Paul Krugman has been warning us for weeks, and now it’s happened. Citing Greg Sargent and others, Krugman has been lamenting how frequently politicians — Mitt Romney in particular, but he’s hardly alone — engage in complete whoppers and no one in the media calls them on it.
As Sargent illustrates, its hard to read a single speech or interview from Mitt in which he doesn’t fabricate a vicious lie about something Obama neither said nor did. And the result of this unchecked permissiveness towards lying, Krugman predicted, would be more and more political dishonesty.
Sure enough, I turned on PBS News Hour in time to catch David Brooks’ opening comments in response to the ever credulous Judy Woodruff. She wanted to know how much the House GOP hurt the Republican image by its behavior on the payroll tax bill this week. Now, the correct answer should have been: none. That’s because their image should already be destroyed. Everyone with any sense already knew that this group is a bunch of vicious clowns who would, if allowed, destroy government, dismantle essential public services and cheerfully screw the victims of the current economic crash to teach them a lesson.
But Brooks, who must privately detest these clowns, apparently thought his job was to help cover for them. So instead of telling the truth — that a group whose mission is to destroy much of government has no business representing the public within that government and just got handed their hats — Brooks said he was somewhat “sympathetic to the principle” they tried to defend. Principle? What principle?
According to Brooks, the GOP House was standing up for the principle that the Social Security Trust Fund should not be raided. Now mind you, this isn’t the argument that tinkering with the payroll tax could undermine the narrative that Social Security is something we all contribute to as an earned retirement fund. No, what Brooks said was that the GOP was upset because the tax holiday was a raid on the Trust Fund.
There are “three national pastimes” in Washington D.C., Brooks informed us: baseball, apple pie, and Congress raiding the Social Security Trust Fund. And the GOP just didn’t want to let that happen.
Judy said nothing to push back on this whopper — she latter indirectly agreed — and Mark Shields had his own spiel, so the false framing deed was done.
Thus viewers were left with the unchallenged view that the tax cut extension was a raid on the Social Security Trust Fund, and only the now unfairly humbled, but somewhat politically naive House GOP had stood up against this unconscionable raid. Well, bless their little entitlements defending hearts!
What gibberish.
First, Brooks neglected to explain that there’s no raid on the Trust Fund. The payroll tax is cut by 2 percent, but the revenues are replaced from the General Fund. In reality, nobody moves wheelbarrows full of dollar bills from one building to the next; all that happens is that in the government’s electronic accounting, computer entries in the trust fund account are made, just as they would have been, for the amounts that would otherwise have been collected if the payroll tax were not reduced. So the Trust Fund isn’t being “raided.” In fact, nothing is being raided, but if you want to know where the “money” comes from, it comes from some account called general funds. And even that gets replaced, in theory, via the silly “pay-fors.”
But that’s the smallest part of what’s now a standard GOP lie. The bigger lie Brooks told is the claim that Congress has been raiding the Trust Fund for years. It’s false.
The Social Security Fund is set up as a separate account that is credited with the receipts from the payroll tax. Those funds don’t just sit there, like dollar bills piled in a vault or stuffed under mattresses of the Social Security administrators. Instead, Congress pays the Trust Fund interest on the surplus account, and that interest is also credited to the Trust Fund and can be/is used to help make Social Security payments — it happens every day, because that’s how it’s supposed to work.
The interest is paid via crediting the Trust Fund with US Treasuries, bonds that pay interest to the holders of the Treasuries — that is, to the Trust Fund. It was set up this way, deliberately, so that the expected surplus the Trust Fund would deliberately build up over the last two decades to cover the baby boomers now would earn interest in the meantime on the safest investment there is: US Treasuries. There is no “raid.” Never has been. It’s as though the American people’s retirement savings account earns interest.
