[Ed. Note: After Alex's encounter with Alan Simpson, the committee has apparently moved the meeting location without notice. Alex is trying to find out where it is being held.]
Streaming live video by Ustream
By Alex Lawson, Communications Director for Social Security Works.
This is the fifth installment of Social Security Works’ weekly livestream of the Closed Door Debt Commission. The best action is around 9:15 a.m. and 11:30 a.m., right as members of the commission are entering and leaving.
After last week’s livestream, there is little chance this week’s will be as exciting.
So let’s dwell in the past a little.
After Jane posted the eight-minute exchange I had with Alan Simpson, interest in this story picked up considerably. (As of last count the two main videos of the exchange have been viewed over 80,000 times.)
Many people zeroed in on Simpson’s comment about "lesser people," but some focused on what I considered a bigger story exposed by his rant.
The Co-Chair of the Fiscal Commission, tasked with making "changes to address the growth of entitlement spending," doesn’t know the first thing about Social Security. In fact, one person told me that Simpson’s lack of knowledge about Social Security was such "a vacuum that after listening to him I knew less than I had before."
Let me elucidate some of the ways that Simpson is wrong about Social Security:
SIMPSON: It’ll go broke in the year 2037.
FACT: The Social Security program faces a modest long-term financing shortfall of tax revenue and interest on Trust Fund assets. The Social Security Trustees estimated in 2009 that the Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance program will continue to add tax revenue to their Trust Funds up to 2016. The Trust Funds will continue to grow because of interest earned through 2023, at which time total assets will be $4.3 trillion. Subsequently, Social Security will gradually draw down all reserves before the end of 2037, if Congress takes no action whatsoever, it will have sufficient resources to pay about three-quarters of scheduled benefits. Hardly “going broke.”
SIMPSON: All of them have to do with stabilizing the system, which we are told is insolvent, it’s paying out more then it’s taking in.
FACT: Social Security is currently running a surplus. In 2009, an estimated 94 percent of Social Security tax revenues were spent to meet current expenditures (benefits and administrative costs). The surplus tax revenues, along with interest credited to the Trust Fund, contribute to a growing Trust Fund balance.
SIMPSON: It’s 2.5 trillion bucks in IOUs which have been used to build the interstate highway system and all of the things people have enjoyed since it has been setup.
FACT: The interstate highway system was built in the 1950’s when Social Security’s income and outgo were equal. The build up of the trust fund began after 1983 when Congress consciously chose that route as part of the 1983 amendments.
SIMPSON: When I was your age there were 16 people paying into the system and 1 taking out and today there are 3 people paying into the system and 1 taking out.
FACT: This is the same misleading information that Bush used to sell his privatization plan. The 16 to 1 ratio is a figure plucked from 1950, the year that social security expanded to cover millions of farm and other workers. All pension programs that require a period of employment for eligibility show similar ratios at the start or when expanded because all newly covered workers are paying in, but none of them have yet qualified for benefits. By 1955, the ratio was 8 to 1 and by 1973 the ratio was where it is today.
If the Social Security population estimates and projections for the 130-year period of 1950-2080 are correct, then the greatest demographic “burden” — when the number of dependents (children plus the elderly) relative to the working-age population — is already in the past, having reached its height in 1965 when there were 94.7 dependents per 100 persons of working age.
SIMPSON: They never knew there was a baby boom in ’83.
FACT: The last baby boomers were born in 1964. The Social Security Admininstration employs over 40 actuaries, whose job is to watch trends such as birth rates. They were aware of the baby boomers as they were arriving! Immediately after the 1983 amendments became law, the actuaries projected that Social Security would be in surplus in 2057. In 1996, the actuaries explained why they were now showing a long range deficit:
“the estimate of the future relationship between beneficiaries and workers was just about the same in 1983 when the program was last in balance. In other words, the fundamental ratio of beneficiaries to workers was fully taken into account in the 1983 financing provisions and, as a matter of fact, was known and taken into account well before that. The current deficit has a different explanation, resulting from an accumulation of relatively small annual changes in the actuarial assumptions and in the method of making the estimates.” (US SSA: 1994-1996 Advisory Council: Developments Since 1983).
