benghazi that day prior to the attack.

    . . .

    Footnote: the CSN&Y original ended with Stephen Stills singing the interjectory phrases “Why?” (some sources say “Why did they die?”) and “How many more?” Those questions are apropos here too.

    The identity of an Iranian scientist who was a US intelligence source was apparently exposed by material contained on Clintoon’s private email server – a server that was laughably badly secured, and which is widely believed to have been penetrated by multiple foreign intelligence services.  As Jonn noted earlier, that Iranian scientist was hanged by Iran in August 2016.

    The answer to the “How many more?” question is thus now, “At least one – and likely more.”

    The answer to the questions, “Why?” and “Why did they die?” should be reasonably obvious.

  • About That Recent “Return of Assets” to Iran . . .

    Remember that $400 million      ransom payment      return of assets we recently sent to Iran?  You know, the one made in cash, using foreign currency obtained in Europe, by a cargo plane immediately before 4 US citizens      held hostage by Iran       detained by Iran were released?  The cash payment I wrote about previously here – and again here – and mentioned yet again here?

    Well, it appears that the       gang of idiots screwing up US foreign policy “by the numbers”      current Administration has recently acknowledged that cash payments in foreign currency made to Iran didn’t stop after the first payment.  The total paid in cash to Iran amounted to far more than the original $400M.  Rather, the entire $1.7 billion in “returned assets” was apparently paid in foreign currency – e.g., in cash.

    The first installment of $400M was sent to Iran on the day Iran agreed to release those       US hostages      detained US citizens:  17 January 2016.  The Administration has now confirmed that the second and third payments of those “returned assets”, totaling another $1.3 billion, were made a few days after their release – on 22 January 2016 and 5 February 2016, respectively.  They were also made in foreign currency.

    Hmm.  So, we made cash payments to an adversary that was at the time detaining a number of US citizens, and in return those US citizens were promptly released.  To me that certainly sounds an awful lot like the textbook definition of something called a “ransom” – and a big honking ransom at that.  And it was paid in cash.

    But maybe that’s just me.

    Oh, and if anyone’s wondering if this is a “big freaking deal”, it is – for two reasons.  First, we have now established the principle that we will indeed pay ransom for US citizens held hostage by adversaries, at least sometimes.  This is idiocy that even Jimmy “the Clueless” Carter did not commit.

    And, second:  cash generally cannot be traced.  And $1.7 billion can fund a helluva lot of terrorist activity.

    I really did not think I’d live long enough to see a US Administration more inept, foreign-policy wise, than Carter’s Clueless Crew.  I was wrong.  This gang of naive fools in DC today takes the cake.

  • Russia’s Military Gets “Frisky”, Part 5

    Well, looks like Putin decided it was time to give the POTUS the finger yet again.

    Yesterday, a Russian SU-27 “buzzed” a US reconnaissance jet over the Black Sea.  The incident occurred 40 miles from the Russian coast.

    This time, it’s estimated that the Russian aircraft passed within 10 feet of the US aircraft, a Navy P-8 Poseidon.

    The incident occurred while the US SECSTATE, John “Christmas in Cambodia” Kerry, is attempting to negotiate with Russia concerning a cease-fire in Syria.  Gee, you don’t suppose this incident was intentional, and intended to send a message – do you?

    There’s no word on whether the pilot of the Russian aircraft gave the US crew the finger – or mooned them – during the close approach.  But if he had, that would have been apropos.

    Hell, Putin’s been doing that to the current POTUS and his gang of sycophants for years now.  They don’t seem to mind.

    And Lord knows, there haven’t been any consequences for Russia for doing that.