Congress funds government programs, from CIA drones to the National Institute of Health. It uses funds borrowed from the Trust Fund via the Treasuries issued/credited to the Trust Fund for its surplus. Congress is no more “raiding” the Trust Fund than it is raiding Goldman Sachs, or your local bank, or a state pension fund or the Chinese government, all of whom also own US bonds.
But the GOP and shills like David Brooks continue to lie to people about this, either to scare people into thinking the Trust Fund is gone, because Congress raided the money, so you shouldn’t count on Social Security (but should trust Wall Street) or to pretend the GOP cares about Social Security and wants to protect it from being raided.
It’s all a big lie, and David Brooks just told it on national television and got away with it. I should turn him in to Politifact for liar of the year, but they seem to be having their own credibility problems.



60 Comments

Scarecrow –
Normally I love your posts and am not happy to disagree on this one:
By setting up the SS Trust Fund to be reimbursed from general fund revenues, what they’ve done is undermine the conceptual basis of SS as a totally self-paid for insurance program. In addition, what happens when it’s time to reimburse the Trust Fund and Congress wants to balk? Last but not least, this phony stimulus cut is simply more window dressing on Obama’s goal of not repealing the Bush/Obama tax cuts for his rich buddies.
Brooks is utterly mendacious. His writing in the Times alternates between being garbage propaganda and poofy, vacuous “our values” writing.
Mahalo, Scarecrow…! Since the NewsHour is still hours away here in the Isles, I’ll just bet that Shields was his useless, usual self and didn’t rebut any of Bobo’s outright lies…! 8-(
The only consistent pastime in DC is lying. Our social fabric is so interwoven with it that no one really knows anything for sure…except that someone is lying. Brooks is just being a traditionalist. And no one in the media will challenge the lies because they will lose sponsorship because sales of products depend upon the repeated lies of the advertisers.
Destroying Social Security was the first thing the President did, before Ending wars, Bad Health Care, and a Bad National Security State, and protecting fraudsters. Actually the fraudster multimillionaires were put on the Catfood Commission, to loot Social Security from the Lesser people.
Obama has no credibility for protecting Social Security or Medicare. It took quite a while for the R’s to realize, they could either join the President or DEFEND Social Security. But they do not want to DEFEND Social Security and they do not want to join the President in gutting Social Security.
I am sad for them and their impossible dilemma. But David Brooks is the new champion of Social Security. Americans can be certain Social Security is now safe and sound. The senior citizens will not have to eat the Obama Catfood with peas.
As I said in the post, Brooks is not making the argument you just made. But both times Congress reduce the tax over the last year, they directed that the TF be credited for the full amount. The directive is in the statute. Of course it’s true Congress could pass a different law in the future and do something stupid in the future, but it didn’t do what you fear here. As for whether this is appropriate stimulus — no — or whether it’s cover for something else — is not what I’m addressing here. None of this justifies the whopper Brooks told.
The Social Security Trust Fund isn’t being raided, but it is being underfunded. Just wait for the arguments from the Republicans that social security as we know it is therefore unsustainable and must be privatized or abandoned.
Replacing the Making Work Pay tax credit with the payroll tax cut was a bad move.
Brooks and the people like him are intellectually corrupt phillistines, but they’re not the problem: the problem is sitting in the White House…as Matt Damon clearly understands:
http://news.yahoo.com/one-time-vocal-supporter-matt-damon-blasts-president-192419589.html
Yes, I understand that is not the argument that Brooks is making. At the same time, regardless of what nonsense/lies that Brooks spews, it seems to me that the funding of SS through general revenues raises certain issues that the two political parties would be happy to exploit in the future, primarily some fear-mongering that SS is now responsible in some way for budgetary deficits.
“And no one in the media will challenge the lies because they will lose sponsorship because sales of products depend upon the repeated lies of the advertisers.”
That, and if the lies are found out, the program(s) will not only lose sponsorship, but credibility with the public.
Which isn’t a bad thing from my point of view…
I don’t agree. The kind of intellectual dishonesty Brooks peddles is destroying the basis of democracy, namely the idea that sensible people can look at facts and figure out a good way to proceed.