SIMPSON: They never dreamed that the life expectancy from 57 years of age to 78 or 75 or whatever. Who would dream that? No one. They just died. People worked. Social Security was never a retirement. It was setup to take care of poor guys in the Depression who lost their butts, who were digging ditches, and it was to give them 43% of their wages…when they got out…and that’s what it was. It was never a retirement. It was an income supplement.
FACT: The Social Security Act, signed into law by Franklin Roosevelt on August 14, 1935, formed the basis of an old-age insurance program by providing income security to workers aged 65 and older in most commerce and industry. Although the Great Depression provided the catalyst for the landmark legislation, its principles were rooted in social insurance, which required payment of benefits based on contributions from workers. It became effective only in 1937 and therefore was not intended to provide immediate economic relief from the effects of the Depression.
To repeat; when Social Security was enacted, many people died of childhood diseases, never making it to adulthood and never paying a penny of Social Security. Most people who made it to adulthood, made it to age 65 and beyond. The life expectancy in 1940 for those who made it to age 65 was 77.7 for men and 79.7 for women. If you include all those children who died, you can get yourself to an overall life expectancy of age 57.
Social Security was enacted during the Depression but it was never intended to “take care of poor guys in the Depression,” as Simpson falsely claims. Means-tested welfare paying benefits immediately was enacted for that purpose. Because Social Security is insurance and people had to pay in to become insured, the 1935 statute didn’t provide for any benefits to be paid until 1942.
Robert J. Myers, who was an actuary with FDR’s Committee on Economic Security, who developed Social Security, and who then worked on Social Security into his 90’s, who died just a few months ago, was the one to crunch the numbers. Not only did he know that people would be living longer in the future, he forecast it with great accuracy. In 1934, he projected that in 2000, 12.7 percent of the population would be age 65 or older. According to the 2000 census figures, the percentage of those aged 65 and older was 12.4 percent of the population.
SIMPSON: Just four weeks ago, there wasn’t as much coming in as going out.
FACT: Social Security is currently running a surplus. In 2009, an estimated 94 percent of Social Security tax revenues were spent to meet current expenditures (benefits and administrative costs). The surplus tax revenues, along with interest credited to the Trust Fund, contribute to a growing Trust Fund balance.
The Social Security Trustees estimated in 2009 that the Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance program will continue to add tax revenue to their Trust Funds up to 2016. The Trust Funds will continue to grow because of interest earned through 2023, at which time total assets will be $4.3 trillion.
Well, those are some of the choice nuggets of ignorance from last week, I hope you enjoy this weeks livestream, and as always please leave ideas for questions in the comments section.



41 Comments




Thanks Alex! Forgive me for not watching the live stream, but I just wanted to pop in to say THANK YOU for the work you are doing. It is a great public service and I am grateful for it.
for goodness sakes, this site has the oligarchs seeking safety in the shadows
Support These Efforts ! – Donate to FDL Fundraiser
I was just saying to someone — That Simpson thing was the perfect storm.
Not many people could stay as cool as Alex, or be that well-informed.
Or have the camera running and get Simpson when he decided to go off.
Alex thinks he’s found the right place. He’s moving over, and we think the next highlights will be when they’re leaving the meeting, around 11:15-11:30.
Nice to know that a bunch of cowardly tax-phobic obscenely privileged millionaire greedheads, gathered together by an even more cowardly and tax-phobic billionaire greedhead named Peter Peterson, will be deciding whether or not the rest of us have to choose from catfood or a bullet in the head in our golden years.
Let’s let Congress know what we think about all this, eh?
Call (202) 224-3121 for the Capitol Hill switchboard operator; this gets you both the House and Senate.
