Social Security is a failed Ponzi scheme

I am not stealing anything from anyone.......

 

This is a matter for the states not the feds just like all welfare programs.

 

SS isn't a retirement savings.

 

Correct its a ponzi scheme

 

Florida Man Tries To Buy $60,000 BMW SUV With Food Stamps

The farcical American welfare-state has a new posterchild. Meet Florida-resident Nicholas Jackson, who tried to purchase a brand new $60,000 BMW X-6 SUV with his Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) card...

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-20/florida-man-tries-buy-60000-bmw-suv-food-stamps

 

The original deal has changed many times. Now, they want to eliminate the income cap, means test it and increase the availability age. What is already a terrible deal will continue to get worse.

 

Not per the definition of ponzi scheme. But I agree it takes people to put money in for people to get money out. But it isn't put in with the hopes of getting richer. Just for a baseline retirement income.

 

Sure you are if you support ss as it is now

 

I disagree, a Ponzi scheme is voluntary. SS is just theft. Calling SS a Ponzi scheme is an insult to Ponzi schemes.

 

They should get rid of the income cap for payment of FICA taxes. Why should it be capped at $119K? Should somebody who makes millions of dollars per year not have to pay proportionally? That is simply not fair.

Raising the age is not a fair solution. Even people over age 50 have almost no chance of getting a real full time job, so how is it fair to expect people already in their 60s to have to grind it out for even more years? Just because people live a few years longer doesn't mean that they will be able to get or keep a full time job.

Means testing is just a way to steal money that is owed to people. And once they start that process of saying that somebody doesn't deserve to get what they have earned then who knows where they will take it? The gov't should have to pay using the same rules and the same plans it enforced when they took our money away from us.

 

The main argument against the cap is the cap on dispersement. This sort of goes with the argument not to means test.

 

If you ran a company that way you would be in jail with Madoff

 

Name one victim. You can't for 75 years

 

SS isn't a company. Neither is the gov't. The gov't is to provide for the general welfare of its citizens.

BTW - aren't you on SS or disability?

 

We used to do that, it was a miserable failure. Which is why we came up with SSi to begin with

 

No, I paid MY money into it and am getting MY money out of it.

You are wrong, you have bought the Repub crap that gets you to believe the lies about SS so they can get their hands on it and give it to their LoveBuds on Wall Street.

 

Correct. The government forces you to pay into these socialist systems. If anyone is "stealing" it's the government... especially when they raid these funds to pay for crap that hasn't got anything to do with retirees.

Social Security is not (NOT) welfare! Welfare gives you "free stuff" that you didn't earn. Social Security, on the other hand, takes your money for decades, then, if you live long enough, you might actually get all your money back from the government -- AFTER you've paid into the system all your working life.

No? Everything I see that come from the Social Security Administration indicates that it is for retirement. You pay for decades, you reach a certain age, you retire, and you get most of your money back (maybe even all of it). It looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, lays eggs like a duck, and flies like a duck -- but you're telling us is isn't a duck?

If it were a "ponzi scheme" it would be illegal! Social Security has been legal ever since the great socialist demi-god, Frankie Roosevelt and his vote-pandering, hyperliberal, Democrat goons put it into existence way back in the mid-1930's.

Fine! Eliminate the Social Security system in its entirety, effective tomorrow morning. BUT -- give all of us back the money that has been seized from our paychecks all our working lives, along with the average interest rate for that period of time. Done! Thanks for the suggestion, but it has less than the proverbial "snowball's chance in hell" of ever being adopted.

No, the government will keep SS, but, next it'll try slimy, devious crap like jacking up the retirement age (again), and introduce "means-testing" in order to cheat people out of the benefits that they should be paid. Means-testing is just a variation of Communist philosophy that says, "WE think you have enough money already, so, we're just going to change the deal on you now and NOT pay you what you have earned -- simply because WE think you have too much already."

. "Don't ask the cattle what 'fair' is -- TELL them!"

 

Again, social security is not an insurance program.

http://constitutionalism.blogspot.com/2011/05/social-security-is-not-insurance.html

It's not even close, and that is a SCOTUS ruling that basically says it's not an insurance program.

If you had even a basic understanding of insurance you would know it is absolutely not insurance. Insurance guarantees coverage, at it's most basic, if the premium is paid. The SCOTUS ruling above makes it clear that there is no guarantee to be paid if you pay into the SS system - thus, at it's most base, it is absolutely not insurance - no matter what convenient titles they come up with.

DO you have a scotus ruling that it is insurance?

- - - Updated - - -

No, it isn't. The SCOTUS ruled there is no guarantee of payment regardless if you paid in; if you understand insurance law, paying the premium entitles you to coverage. Sorry, I disagree with the assertions of right wing forum dwellers when the SCOTUS has provided a ruling that says exactly the opposite of your claims.

SO unless you've got something, I think your argument is tired out.

It's not insurance.

 

Good post for the most part except for this : ""Social Security has been legal ever since the great socialist demi-god, Frankie Roosevelt and his vote-pandering, hyperliberal, Democrat goons put it into existence way back in the mid-1930's.""


If it wasn't for Roosevelt and liberal Democrats people would simply have to either die young (and assisted suicide is frowned upon for some odd reason) , work until they die, OR be supported in their old age WITH WELFARE/TAXES...

I prefer SS because some people HAVE to forced to save money or they spend it on electronics, designer clothes, Disneyworld, casinos, new cars, kids, and other unnecessary crap not realizing that they may need that money to retire with....If they're unable to work until they drop dead, taxpayers will be paying for them.

 

Money you contribute to SS isn't a savings. That is what I said. What you pay into SS while you work pays for the people in retirement at that time. When you are in retirement, people working then, will be paying for you SS checks. Do you know see this isn't a savings investment program? Yes, you receive it once you claim you are retired, or partially retired. But that isn't what I said, I said it isn't a savings program.

 

Strawman non sequitur.

 

Math is not a republican creation.

 

No, but privatizing SS, and giving it to the wall street casino banksters, who can't even handle mortgages, is a republican idea. I believe retirement is more important then a mortgage, so I highly disagree with giving those funds to an unregulated dark economy like the ones invented by greedy mobsters.

 

If Social Security isn't a retirement plan, then why is it that all the information that pours out of the Social Security Administration tell you that if you paid THIS much into the system, and you are THIS number of years old, then you WILL receive THIS much month per month until you die? Seems clear enough to me....

I haven't yet seen anything at the SS website or in anything they've mailed out (and I've kept all of it) that says what you say it means. I've never seen anything from SS that says, "You're having money extracted from your pay every working day of your life to pay for somebody else's retirement, but not one penny of that is for your own retirement!" Perhaps I have reading comprehension problems that I'm too stupid to realize actually exist, so, please be so kind as to post a link to any information from the SS bureaucracy saying that, and then I'll believe it.... But, if, on the other hand, no such information exists, at least please take a moment and post your inability to find such a statement. Many thanks!

 

Forced participation into a system by which one's money is confiscated by the government is "stealing from taxpayers."

So, Quit lying about SS.