I don’t think Obama does that.
What’s even worse is the sneaky dishonest way Obamarama and his Dinocratic pals laid their “dirty” hands on the third rail and are now laughing behind our backs that they’ve gotten away with breaking what used to be a hard and fast rule in DC. Now going forward all these assholes will feel free to fiddle around with the Trust fund. Our 1st mistake was allowing Reagan back when to get his grimy hands on the way the whole fund was financed. Now its too late. Obama has millions believing he’s given them a tax cut and it’s a friggin dangerous ugly lie. All this to cover his and his so called parties cowardice when it came time to allow the BVU$H2 tax cuts to expire.
The esteemed Mr. Brooks placed #12 in this year’s Hack List. No wonder…
http://www.salon.com/2011/12/15/12_david_brooks/singleton/
Seems to me the attacks on SS will continue: it is a ponzi scheme,it is unsustainable, if you are under 45 it will run out, we need to cut it, raise the retirement age, give it to Wall street, let the people decide what to do with their contributions. These and more are in the offing. In the end, the only and I do mean the only, way to protect SS is at the ballot box. We do very little to combat the assault on SS. Scarecrow just backstopped one of them but most people never heard the words. So the bad PR is out there. The attacks are pernicious and they will not stop. Given the right President and Congress they can do immense damage. They can cut it to the point where they can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in a tub and fuck the fund.
The assaults on the safety net are subtle and carried out by the right wing. Lies, half truths, and rumors are the choice of weapons. By and large it is not Obama. I think he will engage in cutting it to gain advantage somewhere else though. Thus far there is smoke there but no fire.
I don’t think Obama has destroyed SS unless I missed it. That doesn’t mean he will not give up something one day.
SS R.I.P.
It’s not a lie. People will continue to get the tax break for two months. Kinda shitty but there it is. Bush tax cuts, now there is something I want to see play out.
It is not being underfunded by virtue of this tax cut. But you are right the thugs will use all sorts of arguments against SS but they always could do that.
There is no doubt it is in danger. But it is not dead yet, only if we lose it at the voting booth.
Voting makes not a twit of difference. Everyone in D.C. gets scads of money from Wall St. It’s a done deal.
“But Brooks, who must privately detest these clowns…”
Assumes facts not in evidence :)
What is very troublesome to me is the way SS is perceived by popular opinion. I am afraid that younger people will ultimately think it will not be there for them and they will not support it.The fund is a two edged sword. It is shrinking and will run out in 2036. People who will retire around then will be easily convinced, they are just helping other people and not themselves.
Man the barricades and pass the ammunition then.
Maybe we should have a fund for the military to fight wars with.That way they will be paid in advance and not cost us trillions, counting continued health care costs.If there is no money in the fund, no war???
It’s been drilled into younguns for decades that SS will not be there for them. The whole point of Greenspan’s SS commish, 1983 (almost 30 years ago) was to build up a combined surplus, so that income tax cuts for the rich could raid the treasury. http://www.ssa.gov/history/greenspn.html
This move is just advancing the ball down the field.
Divide & conquer, young vs. old in this case, sometimes takes a long time to accomplish. Rich have been working at dismantling SS a long time.
It’s a case study in the finest tradition of Zinn.
So funny. Xmas Carol is playing on tnt. Dialogue slightly updated. So Scrooge just said: Ah, stock exchange. Profit is everything.
Yes, and it is now evident to all. So we need another strategy that is not reliant on a diminishing fund. So it is not Obama, it is the perception of a lousy deal.
Of course, this is America after all.
Ya know, I don’t think those people perceive themselves as representative of the Scrooge character. And the ones who can’t hide from the reality of what they are pretend to absolve themselves of their sins by doing churchy things.
This updated version of Xmas Carole will end with the Cratchett family in debtors prison & headlines blaming them for their own profligacy.
