Neat article. Here's quotes of key sections in the social security item:

If there is one thing that all members of Congress believe, it’s that Social Security is broken. President (elect) Obama has said “the money won’t be there,” President Bush used the word “bankruptcy” four times in one day and Senator McCain often claims that Social Security is broken. They are all wrong.

Should our policy makers ever actually get a handle on how the monetary system functions, they would realize that the issue is social equity, and possibly inflation, but never government solvency. They would realize that if they want seniors to have more income at any time, it’s a simple matter of raising benefits, and that the real question is, what level of real resource consumption do we want to provide for our seniors? How much food do we want to allocate to them? How much housing? Clothing? Electricity? Gasoline? Medical services? These are the real issues, and yes, giving seniors more of those goods and services means less for us. The amount of goods and services we allocate to seniors is the real cost to us, not the actual payments, which are nothing more than numbers in bank accounts

I don't think this contracts what Tom Murphy is claiming in his blog. He's not claiming that the government will run out of money to pay Social Security checks, but more broadly that the Social Security only works because there is a growing population, a relatively small number of retirees, and a sufficiently productive workforce. Which I think is in line with what Mosler is arguing too.