Re: A trip down memory lane ...


"Rumpelstiltskin" <PleaseDoNotReplyByEmail@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4ctt6550vaf3ki5ej7qb53g4obkk4s4k4d@xxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:24:55 -0700, "Lawrence Akutagawa"
<lakuNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


"Rumpelstiltskin" <PleaseDoNotReplyByEmail@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:24gs65tjmcho6p7ll9d154g0p9rn59p1ri@xxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 10:34:23 -0700, "Lawrence Akutagawa"
<snip>

Perhaps the next time you won't be as hasty in taking a quote out of
context.

I will think twice before I jump down your rabbit hole
again, you've accomplished that much.

I might be willing to jump down just for tea if Alice and
the Dormouse are with you, but only if you have jam
that day.

Done. Dunno about Alice, but the Dormouse may well be there. Til
then.....

I've locked the message in which you completely
destroyed your earlier position that SS bonds were "funny
money" because they couldn't be traded on the open
market, after you were forced to retreat into saying that
SS bonds could only be compared with themselves when
I pointed out that i-bonds also cannot be traded on the
open market.

You can back off and back off in response to every
challenge as much as you want, using the excuse that
something wasn't covered, but once you've backed off
into such a corner that a previous position you took
is made moot, you can't go back and act as if it never
happened later.

I don't intend to respond to any further weasels
because it's now clear to me that the process would
be never-ending, but you crossed a Rubicon with that
post and I will bring it back if I see you later repeating
your earlier now-dead argument that SS bonds not
being negotiable makes them "funny money".

egads...still whipping that dead horse? Let's tackle this from three
directions.
First, you are comparing the funny money in the SS trust fund with the US
Treasury I Bond. Ok. I said - and have documented
http://www.heritage.org/research/socialsecurity/em940.cfm - that what is
paid in interest on the funny money is yet more funny money. Make the
case - and document - that interest on the I Bond is paid in yet more I
Bonds instead of in "real dollars."

Second, you think that the SS trust fund funny money is indeed negotiable on
the open market? If so, then please cite the secondary market that openly
trades in this funny money. That - given your insistence that this funny
money is in fact negotiable - should be no problem at all.

Third, from Dollars and Sense
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2001/1101frank.html
"Realize that the bonds are non-negotiable, and SSA cannot redeem them for
cash unless Congresses allocate money for this purpose."

You don't like Dollars and Sense? How about Bookrags? from
http://www.bookrags.com/wiki/Social_Security_Trust_Fund
"From the point of view of the Social Security trust funds, the holdings of
"special" government bonds are an investment that returned 5.5% to the trust
funds in 2005. The trust funds cannot resell these "special" government
bonds on the secondary bond market, although the interest rate is determined
based on market interest rates. "

You don't like Bookrags? How about The Seattle Times? from
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002199258_socialtrust07.html
"But when the public expressed doubt that the Social Security system would
ever be paid back, Congress instructed the Treasury Department in 1994 to
prepare non-negotiable bonds of five to 15 years in duration, carrying
interest rates prevailing in private markets. "

You don't like The Seattle Times? How about The Institutional Risk Analyst.
from http://us1.institutionalriskanalytics.com/pub/IRAstory.asp?tag=88
"But the asset behind the non-negotiable Treasury debt held by the Social
Security trust funds has long since been spent."

You don't like The Institutional Risk Analyst? How about Testimony Before
the Subcommittee on Social Security of the House Committee on Ways and
Means? from
http://waysandmeans.house.gov/legacy/socsec/105cong/7-10-97/7-10neum.htm
"Currently, the Trust Fund takes in more in taxes than it pays out in
benefits. This Social Security surplus, however, is then spent by Washington
on other government programs. The government "borrows" the money from the
Social Security Trust Fund, writing an IOU in the form of a non-negotiable
Treasury bill. These non-negotiable bills are not real tangible assets and
have no value in the real world: they are nothing more than IOUs -- promises
by the government to repay the money "borrowed" from the Trust Fund. "

You don't like Testimony Before the Subcommitte on Social Security of the
House Committe on Ways and Means? How about the Wall Street Journal? from
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB111991903887371114.html
"Under the current system, government spends the surplus, and the Treasury
department then issues a non-negotiable IOU to the Social Security
Administration"

You don't like the Wall Street Journal? How about the Social Security
Administration itself? http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/fundFAQ.html
"By law, income to the trust funds must be invested, on a daily basis, in
securities guaranteed as to both principal and interest by the Federal
government. All securities held by the trust funds are "special issues" of
the United States Treasury. Such securities are available only to the trust
funds. "

These are my bona fides. There's *lots* more on the net. You've been
beating your gums a lot and done not much else. Where o where are your bona
fides?


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Official Why Zarqawi and why now? thread
    ... If small amounts were invested instead, under the control of the individual, would that not be money invested and not spent? ... Here is a thought experiment for you William related to the so-call social security lockbox. ... Does the second reality change one bit the obligations of the federal government regarding the financial resources of the government and it's ability to pay what is promised to the intended recipients and the ultimate cost of these obligations to the population at large? ... If the social security system did not exist, the national debt would still be exactly the same, because the bonds now held by the SS Trust Fund would be held by the public instead. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: Social Security (was Re: Record deficit expected in 2009
    ... it as Social Security being broke in 2040, the zero point, not ... exactly as if the Trust Fund didn't exist. ... about $250 billion more than payroll tax collections. ... other sources (used to redeem TF bonds then) remitted to SS ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Value Added Tax
    ... Social Security trust fund are not the "Treasury Bonds" that you and I ... dealers who insisted that Trust Fund Treasuries be non-marketable, ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Ron Pauls surprisingly lucid solution to the debt ceiling impasse
    ... when the government wants to borrow money it sells bonds. ... wasn't caused by Social Security and Medicare. ... These [Trust Fund] balances are available to finance future benefit ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: OT: Official Why Zarqawi and why now? thread
    ... The current social security scheme does not increase ... When the trust fund is exhausted, ... but the money is replaced with interest bearing bonds with zero risk ... it is invested in interest bearing government bonds. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)