Obama keeps very bad company. He partnered up with Petey Peterson, the most evil man in America. Peterson PROMISED to loot Social Security for his Hedge Fund Fraudsters.
Scrooge after all was a job creator (TM).
It sure trickled down all over Cratchit.
I’m going to leave it this way. We need to say that SS is a right for all our people, a guaranteed right. It has accumulated over your lifetime as a part of this country. It does not depend on a fucking fund. To that end, stop collecting payroll taxes and move it to the general fund. That way it is truly intergenerational and not a ponzi scheme and will never run out, ever. We should fund it like we do everything else in government. But you gotta have the political power to do any of that. But I dream , you know like a guaranteed job for everyone who wants it. They did that in Argentina. Ah but we need leaders.
The payroll tax cut does not immediately underfund Social Security because general revenues are being used to make up the difference. The payroll tax cut is, however, the foundation for an attack on Social Security.
Don’t expect this “temporary” tax cut to end before the Trust Funds are empty. The Republicans will never vote for a tax “increase” even if it is merely the expiration of a prior cut, thanks to ideology and Grover Norquist. Democrats are as fearful of raising taxes as they are of rejecting war and being called soft on defense. We’re all familiar with the Obama tax cuts of December 2010 – they aren’t the Bush cuts any longer – and you may remember from just a few weeks ago that the “millionaires’ surtax” promoted by Harry Reid was dropped.
If anything is going to happen to the SS tax, it will be further reductions, in the name of stimulating a weak economy, until Social Security is funded entirely by general revenues. Then SS will be a prime target for cuts to balance the budget.
BTW, when does Brooks reach the celebrity’s dreaded point of being overexposed? He’s everywhere all of the time. Is that evidence of a monolithic MSM?
Any candidates in mind?
How much fun do you think the PTB had at their holiday parties laughing at 99ers.
Lots of chuckling at the done deal, as you note above, eC.
When the left gets together, they make a lot of noise and a muddy mess. (No offense intended toward OWS.) When the PTB assemble, they leave with signed contracts and checks. Which one has a tangible effect in the real world?!
The Gov has been raiding the Soc. Sec, Trust Fund at least since Reagan. The fiction that the SS money is sacrosanct is just that, fiction.
The ONLY thing that will stimulate the economy is demand. Demand will only be created by consumers having the funds to spend for commodities. For those consumers to have the funds they must have income. As no “job creators” have seen fit to raise wages in any significant way since 1980, tax reduction seems to be the only recourse.
Scarecrow contends that POTUS can independently end the Bushit Cuts. Would that it were so.
The SS Fund at this point is funded for something like 25 years. The funds provided by the cuts, whether for another two months of another year, are derided by Romney, the GOP, and many here.
That only displays their arrogance.
To the 1%, an extra $1000 is a pleasant dinner with friends (ask Eric Cantor).
To the 99%, an extra $1000 can feed a family of four for two months.
As Woody asked, “Which side are you on?
Moving upstairs for a recap on how the U.S. lost the Iraq war.
Slow muse day?
Veal Pen jive, meh.
Who cares, Scarecrow?
Do we hold anyone accountable by reporting about them?
They are the 1%, they won’t change, we proggys all know who they are and what they think.
Could we hang them a bit more close to home and with greater authority aside from scathing them at FDL.
I MEAN, CAN WE OCCUPY THESE ASSHATS?
N really take them down a peg or two?
Cuz bloggin about the Veal Pen is NOT gonna get to them, or influence them, or back them down. I think that’s pretty well proven.
When will the attack be taken TO them, and not about them?
But if protesters show up at their doors . . . ;-)
Let’s cut to the chase, and stop the jive?
Pressure is as pressure does . . . . ;-)
I agree with you basic point about Brooks’s lie. But he lies frequently, along with many other columnists these days, so I’m not surprised. But, a question for you, where is the “. . . separate “account” that is credited with the receipts from the payroll tax? Is it a bank account at the Fed?
