No, Social Security will not "go bankrupt"

The Social Security Administration released its annual report this week, and right on cue prominent Republicans started shaking their heads slowly and lying about needing to cut benefits to "save" it.

This is utter bullshit.

I'll let a Nobel laureate explain:

While Social Security was designed to look like a pension fund, it isn’t. A pension fund pays benefits out of a stock of assets it has accumulated over time. In contrast, Social Security operates as a government transfer program, like food stamps or Medicaid.

Now, unlike food stamps — but like the highway trust fund — Social Security is on paper supported by a dedicated tax, the payroll tax, that is assigned to that program. But I say “on paper” because from an economic point of view assigning the payroll tax to Social Security is just an accounting convention. What matters for the U.S. economy is the overall balance between government spending and government revenue, not the difference between one type of spending and one source of revenue. So there’s no inherent economic significance to the fact that by 2034 payroll tax receipts will be insufficient to cover promised benefits.

There is, however, a legislative issue. As long as the Social Security Administration can pay benefits out of payroll taxes and its cash reserve, there’s no need for Congress to vote each year to authorize benefits — they just keep going out until further notice. However, once those resources become insufficient, benefits will fall —by 17 percent according to the Trustees — unless Congress passes new legislation that “tops up” Social Security’s finances.

Yet the current administration and Republican party are such extremists that there is a real risk that Social Security will be held hostage on behalf of their goals.

Is Social Security in trouble? Yes, but only because of the way its financing is currently structured — a structure that no longer works well because our society and economy have become so unequal. Moreover, Trump’s immigration policies are further endangering its already deteriorating financial condition.

So don’t believe Republicans’ gaslighting that it will be necessary to cut Social Security benefits. All that is necessary to preserve Social Security is political will to raise taxes on the wealthy and a sensible immigration policy.

Right now, the most any taxpayer contributes to Social Security is just over $11,000 a year, because wages are only taxed up to $184,500. So the most obvious, simplest, and to the Republican Party least acceptable fix would be to eliminate the contribution limit. Voilà! Billions more receipts!

But again, as Krugman pointed out, Social Security is just a government outlay, like defense spending and coloring-book projects for the OAFPOTUS. The current crop of radical right-wing Republicans hates giving money to those people, and has an ideology based around the supernatural. For those of us more grounded in reality, particularly those of us closer to 70 than to 40, I would really like the benefits I've paid for over the last few decades of work.

The election is in 144 days.