Well, I say it's the government that got us into this mess. It's the federal government that created the problem in the first place and refuses to correct it though they've had plenty of chances.

Afraid to be honest, our crafty politicians and bureaucrats decided long ago to take the crooked path. Rather than openly ask taxpayers for more money to beat the Russians into the ground economically, restore Savings & Loans they had allowed to play fast and loose, or employ the silly idea of just printing more money, our government decided it was easier to trick taxpayers. It was much simpler to make the people foot the bill by creating surpluses, not only with Social Security, but with dozens of other entitlements across the board. Then steal every cent of those surpluses.

Now we've got a bunch of loyal messengers running about shouting messages like one of Franz Kafka's poems. "In the beginning, they were given the choice of becoming Kings or the couriers of Kings. As children would, they all chose to be couriers. Now they run about the world shouting messages to one another. Messages which, since there is no King, have no meaning. They realize the hopelessness of their situation and would like to change, but dare not because of their oaths to service."

Today we're given the mantra of how our government will face "tough decisions" in the near future. If and when Social Security must turn to its trust fund, a debit black hole holding nothing but debt, the government will be faced with three tough decisions—or any combination thereof.

And what are these three tough choices? Always the same, they are 1) raise taxes, 2) borrow massive amounts by putting it on the credit card selling securities to honest investors, or 3) cut benefits, usually taken to mean cut Social Security benefits rather than discretionary spending. God knows, you can't expect the politicians to give up their pork-barrels.

Sometimes, the second option is left out by messengers thoroughly indoctrinated by the propaganda that says borrowing from the public, turning to investors willing to contract for the safest haven in the world, is as evil as communism because it causes deficits. Booga, booga. Thus, a built-in mechanism capable of raising billions overnight, unique to government and left to us by our forefathers, goes down the drain like so many other things we shed in the name of dishonesty. Because they abused this emergency system, legislators now want to throw the baby out with the bath water. We even have a President talking about setting up a "contingency" account in the trillions. Hoarding or sitting on our money until there's an emergency use for it.

Now, I want you to take these three choices, look at them closely, think about them, and then ask yourself—what's the difference? How do these three solutions differ from what could always be done anyway? Aren't they nothing more than normal government fund raising? Weren't these the same choices on hand before our illustrious government decided to steal our retirement money?

Supposing there was no Social Security Trust Fund at all. Suppose the federal government had simply taken the money and run. Supposing they had never adopted the outright criminal policy of stealing entitlement money in order to do what they wanted to do with it, and then pretending that it was just borrowing. Giving us debt in return for money. Pretending that the trust held savings that could be used to extend the life of Social Security far into the future.

Without any Social Security Trust Fund at all, wouldn't the federal government still be faced with the same three tough choices? Of course they would. And didn't the Beltway Bandits know this all along? Of course they did. It's basic to how a governmental not-for-profit organization raises money.

It's been a long and disgusting game of monopoly, a round robin where we're right back where we started from. The only thing missing is all the money we gave them.

So what good is the trust fund? Answer: It could be used to withdraw money from the Treasury's General Fund, but the amounts are so high this money would have to be replaced to run the government's other functions, so it's absolutely useless. Absolutely worthless, except as a cover story for the Beltway Bandit's theft operation.

Oh, and there's one other small thing.

The government doesn't want you looking too closely at their trust fund list. Why? Because about ten percent of the supposed dollar holdings are perks for themselves. All sorts of funds for everything from life insurance to gift accounts, for everyone from clerks to federal judges, established by simply naming trusts and thrusting some nonmarketable bonds into them. Isn't that cute? When actual cash is required, it's simply drawn from the Treasury's General Fund of taxpayer dollars, without hitting that fund nearly as hard as Social Security's holdings would. In fact, it's barely noticeable taking a few million here and a few there over time.

Ninety percent of the dollar holdings are in entitlements, even Indian trusts, accounting for about 35 percent of the national debt, but the government wants to hold onto its perks. And this is a government with the power to start wars in order to divert attention from the scam about to unravel.

Do you realize that, if we wanted to get rid of about 40 percent of the national debt, all we would have to do is eliminate these worthless nonmarketable "special obligation" bonds. Of course, the government may do that for us anyway once it successfully transfers debt from the honestly contracted investor side to the entitlement side of the debt. Once "available" debt is reduced as far as possible. A laundry operation underway since 1998, and bringing us the grand return of six or seven cents in accrued interest savings with every surplus dollar we provide the pirates.

And the people love it. Most are convinced that paying down one side of the national debt, while increasing the other side dollar-for-dollar plus interest, is as wonderful as kissing babies. Rape me some more, please.

Meanwhile, our new President who, as a leader fresh on the scene, could have been first to tell the truth and straigten out a problem that's relatively simple -- stop stealing the money. Either don't collect it or invest it properly. Yet, he can't really do so. As our latest product of nepotism in government, he doesn't dare expose the role his father played in the rip-off that began in earnest during the eighties, during pop's tenure. Instead, daddy has given him the idea of "personal accounts" patterned after the 1987 Thrift Savings Plan. Focused only on a portion of the payroll tax market, not doing anything at all about other entitlements, creating massive paperwork for employers, this scheme still leaves the big share of the pie in the hands of the Beltway Bandits.

But there's another factor looming on the horizon that's worse than the fictitious baby-boomer fable. Let me put it this way.

A great man used to visit our market research offices in Chicago from time to time. One of my partners had been his fair-haired boy in Carbondale's University of Southern Illinois World Game program. Buckminster Fuller once told us that "anytime you turn to nature for solutions and only discover three factors, look again, there's always a fourth."

I don't think the federal government really wants to face that fourth factor because it will not be at all pleasant. And yes, that is a threat. Social Security is not known as the "third rail" for nothing.