You can also leave a comment for the House here: http://www.house.gov/house/house_comments.shtml Or write your Rep here: https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/ (You can write your senator here: http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/general/one_item_and_teasers/contacting.htm)
Isn’t this just perfect, Jane? What better way for the Catfoodies to tacitly admit that they don’t have our best interests at heart? Not only is the meeting behind closed doors and attended only by elites, they tried to hide its very location like it was Dick Cheney or something.
What idiots.
Wow, great analysis Alex.
I liked how Robert J. Myers, sitting at his desk in 1934, completely owned Alan Simpson all the way in 2010, impressive.
As is often the case in life a cool head and perfect timing make all the difference. It has been fascinating seeing how one well placed interview suddenly makes a big deal out of story that no one could be bothered with.
Just to echo cbl2, we wouldn’t be having this conversation if it weren’t for FDL. I’ve chipped in already, I hope others value this work enough to chip in and keep things running smoothly here.
Thanks for all you do Jane!
Wow! Alex must have really scared them. I would love to be a fly on the wall this morning, I bet Simpson is getting his butt chewed but good for quite possibly blowing their whole pernicious game plan.
I can’t watch now, but I appreciate the link and the work you’re doing. Since I am about to retire (at age 67-1/2) I am intensely interested in SS and the cat food commission that is stacked against us.
And P.S., I donated to FDL. Just $50 but every little bit helps.
People don’t like to admit it but our government has been thoroughly corrupted. As a result, we are unable to meet the challenges that face us as a nation. Here is how to turn the country around!
1. Fair Elections Now Act (S. 752 and H.R. 1826) – public funding of federal elections.
2. The Bipartisan Tax Fairness and Simplification Act of 2010 – (Change the top tax bracket to 50% instead of 35% to pay down the deficit).
3. Financial Regulation – end Too Big To Fail, go back to Glass-Steagall, reign in the derivatives market.
4. End Both Wars – Reduce deficit by $1 trillion over 10 years by shrinking defense budget.
5. Reduce The Deficit – SERIOUSLY means test Medicare and Social Security.
6. Education Reform – fully fund Race To The Top
7. National Infrastructure Bank – to create jobs now and increase productivity later. Run by engineers, not politicians. Sell bonds to finance.
8. Bold Energy & Climate Change Legislation – put a heavy price on carbon and initiate Pickens Plan to create jobs now.
9. Immigration Reform – create path to citizenship for illegal aliens.
10. Health Care Reform – add the public option. Allow Medicare to purchase drugs. Allow drug re-importation.
11. A Healthy Society – federal government mandate the removal of ALL food and drinks of high caloric content in any school receiving federal aid.
It is a real talent to stay that cool in the face of such condescending bull spewing out of that old cranky fart’s mouth. When I moved here to Montana 18 years ago, I was rather shocked at the number of mean old bastards and young ones who felt they could treat me with contempt right to my face. Old rich ranchers like Simpson are the worst. All that land makes some of them pretty arrogant.
I’d like to do a diary on Cranky Mc Simpson’s own “flashwords” and “sophistry of babbling” like the idiotic “It’s not real money” flashwords and the “it’s a double hit” babble. As Dean Baker said, these Know Nothings should not be in charge of anything to do with our money and our future.
Thank you for your service.
Thanks for your work Alex and congrats on hitting pay dirt. Thanks Jane for the amplification. No thanks to you Obama. This ugly hateful commission is a reflection of YOU.
Great Post. I will be storing this one for future reference.
My local newspaper (Oregonian) came out endorsing the the Saturday meeting at the local convention center as a “national effort to discuss debt and fiscal policy”. Fortunately they published my letter in the same edition.
