http://www.ssa.gov/...
Okay it's here. Links on the left get you to the HTML of the full Report, while the link in the top paragraph gets you to the PDF. Links to the Social Security Summary in HTML and PDF as well as the text of the Medicare Report are under 'Related reports'.
See you when I have some numbers.
Update 1: top level numbers a little worse than I expected, we didn't have the second half of 2010 job recovery we really needed and it shows.
Combined Trust Fund Depletion: 2036
DI Trust Fund Depletion: 2018
OAS (Old Age Survivors): 2038
Then again I have been pointing out that DI needs a fix, and yesterday, for some years now, and a fix to it also would have positive effects on that combined number.
75 year actuarial deficit for combined: 2.22%, up a fairly whopping 0.3% from last year and finally back to its 1997 level. Not bad considering 14 years of inactivity left us in no worse position going forward, and with (non-collected tax money or benefits not foregone) money left in our pockets. Oddly though that 2.22% is actually higher than the 2.17% immediate hike needed to backfill the entire gap, if I get a chance I'll explore and explain the dichotomy.
More numbers in Extended and/or in new posts to come.
Update 2. Important Tables and Figures to start with:
Heck all the Tables: List of Tables and all the figures: List of Figures Dive in! Mangia!
Table IV.B4.—Components of Summarized Income Rates and Cost Rates, Calendar Years 2011-85
This Table shows the projected actuarial gaps for the 25 year, 50 year, and 75 year projection period with all of OAS, DI and combined OASDI shown separately. Clearly DI needs immediate attention (projecting to run its TF to depletion by 2018) but a phased in fix to it in isolation also significantly improves the outlook of the Combined OASDI system.
Figure II.D6.—Long-Range OASDI Trust Fund Ratios Under Alternative Assumptions [Assets as a percentage of annual cost] My favorite figure. In this outcome III is 'High Cost' (i.e. most pessimistic), II is 'Intermediate Cost (supposedly the center of the probability distribution), and I is 'Low Cost'. Note that under Low Cost not only do the Trust Funds never project to go to zero, they actually end up overfunded. Which has its own problems. What this suggests to me is that supporters of traditional Social Security start looking at medium term policy outcomes that get II's tail up and I's tail down so that they intersect at the 100% TF Ratio line, which after all is the legal target.