wrote in message
...
I wouldn't go so far as to say "disparaging" it, but it is incorrect.
There is money out there earning interest and the size is very relevant.
The money via "SS tax" is flowing in all the time, but (essentially) it
immediately flows back out, "loaned" to other budget items/agencies/etc.
as an "investment," therefore, the size is VERY relevant. Some actually
flows back in when some new bureaucrat actually pays attention to this
kind of everyday business stuff and pays down "short-term non-capital
badcompany debt," but it is immediately "loaned" back out again.

Richard, you make a distinction without substance. The size of the Trust
Fund is only relevant in bookeeping terms, i.e. which *government account*
the money is tied to. It still represents a government obligation no matter
which pocket it comes out of. As the current SS obligations grow, there is
less money for Congress to "borrow" to spend on other things. They really
worry about the time when there is no SS surplus and they not only have none
to "borrow", but are obligated to pay money owed to the fund in order to
meet current obligations. That money will need to come from somewhere - e.g.
either reduce SS benefits, increase SS or other (e.g.income) taxes, reduce
other government programs, or increase debt.

Bob Weinberger

* As a side note: During tours at the Pentagon in the Navy Budget Office, I
was constantly amused and appalled at how much time was spent ensuring that
funds were spent from the "proper" accounts relative to the time spent
ensuring that the funds were productively spent on worthwhile projects.


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **