it s not going to be like that. according to a new report from the government, we re not going to have all that money in 2037. if you re in your early 40s or younger, that means that your retirement may not be there. the same on disability and receiving survivor benefits. a study says at current levels social security will go bankrupt in 2037. it will have no more money. that is despite this number way over there, $2.5 trillion. that is a big number. that is the cash in the bank that associate security built up since the 1980s. it is a huge surplus. sitting pretty? no. this year the program is spending $45 billion more than its taking in with the new tax cut, the program is $130 billion short. after 26 years of stuff like this, the bank account will go to zero. nobody wants to cut social security. it s a so-called sacred cow, but what would you do if you had to cut it? a new york times poll says that two out of three people,
in. so you go and the next phony politician that gets up and says we can get there by doing that, you just say, no, we can t, because our commission unanimously, we did not all agree but we unanimously agreed deficit denial is over and the only way to get to the meat is do something with medicare, medicaid, social security . and it doesn t mean balancing the budget on the backs of poor old social security people. that is fake. neil: you say go slow by go. guest: got to go because if the debt limit comes up and the guys say i will not vote for that and they say you have to, and if we don t do anything with social security when you get up to the window in 2037 you will only get 22 percent less and still at the point at the end of this year and have done nothing or minuscule crap, the creditors in china and the private and public are going to say, we thought you had the guts to do something, you didn t, and now
workers for every retiree. that means that at some point, it s got to break. you ve got to end up reforming the system. and we can either wait until 2037, when we hit a crisis, or we can do it now, and phase this in over a 30-year period, which i think most americans would agree on. it s not a question of if we re going to do decifit reduction. it s only a question of when, are we going to do it on our timetable or wait until the financial markets to dictate this. jon: senator mark warner, democrat from virginia, joining with saxby chambliss who introduced that legislation he was just telling us about. senator warner, thank you for being with us. jenna: the home of the dollar menu, mcdonald s, raising prices. the company said listen, with this higher cost of food we re seeing we re going to have to adjust and charge you more for a big mac. robert gray from the fox business network, breaking the bad news to us. this is the dollar menu, robert. is that going anywhere or will we see the p
about military spending, and those who have said maybe the military is too big, politically they don t want to be vulnerable to the charge that they are anti-military. so the political system has allowed these weapon systems that we don t necessarily need that are often way over budget to be getting built without much restraint. and their personnel costs are soaring at the same time. yeah, anything that could ever be seen to be weakening america is definitely something that carries with it a lot of political risk. something else that s been called the third rail of american politics on more than one occasion, particularly during election years, social security. let s put up the graphics on this. the budget for social security we ve got the wrong graphic up here. if we could put the correct graphic up, it says $703 billion in 2015, then we can put up the other one, it goes negative, 2037, we re going to need to cut benefits 22% in order to stay solvent. couple of proposals out there
be on the deficit reduction side or getting the entitlements in order, i do agree with. i don t lap to agree with raising the age for our seniors from 67 to 69 or 70. that, to me, is a benefits cut off the top. there are other ways. neil: but it is not coming for 40 years. guest: we need to do something now but we are not in an emergency situation. social security is secure. neil: these guys are doing just that. they are not, at 69, that is 2075. guest: they presented 15 options and that is not an option i can accept. you are asking me a question and i am trying to answer it to the best of my ability. i would look at other ways to bolster social security beyond 2037 which we have done already in the past. neil: as have they.