Also, there’s a discussion on this issue going on here:
http://www.correntewire.com/yes_republicans_are_assholes_but_i_cant_support_the_payroll_tax_holiday#comment-203710
right now. I think it’s deeper than this one, and may be of interest to you and readers here.
BP,
“. . . what they’ve done is undermine the conceptual basis of SS as a totally self-paid for insurance program.”
I’m not sure what you mean by this. I think there are many narratives about the SS program, and this is one of them.
However, another one is that: SS payments are an immediate transfer from workers to retirees today, and that it isn’t a pension fund in which a worker invests money and then draws out the contributions and earnings when he/she retires.
The first narrative sees SS from the individual perspective rather than from a macro-economic perspective, and, as such, it is a false framing which the Rs want us to believe because they want us to decide that we ought to privatize SS and make it just another pension plan based on individual contributions.
The second narrative is the true one, and it makes us see that we can fund the SS payments any way we wish. The transfers need not cover anything like the whole cost of SS on a current basis. They need not even cover any of the cost of SS. Nor do we need to either tax or borrow to pay the cost of SS. If we want to we can use the Government’s power to create money to pay for it. We don’t even need Congress to do this. The President could use proof platinum coin seigniorage (ppcs) to pay the annual cost of SS without either levying any payroll taxes, or issuing debt instruments to fund it.
The whole problem of funding SS is a fake crisis. There is neither a crisis, nor even a fiscal problem. There is only a political problem because some people want older Americans to “die quickly.”
See: http://my.firedoglake.com/letsgetitdone/2011/04/05/the-fake-social-security-solvency-crisis-is-congresss-fault/
David Brooks is a lying sack of shit, but …
All $2.6 trillion of the Trust Fund is invested in Treasury bonds. And, selling Treasury bonds to the Trust Fund is not a “raid,” unless that sale is accompanied by a scheme to avoid the redemption of those bonds. But that is exactly what the folks (like Obama and his Catfood Commission) who want to “fix” SS are trying to do; unless SS runs a deficit deficit, those bonds cannot be redeemed.
Nobody listens to Brooks anymore. That’s part of what makes him attractive to the news shows that bring him on. He won’t hurt ratings because no one listens to him. The only thing he has going for him these days are his eyebrows.
You’ve just written a lengthy post rebutting Brooks’s simple claim. All he has to do is point out that (1) Obama has said repeatedly he wants to cut Social Security but Republican candidate whoever hasn’t; and (2) Democrats just rejoiced over cutting the funding mechanism for Social Security but Republicans didn’t.
Which is easier to understand on TV, the big lie, or the hard truth? Why does banging my head against my desk make it hurt so much?
Dear Scarecrow:
I don’t doubt that you are sincere in your beliefs. I don’t doubt that you are a good hearted person with a sincere desire to expose what you believe to be elitist lies that in your opinion threaten the well being of individual American citizens.
That being said I can state with absolute certainty that you, as with 99% of the population have no clue regarding the actual workings of and true status of the social security program. I don’t say that to insult you. I say so to offer you the opportunity to educate yourself.
In the spirit of “the truth shall set you free, but first it will piss you off”.
http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2011/01/fraud-at-heart-of-social-security.html
As the replies indicate the Corporate Media makes their living playing both ends against the middle.
I can only accept the premise of your sanity by assuming that you are joking.
Please tell me you are joking, right?
Jeebus.
The general fund is income taxes. That’s all you need to know. So…
* When SS taxes don’t cover benefits, it’s covered by income taxes.
* It’s covered by income taxes because the IOU’s in the trust fund are paid for, by income taxes.
* That means it adds to the deficit/printing.
* Deficit/printing is covered by income tax. Payers are mostly the rich.
Any questions?
Agree or not, Brooks isn’t the one who’s put SS on the chopping block for the repubs, and he’s not the preznint of the U.S., with his head three feet up Wall Street’s ass.
