If the numbers increase in enrollment to SSD, it is because the general population of the nation has increased, so the 'incidence' increases as a function of the 'nature of the beast.'
It is what it is. No one is 'growing' SSD. It is a necessary function of the society of the USA. We are a compassionate country that realizes there are times when a human body doesn't do what it is suppose to do.
As far as the investments for SSD.This is where SSD is invested:
Funds not withdrawn for current expenses (click here) are invested in interest-bearing Federal securities, as required by law; the interest earned is also deposited in the trust fund.
...The projected decline (click title to entry - thank you) in costs relative to gross domestic product is not a function of decreasing numbers of SSI disabled recipients, since the number of recipients is projected to increase, albeit slowly, well into the future. The increase in the number of recipients appears to be related to the size of the population, rather than to an increase in the prevalence of disability, since the SSI population is projected to be relatively stable or even decline as a portion of the population in each age group (Chart 66). This relationship indicates that the projected growth in the economy will play a role in diminishing the cost of the program relative to GDP. This analysis does not include the cost of Medicaid for the disabled, which, as shown in Chart 17, has been growing much more quickly than has the cost of the disability programs administered by SSA....
The credit rating of the USA is going to be reflected in our bonds that we use in order to make money to keep Trust Funds going. We need to be sure our nation is sound because programs like this are insured by those bonds. We invest in ourselves, not Wall Street. That also says something about turning SSI into a private investment account. There is no better investment than USA Treasury Bonds. Turning SSI into a private investment account is a huge mistake and most smart Americans would invest back in US Treasury Bonds anyway. Why do through all the change unless there is a benefit for Wall Street that is more risky than the USA.