“The op ed by Adam Davis published in the Monday edition of the Oregonian should be called out for what it is. It is an attempt to create a fake grass roots organization to back billionaire hedge fund operator Pete Peterson in his attempt to gut Social Security. He is the mover behind President Obama’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility Commission. By joining this organization you are helping him make certain the money that was borrowed from the Social Security Trust fund to help pay for tax cuts for the wealthy is not repaid. In his mind that money was stolen fair and square and they have a right to keep it. If you decide to attend or join the online group make sure you make others aware of what is really going on.”
Wonderful job. Praise comes from a guy who spent 45 years as a newspaper editor and publisher.
Don’t stop until you see their horns and tails far in the distance.
They wanna keep the catfood brand a secret until the very last minute…you know, sorta like Xmas…
Michael Whitney has another liveblogging post up: Liveblog: Hearing on Oil Rig and Cleanup Worker Health and Safety
good on ya !
starting to see folks alerting others to this charade on FB as well
Since this was smack into the Great Recession, do we know what their assumptions were for employment levels? Wondering if this was overly optimistic… yet another argument to do what it takes to achieve full employment.
“These [Trust Fund] balances are available to finance future benefit payments and other Trust Fund expenditures – but only in a bookkeeping sense…. They do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits. Instead, they are claims on the Treasury that, when redeemed, will have to be financed by raising taxes, borrowing from the public, or reducing benefits or other expenditures. The existence of large Trust Fund balances, therefore, does not, by itself, have any impact on the Government’s ability to pay benefits. (from FY 2000 Budget, Analytical Perspectives, p. 337)”
I’ll look forward to your diary mm. I’m sure it will be fun.
Great post, Alex and great job livestreaming.
5. Reduce The Deficit – SERIOUSLY means test Medicare and Social Security.
Are you not paying attention to anything Alex is writing? Wrong blog for that brand of spam.
Alex, just want to comment once again how much your reporting is truly appreciated. If we only had more reporters such as yourself, we might have a better country for “we the people”.
Former Senator Alan Simpson is wealthy, has his own senatorial pension, collects Social Security retirement on top of that, and is 78 years old.
Does anybody think that, given his statements, he gives a damn if other old people end up in abject poverty due to his inability to empathize?
Nope.
- “Lesser” people is pathetic, leaders should know not to use their pet names for proles.
- His comment on the “big” 3 demands attention. Sorry but I can think of another one or two budgets that are trillions of dollars more.
- His lack of knowledge is distrubing – but look at what he said, he knows enough (and apparently he has “his” “math”). He said the purpose of Social Security was setup for people at an age when most would be dead… that is what he wants to do (a plan as bad as he can get to prevent people from the benefit – sounds like the health insurance debate all over, though people pay in and the money is actually used for war and his roads).
One of the things bothering me most about attacks on SS are the frequent dismissal of Trust Fund assets as merely “IOUs.” IOUs are what guys give each other when they can’t cover their losses at friendly poker games. Financial assets of fiscal intermediaries, issued according to law and strict protocol, are significantly more than that. Attempting to describe them as IOUs is a shameful attempt to distort the issue and skew the debate.
Simpson is just another hired stooge for the oligarchs, whose he fooling? His whole friggin life has been nothing more then being one of their paid for “good old boys.” Where is Madame Defarge when we need her? Off with this assklowns head already!
That’s doubletalk.
“The trust funds run surpluses in that the amount paid in by current workers is more than the amount paid out to current beneficiaries. These surpluses are invested in special U.S. government securities, which are deposited into the trust funds. If the trust funds begin running deficits, meaning more in benefits are paid out than contributions paid in, the Social Security Administration is empowered to redeem the securities and use those funds to cover the deficit.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_Trust_Fund
Hoyer just came out favoring screwing Social Security, Medicare and even the middle class tax cuts set to expire next year. Mr. Blue Dog “Third Way” knows what the Wall Street masters want, and he rolled over and begged for another doggie treat.
Meanwhile, Morning Joe Scaredbrain and Mucker Brehzinski agreed on tv this a.m. that the retirement age has to increase, Medicare cut and Social Security “means tested.”
