Edwin J. Feulner is a Filthy Prevaricator

Actually I don't know anything about Mr. Feulner's hygiene, so it's possible, even probable that he is actually a neat and tidy prevaricator. Dictionary.com defines preverication as "To stray from or evade the truth; equivocate." Let's see if Mr. Feulner fits this description.

Here's a section from his latest article on the Social Security "crisis."

Over the next 75 years, Social Security is scheduled to pay out $27 trillion more in benefits than it will take in through payroll taxes. PRAs would close that gap.(1) Without them we'll have to raise taxes or slash benefits - or both - to keep the program going.

Of course, there are some who still deny the country faces a problem. "The system is not in crisis; it has money to last for about the next half century, and even then, if nothing is done the required benefit cuts would still leave retirees better off than those getting benefits today," the Minneapolis Star-Tribune wrote in a recent editorial.

Unfortunately, that assumes that Social Security can really rely on its trust fund to pay benefits. There are billions of dollars worth of IOUs in that fund, but no real money. (2) So, in 2018 when the program starts spending more in benefits than it takes in through taxes, the government will still need to increase taxes or cut spending in order to pay those IOUs out of general revenues.(3)

Here are where Mr. Feulner misses the mark in an attempt to deceive the American people.

1. Mr. Feulner guarantees that Personal Retirement Accounts would close the gap. In theory he can believe what ever he likes; but the evidence doesn't exactly point towards his theory. For one thing setting up and maintaining the PRAs will drain a lot of money out of the system. For another it's impossible to know how much money these PRAs will actually produce.

2. The money in the Social Security Trust fund, as we have mentioned many times, is in United State Government Treasuries. I don't know what is wrong with conservatives who seem determined to tear down America. The America I know is an honest country who pays her debts. Conservatives see us as a deadbeat nation who won't (or can't) pay off her debts. You decide which you think describes us better.

3. This isn't a deception actually, although Mr. Feulner would probably prefer you not to think about why this situation arises. Feulner also suggests that, because we are a deadbeat nation, raising taxes won't work because we'd just spend the money anyway.

Edited because I consistently mispelled Mr. Feulner's name.