SS is not a defined benefit plan, it is a Social Insurance program. Nothing more, nothing less. The "unfunded liabilities" is simply the difference between the pension's benefit plan estimated benefits and its assets. The "IOUs" that SS has per the governmental accounting standards is more fluff than substance. In other words, if you borrow from your spouse's account, does that mean you have a liability towards your spouse, accounting-wise? No, it does not. The same can be said when you have an SS Trust fund having money "borrowed" from the General fund to pay for its debts. It is not a true liability or unfunded liability. https://www.michigan.gov/-/media/Pr... is simply the,of the benefits is actuarially
I'm not Republican. And yes... they should be forced to pass budgets without deficits, and if they over spend THEY feel it in their wallet instead of mine. Thats what leadership is called. It's the format every other person and private business owner feels. Instead, they keep making their millions and zero repercussions. Opposing tax cuts that fund ever increasing spending like a bunch of heroine addicts doesn't make sense to me. How is THAT supposed to invoke change?
That's the only question? In a vacuum, no other context? No other considerations? Nah, I'm not playing your little game. You don't care about facts. See if you are capable of figuring out a line chart. FYI, Trump took office in 2017 and covid started in 2019. Don't let facts get in the way of your agenda though.
I'm 44. Within the parameters of the Social Security program, retire at 67 and die at 85, I will see less money than what I put in. Terrible investment social plan. Good thing it isn't mandatory or anything. But we should have known the government had no intention of honoring their pyramid scheme anyway, it was just another mechanism to forcefully steal from the people under the guise of "saving us"