Question of the Day: How exactly is it that the only USG bonds to merit getting called mere “IOU’s” are the ones associated with SS?
Do not accept bullshit framing.
Alex
Great report – what I should have written if I had any talent in writing. The News that Bob Myers has died a few months ago should have caught my eye – I am sure it is on the SOA site. I knew Bob for many years as a wonderful fellow – I remember when he brought his book – the history of Social Security called simply “Social Security” – to the annual SOA meeting as a gift to any that asked (I got mine!).
The only point in your write up that made me wonder were the age 65 expectancy of life numbers for 1940 – I did not recall them being quite that high – although your point is well taken that the increase since 1940 has only been a few years(less than 3 years per your numbers – less than 4 per my memory). So Reagan’s move to age 67 and the likely move via the commission to age 70 by 2050 more than takes care of the change. Just for the record the following is taken from the SSA:
YEAR MALE FEMALE YEARS AFTER AGE 65
1940 12.7 14.7
1950 13.1 16.2
1960 13.2 17.4
1970 13.8 18.6
1980 14.6 19.1
1990 15.3 19.6
2000 16.1 19.1 (2000 is a “study” and SSA just says in 2010 that its up 4 years to age 81, with women up nearly 6 years to age 84, since 1940).
So your 1940 age 65 was 77.7 for men and 79.7 for women, or 12.7 and 14.7 was spot on. So much for my memory. I really hate this getting old thing.
I wouldn’t mind them raising the age to collect full SSDI to 70, as long as they actually end age discrimination so older people can actually have jobs that pay living wages, instead of being a ‘greeter’ at a discount store or some other minimum-wage job.
A slight correction. The NYT reported on March 25, that revenues will not be sufficient to pay all benefits in 2010. The difference is about $29 billion.
Time to cash in some of our bonds. Pay up, pig bastards, a deal’s a deal.
That’s the crux. The rich are attempting to welch on the deal.
Do not accept bullshit framing.
(No slur on the Welsh intended.)
Which would entail the 65 to 70 year olds being able to buy “affordable” health insurance.
Which is why there is age discrimination, because people over 55, require expensive medical insurance.
The solution to the US economic problem is to increase the labor pool, and thus increase unemployment?
I agree –
I was a hot item – easy to say forget about it whenever the employer chose to show whose boss by screwing me more than usual – jobs were a gift I gave the new employer – until age 50.
At age 50 it was like that number closed doors so fast your head was dizzy – what had been 30 to 60 days between jobs became 6 to 9 months. Then at 59, in order to make room for younger talent, I was forced out of the current job and “allowed” to take a “starting” position at half the salary I had a few months earlier – and having checked the hiring situation I was glad to accept the lesser paying job. Indeed hanging on to it to 65 was not easy. Post 65 the resume brings interview discussions – which end when the age is noted. Now health means part-time if I could get it – but I can’t. Post 65 is only for those with family connections that can get them board seats.
But the 1937 “entitlement” was for 13 years post retirement income on average – and living longer screws up that “agreement” – so the retirement age must be raised. Reagan raised it to 67 – and with little fuss at the time. This round must raise it to 69 or 70. In both cases the later retirement age was for retirees that starting receiving income 20 years from the date of the decision – actually Reagan got the transition to 66 done during Bush’s term, but the age 67 transition is still ahead of us. Likewise any transition to 70 will begin around 2029 and end at 2065.
economics is a curious science – but yes – adding older workers would indeed add to the economy – it is not a zero sum game. Whites do not lose if a black man gets a job, and the young do not lose if the aged get a job.
“Unemployment” is a negative until a business is looking for a “pool of available trained workers”.
Firedoglake and Rolling Stone need to hook up since they are doing real gonzo investigative journalism while main stream media sits on their butts. Since the McChrystal story might have taken all the air yesterday, if we link the two maybe we can get more coverage for Alex’s reporting.