Social Security is Totally Secure. Or is it? A Debate.

Given Social Security’s nearly $3 trillion trust fund, the system cannot add to the federal deficit. That was the topic of a public debated hosted by the Soho Forum …


  1. Gotta hand it to Teresa to strolling into the lion's den when it comes to this issue, on stage with three libertarians who rightly believe social security is a massive immoral scam.

    But yeah she's essentially a propagandist.

  2. I love her talk of government bonds acting like they actually grow and aren't just a guarantee of future tax increases. This shit is wild.

  3. The fact that we have to have this debate tells me all I need to know.

    But this is the first time I've thought Gene may be wrong. I'll have to do my own research.

    Saying the law makes social security perform a certain way is a poor defense though, so I don't think social security is safe. Most of the government is illegal already. The law doesn't keep us safe.

  4. What this lady doesn't realize is that US treasuries are the most secure asset is because people in finance can get addition funds through excess TAXATION!!! she brings up the example of saying you have a personal trust fund of real assets but it was made up of Enron and other failing companies…… NO thats not the point. You can't BUY YOUR OWN DEBT and call it a an asset. If this were the case why wouldnt AT&T or literally any other company buy there own bond offerings??? Oh right because it's still a liability because the party to generates the debt cant assume the same risk to turn it into an asset. MY HELL SHE IS DULL!!!

  5. There is no MONEY you lying shits the SS money has gone into the general fund of the US govt there is a IOU from the Govt owed to the SS ledger DO YOU GET IT

  6. medicare wasn't suppose to use a certain percent of general revenue but they are way over the mark there. congress is one vote away from ignoring from not having it add to the debt or they can just ignore it like they did with medicare.

  7. This Grant was specifically placed for those who need assistance paying for medical bills, buying a home,salesman starting their own business, going to school, or even helping raise their children with old and retired people A Friend who also Received the grant told me about it and i thought it was worth looking into, so glad i did.This is a new program from the Federal Government with the help and support of the world bank and I already received $150,000 when i applied for the grant and you don't have to pay it back. I don't know if you know about Agent Richard? he was the Online Claiming Agent who helped me get the grant money
    you can contact him via# 4046921186

  8. 54:40 There is a less controversial way to raise money that both parties would agree upon. Stop taxing income of people and companies; tax the stock market 1/10 of one percent and have wealthy people and institutions from all over the world pay our taxes, not working people.

  9. I don't see this as a debate. I see someone fooled by a conman and someone else pull the curtain and display who Oz really is.

    I agree with the male speaker, but when he breathes into the microphone it is so annoying.

  10. So I am only 6 minutes into this thing. Has this woman even listened to the SSA themselves? They themselves are saying they are going broke. When the fund goes negative, massive changes are going to have to happen.

  11. I would rather have a 7 to 14% raise frankly. We can buy Treasury bonds and bills literally on our phones if we CHOOSE to!! It's an outdated system.

  12. When they passed the income tax one way they did it was to say it would never go over 1%, obviously they the government have been lying to us, our entire lives. One way or the other when the government wants to do one little thing and starts on it, it always spreads like a virus with no cure in sight, plus it always effects something partially unrelated in a negative way. In short the Federal level of government has been out of control for over one hundred years and it's progressive in nature.

    It always seems like the Federal level of government passes bills and even amendments to destroy the first 10 amendments and it's for the purpose of Control, the goal is Control.

  13. Mizz Ghilarducci admitted that the SS "trust fund" is funded by treasury bonds, but because these bonds are debt we owe ourselves, this isn't a real deficit. Comptroller Gen David Walker admitted to the growing debt incurred by our entitlements more than 10 years ago. It is only a mystery to academic hacks like Mizz Gihlarducci.

  14. Teresa is right in a sense. SS can't add to the deficit given current laws. My SS money simply won't be there when I retire. 2035 payout is 70%, by 2050 what do you suppose the return will be? Assuming that the country even survives all the rioting and politicians scrambling to avoid the guillotines when people finally realize just how screwed they are, just imagine that the deficit is 60-100 trillion dollars by then. That seems conservative to me.

  15. Astonishing that anyone could argue that "intragovernmental debt" doesn't have a net negative effect on the overall debt. That would assume that all debts affect the economy equally, and/or that putting control of the "trust fund" in the hands of the treasury instead of an "external" location like the private stock market doesn't influence overall federal spending and fiscal irresponsibly.

    OF COURSE, if the government has access to the funds designated by the SSA as a "trust" it will inevitably be less responsible in budgetary concerns than it otherwise would be.

    Only a statist idiot would argue that such access to your money would not be abused.

