SS payments

[Timmy59]

But Joe,.
The government may stop issuing Social Security payments after the debt limit is hit — here’s why
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/ret...-the-debt-limit-is-hit-here-s-why/ar-AA18tC8j

 

[sklfco]

They going to cut Ukraine off the tit as well??

 

[OKRuss]

Damn, this paragraph is unsettling to say the least. I can definitely see the current administration using this as leverage to get the debt ceiling raised even higher.

Scary as that prospect is, however, the alternative might be even worse: A little-known provision of a 1996 law could be interpreted to allow the Social Security trust fund to be used not only to pay Social Security’s monthly checks but also to circumvent the debt limit and pay all the government’s otherwise overdue bills.

 

[O4L]

Meh. Just MSN click bait IMO.

 

[L.C.]

Article Here:
RETIREMENT WEEKLY
There’s a very real possibility the government will stop issuing Social Security payments after the debt limit is hit.

Scary as that prospect is, however, the alternative might be even worse: A little-known provision of a 1996 law could be interpreted to allow the Social Security trust fund to be used not only to pay Social Security’s monthly checks but also to circumvent the debt limit and pay all the government’s otherwise overdue bills.

If that happens, any short-term relief to Social Security recipients would come with a potentially huge long-term price tag: The Social Security trust fund could be exhausted much sooner than currently projected—in just a couple of years, in fact.
Read: I’ll be 60, have $95,000 in cash and no debts — I think I can retire, but financial seminars ‘say otherwise’
These dire possibilities emerge from an analysis conducted by Steve Robinson, the chief economist for The Concord Coalition, a group that describes itself as “a nonpartisan organization dedicated to educating the public and finding common sense solutions to our nation’s fiscal policy challenges.”
An issue brief he wrote, entitled “Social Security’s Debt Limit Escape Clause,” is available on the group’s website.
Let me hasten to add that Robinson is not advocating that the Social Security trust fund be used in this way. In an interview, he instead stressed that he wrote his issue brief because we need to be aware not only that this “escape clause” exists but that its use could have unintended consequences. Though hardly anyone outside Washington knows that it even exists, and relatively few on Capitol Hill, the Treasury Department and the Social Security Administration are very much aware of it.
Read: ChatGPT is about to make the business of retirement planning and financial advice profoundly human
Before reviewing the details of this escape clause, it’s worth focusing on the political dynamics that surround it. Because the escape clause lessens the pressure on Congress and the president to come up with a solution to the debt crisis, neither side has an incentive to publicize its existence. But if the government is otherwise pushed to the edge of the fiscal cliff, and it’s facing the potentially huge consequences of an outright default (including the nonpayment of monthly Social Security checks), the political pressure to use the escape clause could be intense.
The 1996 law that creates the escape clause was passed in the wake of the government hitting its debt limit in 1995 and 1996. Ironically, the intent of that law was to prevent the Social Security trust fund from being used for anything other than paying Social Security benefits. But, Robinson explains, that’s unworkable in the real world. That’s because Social Security checks are sent out by the Treasury’s general account, and if that account is in default the checks would bounce.
Read: These 3 things will bring you happiness in retirement — and life
If and when the debt limit is hit, therefore, the only way—in practice—for Social Security checks to continue being issued and cleared through the banking system would be for the Social Security trust fund to “lend” the Treasury sufficient funds that it could pay all the government’s unmet obligations. (I put “lend” in quotes because that’s not exactly how it works; the key is that the “loan” can be structured in ways that don’t count against the debt limit. If you’re interested in reading more about the complex logistics involved, you should read Robinson’s issue brief.)
Therefore, if the debt limit is hit, which it is projected to do perhaps as early as June, Congress and the president will be on the horns of a huge dilemma:

• Do they allow Social Security checks to continue getting paid, risking the political fallout of being accused of “raiding” the Social Security trust fund?
• Or do they stop issuing Social Security payments, risking the political fallout of not issuing Social Security payments, on whom the very livelihoods of many elderly currently depend?

You can appreciate why Congress and the president don’t want us to know that this escape clause exists. Once we are aware of it, they are put in a no-win situation.
So fasten your seat belts for a wild ride in coming months as both parties play political brinkmanship over the debt limit and, by extension, Social Security. With both sides by the day hardening their stances, there’s a very real possibility that the debt limit will be hit.
If that happens, we’ll be hearing a lot more about the little-known provision of a nearly 30-year-old law.
Mark Hulbert is a regular contributor to MarketWatch. His Hulbert Ratings tracks investment newsletters that pay a flat fee to be audited. He can be reached at [email protected].

