Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Social Security Administration has cause for insecurity

Doom, despair, and a guarantee of fear and loathing has been forecast for Social Security for a long time. This year is going to be a mark in favor of that viewpoint. The Social Security Administration will pay more than it will obtain. It’s not the very first time, either. The SSA flirted with insolvency within the early 1980s. Social Security retains a trust fund where it holds all funds, and shortfalls are exactly what the fund is there to counteract.

Social Security payments to exceed income

This year, according to the Los Angeles Times, the Social Security Administration will spend more than it will earn. The board of trustees for Social Security and Medicare have reported, as of August 5, the tax income will be less than their due to fork out out by the end of 2010. Medicare, following the passage of the new health care reform bill, is expected to stay above water until 2029. Medicare had previously been estimated to lapse into critical condition by 2017. The projected bankruptcy of Medicare is thought to be put further off with incentives and regulations aimed at streamlining the program.

Social Security is a trust fund baby

There is a trust fund that Social Security has just in case. Anything left over after expenditures gets put in the trust fund. Any shortfalls that occur are covered by the trust fund. The fund itself was created for exactly this purpose. The Social Security Trust Fund, as outlined by the New York Times, is projected to run out by 2037. The Social Security Administration will still be able for making 75 percent of its payments if the numbers are accurate, according to the Social Security commissioner Michael Astrue.

Peter to Pay Paul!

The funding for Social Security is from tax revenue. If less money is being earned by individuals working, less cash is available for the program. More cash has to be paid out as people live longer and longer lives. This particular Social Security shortfall won’t affect people’s benefits, but the next one might.

More on this topic

nytimes.com/2010/08/06/us/politics/06benefits.html

latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sc-dc-0806-social-security-20100805,0,6306255.story



No comments: