Left Out

According to a Washington Post article, a “treacherous milestone” was reached earlier than expected when Social Security went “cash negative” last year. With high unemployment and the subsequent loss of payroll taxes, the outlays of benefits outstripped the income from payroll taxes. There’s just one small detail that the article didn’t take into account: the interest income on the government bonds that the Social Security trust fund generates. When the interest income is added to the payroll tax income, Social Security is ‘cash positive,’ that is, more money is coming into the system than is going out.

The omission of the trust fund’s interest income from the equation is a glaring oversight, but it makes for a more scary headline.
~ from Has Social Security Gone ‘Cash Negative’? by David Drumm ~

So, what do you think? Was this an innocent error by the Washington Post's reporter or do you think that, under the veil of objectivity, the reporter was advancing a specific narrative and agenda?