 

[Chuckie]

Article Here:
RETIREMENT WEEKLY
There’s a very real possibility the government will stop issuing Social Security payments after the debt limit is hit.

Scary as that prospect is, however, the alternative might be even worse: A little-known provision of a 1996 law could be interpreted to allow the Social Security trust fund to be used not only to pay Social Security’s monthly checks but also to circumvent the debt limit and pay all the government’s otherwise overdue bills.

If that happens, any short-term relief to Social Security recipients would come with a potentially huge long-term price tag: The Social Security trust fund could be exhausted much sooner than currently projected—in just a couple of years, in fact.
Read: I’ll be 60, have $95,000 in cash and no debts — I think I can retire, but financial seminars ‘say otherwise’
These dire possibilities emerge from an analysis conducted by Steve Robinson, the chief economist for The Concord Coalition, a group that describes itself as “a nonpartisan organization dedicated to educating the public and finding common sense solutions to our nation’s fiscal policy challenges.”
An issue brief he wrote, entitled “Social Security’s Debt Limit Escape Clause,” is available on the group’s website.
Let me hasten to add that Robinson is not advocating that the Social Security trust fund be used in this way. In an interview, he instead stressed that he wrote his issue brief because we need to be aware not only that this “escape clause” exists but that its use could have unintended consequences. Though hardly anyone outside Washington knows that it even exists, and relatively few on Capitol Hill, the Treasury Department and the Social Security Administration are very much aware of it.
Read: ChatGPT is about to make the business of retirement planning and financial advice profoundly human
Before reviewing the details of this escape clause, it’s worth focusing on the political dynamics that surround it. Because the escape clause lessens the pressure on Congress and the president to come up with a solution to the debt crisis, neither side has an incentive to publicize its existence. But if the government is otherwise pushed to the edge of the fiscal cliff, and it’s facing the potentially huge consequences of an outright default (including the nonpayment of monthly Social Security checks), the political pressure to use the escape clause could be intense.
The 1996 law that creates the escape clause was passed in the wake of the government hitting its debt limit in 1995 and 1996. Ironically, the intent of that law was to prevent the Social Security trust fund from being used for anything other than paying Social Security benefits. But, Robinson explains, that’s unworkable in the real world. That’s because Social Security checks are sent out by the Treasury’s general account, and if that account is in default the checks would bounce.
Read: These 3 things will bring you happiness in retirement — and life
If and when the debt limit is hit, therefore, the only way—in practice—for Social Security checks to continue being issued and cleared through the banking system would be for the Social Security trust fund to “lend” the Treasury sufficient funds that it could pay all the government’s unmet obligations. (I put “lend” in quotes because that’s not exactly how it works; the key is that the “loan” can be structured in ways that don’t count against the debt limit. If you’re interested in reading more about the complex logistics involved, you should read Robinson’s issue brief.)
Therefore, if the debt limit is hit, which it is projected to do perhaps as early as June, Congress and the president will be on the horns of a huge dilemma:

• Do they allow Social Security checks to continue getting paid, risking the political fallout of being accused of “raiding” the Social Security trust fund?
• Or do they stop issuing Social Security payments, risking the political fallout of not issuing Social Security payments, on whom the very livelihoods of many elderly currently depend?

You can appreciate why Congress and the president don’t want us to know that this escape clause exists. Once we are aware of it, they are put in a no-win situation.
So fasten your seat belts for a wild ride in coming months as both parties play political brinkmanship over the debt limit and, by extension, Social Security. With both sides by the day hardening their stances, there’s a very real possibility that the debt limit will be hit.
If that happens, we’ll be hearing a lot more about the little-known provision of a nearly 30-year-old law.
Mark Hulbert is a regular contributor to MarketWatch. His Hulbert Ratings tracks investment newsletters that pay a flat fee to be audited. He can be reached at [email protected].

Total BS published to fan the flames. If this could have been done it would have been done already at some point in time after 1996 (27 years).

 

[2busy]

They need to stop congress salary and perks every time they go over budget.

 

[Timmy59]

If, 4 years ago someone said something along the lines of a flu was going to screw the world .. One would have called BS . If, 10 years ago it was said boys can be girls and girls can be boys ??
BS, we're swimming in it.

 

[skyhawk1]

Damn and I was looking forward to getting my first check next month when I turn 70!!

 

[rickm]

That is one of the problems already the .gov has already borrowed(years ago) from the SS fund to pay debits but has never paid back what they borrowed