The republicans are being what we knew they’d be. What we didn’t know was that Obama would lay down like a cur dog for them.
Jeebus.
The general fund is income taxes. That’s all you need to know. So…
* When SS taxes don’t cover benefits, it’s covered by income taxes.
* It’s covered by income taxes because the IOUs/bonds in the trust fund are paid for, by income taxes.
* That means it adds to the deficit/printing.
* Deficit/printing is covered by income tax. Payers are mostly the rich.
Any questions?
Dear Scarecrow,
It is no longer news that David Brooks lies. That’s what he’s paid to do. The Republicans are perfectly happy to let Obama do their dirty work in deconstructing Social Security – because he did so well with health care. I so wish folk would not forget the drawn out implementation of that scenario – phase two will begin on Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid right after the bigwigs get their liberal helpings of pate’ de fois gras and truffle stuffing.
Lots to do in 2012, behind the flimflammery of electioneering. Gotta orchestrate this thing so it will be full of potential promises right up to the doorstep of the election, and then only if we re-elect Obama will there be that little carrot dangled – only to be crushed underfoot once he gets in. Remember the public option? Won’t be his fault of course; those nasty Republicans….he did his best….They tried, remember, on the heels of Bush’s ‘re-election’ – first thing he did was attempt to privatize Social Security. And who’s Bush Three? By their fruits ye shall know them. It’s in the cards. All of that and gravy besides. Oh it makes for a lovely feasting time – they’ve kept that shoe in the door.
Keep doing what you have been doing and you will keep getting what you have been getting.
Fool me once….
This is only the beginning and I really don’t care how Boener or Brooks spin it – they are peripheral flackery. What Obama does is wheel and deal in backrooms, did that to produce the health insurance deal, (success)then the Supers (failure) – and when that didn’t fly, here we go on the innocent seeming payroll taxcut – which of course appeals to people working and needing every cent; I totally understand how important it seems. That’s why they did it this way, but it doesn’t end there, trust me it doesn’t. Just like when they wanted folk to lose their pensions and homes they encouraged great sounding plans to get folk invested – then pulled the rug out. What part of this haven’t we seen before?
Just because all you see is the fun part, the enticing part, the part you think you really want and need doesn’t mean that nasty stuff won’t happen down the road.
When has it not with this administration? When has it not?
What part about Lucy and the football don’t you remember, Charlie Brown?
(Sigh)
Yes, when I posted that I was unaware that the statute required that the SS trust fund still be credited in full as though the tax cut were not in effect. However, expect the foes of SS to argue that SS is already being supplemented by general tax revenue and borrowing on the debt.
The Making Work Pay tax credit was still a better deal for the working poor.
SS deficits are NOT covered by the general fund. They are covered by redeeming the Treasury bonds in the SS Trust Fund. That’s what the fund is there for.
The $2.6 trillion in the SS Trust Fund is sufficient to cover projected SS deficits for the next quarter of a century. After that, benefits will be cut and/or additional revenue will be required, perhaps from the general fund. But those decisions can be postponed for many years.
It is, however, correct to so that the SS income lost due to the payroll-tax holiday is being replaced from the general fund, but that’s a different matter.
Where do you think the money to redeem said bonds comes from?
Where do you think the interest paid on said bonds comes from?
It all comes from general revenues/income taxes. There is no other source of cash. (Aside from borrowing/printing.)
You don’t have to believe me, this guy can detail it out for you, with links to Govt sources.
http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2011/01/fraud-at-heart-of-social-security.html
yeah, Congress is “raiding” the trust fund in the same sense as the banks are “raiding” our savings accounts. I want to see my money!
You did read the linked piece and the references in there didn’t you? If you didn’t, go read before you accuse me of having left my senses. and if you’ve read those links then tell me what you disagree with and we can have a useful exchange. Otherwise, name-calling and labeling doesn’t go very far around here, in my experience.