    The example of the family that sets up a trust for their kids perfectly illustrates this, even though Gene wasn't nearly bold enough on that point. He should have made the point that if the parents bought private investments in their children's names rather than issuing IOU's, the assets would be INSULATED from the parents' own "internal" fiscal irresponsibly. But their ability to control the theoretical assets defined by the IOU's are vulnerable to their decisions being corrupted by their access to the assets.

    The government's control of retirement assets, whether directly or through fictional barriers is the same. Just putting the government in charge of these schemes corrupts the schemes.

  16. Why didn't anyone the governments limited ability to tax combined with social security being politically untouchable? Trust fund runs out, social security taxes go up to maintain benefits. This increase in taxes reduces the federal government's ability to raise revenue, as eventually you hit a point on the laffer curve when higher taxes reduce revenue. If taxes go up 2% to save social security, that 2% could've went to the general fund instead. You're taxing the same people.

    Even if you consider social security and the federal government separate entities that tax, they both tax the same pool that has limited capacity to be taxed. So at the end of the day, if we assume that benefits won't be cut, rising unfunded liabilities from social security contribute to the debt because those liabilities will have to be paid by future taxes that could've went to the federal government.

  17. Imagine you are saving up half a million dollars in a bank savings account to buy a house. You work for years putting part of your paycheck into your account. Finally, the time comes when you want to take out that money to buy a great house, so you go to your bank to take out the money. You get to the bank and ask for your money bank, but the teller says that they don't have enough money to give you back what you paid into your account. You saved up half a million dollars, but you only get $350,000 since the bank has been using your money to pay back what they promised their earlier customers and are now not getting enough money to pay you back in full. That is Social Security.

  18. Insolvent . Been Insolvent since August 15 1971 when the Federal Reserve became Insolvent .

    The Federal Reserve should not exist . When , the Federal Reserve does not exist , Social Security does not exist either .

  19. The idea that inter-governmental transfers don't affect the economy is factually wrong. While the money stays within the US economy it is being taken from those who might be more productive and given to those who WERE potentially less productive. Therefore SS beneficiaries might receive more than their fair share. Resources are moved intentionally towards those who are more productive i.e. those providing the greatest good for the market/society. When the government interrupts this process they create market distortions and ultimately slow the economy. That is 6.2% of every entrepreneur's and working person's income.

    The affirmative side does not believe the market is efficient, they just see the country as a single unit, a family, but they forget that the family as a unit acts efficiently like a firm. The family and the firm both allocate resources efficiently, the government does not because of what Hayek called the information problem, which is inherent in government.

  20. Social Security, as people understand it, includes medicare and medicaid, which all operate under the same umbrella. The umbrella of benefits is in far worse shape than part A, which is the base of Social Security.

    Also, no politician will ever allow Social Security benefits to be cut, including the parts that fall under the social security umbrella. Teresa was speaking of Part A only, which is far more stable than other parts.

  21. Even if she was right I think it is incredibly naive to think that politicians in 2035 won't try and change the law to fund Social Security and include it in the deficit.

  22. I like this lady, she is a fighter, has a sharp mind and good sense of humor. And I don't believe for a second that SS is going to survive at the current rate.

  23. I once calculated how much I would have if I had been allowed to use my SSI payments to my IRA instead.
    I would have an additional $750,000 in retirement.
    Social Security is robbing future generations.

  24. Any Company that ran their retirement the way the government does would be arrested for misappropriation of funds and running a PONZI scheme. The exact same tactic has been run by the Mafia with Unions. This lady is delusional, Congress never did honor their so called "Trust Fund". It was another "If you like your Doctor you can keep your doctor LIE!

  25. Are you telling me that the Federal government is composed almost entirely of liars and thieves? I am shocked! I tell you, shocked!!🦂

  26. 3:12 into the "debate" and I vote against the delusional loonbag. There is NO trust fund. The money has been spent. When outlays exceed tax revenue the Social Security Administration will have to cash in the non-negotiable bonds that have been put in the cookie jar. Where will the cash come from? IT WILL BE BORROWED, THEREFORE S.S. WILL BE ADDING TO THE NATIONAL DEBT.

  27. Amazon pays no tax or Google or Twitter or any other Billionaire run corp so shoot Mitch Mconnel Hud and DOD cannot find 21 trillion….think some fraud is afoot?

  28. This is the dumbest debate. Arguing over whether a bloated government program is contributing to the deficit or simply overtaxing people. Both are a moot point because the program is failure regardless.

  29. Am I the only one who thinks that the question they're arguing over is both weirdly worded and or irrelevant? The main debate to be had is whether Social Security should be propped up or allowed to die.

  30. Very nice debating skills she has. Saying "I won the debate" 5 times before it even ended doesn't actually help you win.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.