Social security a ponzi scheme? the righties are at it again

Discussion in 'Social Security' started by LiberalActivist, Sep 2, 2011.

  1. LiberalActivist

    LiberalActivist New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Uh, yeah... ss isnt' a ponzi scheme. lol.

    Ponzi schemes are ILLEGAL. Social Security is not only legal, but ran by the government themselves! rofl!

    Social Security has a big ass trust fund! pwned again, righties

    SS is FREE!!! lol

    looks like I just showed the necons. Watch, they'll come up with some lame argument against this. :bored:
     
  2. PatrickT

    PatrickT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2009
    Messages:
    16,493
    Likes Received:
    352
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Oh, wow, that's great. So, the government run lotteries aren't games of chance because they're legal? They're not even really lotteries because lotteries are illegal and the government lotteries are legal.

    Here's a link telling you about Ponzi schemes.
    http://www.sec.gov/answers/ponzi.htm
     
  3. Beevee

    Beevee New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    13,916
    Likes Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    0
    My lame question is: Where's the link?
     
  4. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    4,203
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Dont feed the troll...
     
  5. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    18,868
    Likes Received:
    515
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Other than the fact that it's legal, social security has all of the characteristics of a ponzi scheme.

    The so-called trust fund is simply IOUs from the government. It's not cash in a bank.
     
  6. Not Amused

    Not Amused New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2011
    Messages:
    2,175
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ponzi was prosecuted because the government didn't want any competition.
     
  7. stonehorse

    stonehorse New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Messages:
    563
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    SS does not have the characteristics of a Ponzi scheme. It has the characteristics of an insurance policy.

    The trust fund is in notes that are better than the T bills that China buys. These notes cannot decline in value. If they go bad it means the U.S.A. no longer exists.

    What is cash in the bank? you just get a receipt or a notation in a passbook.

    The SS trust fund is safer than the bank.
     
  8. KSigMason

    KSigMason Banned at Members Request Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    11,505
    Likes Received:
    129
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Uh, what the (*)(*)(*)(*) are you talking about dbag? Who said what and where?
     
  9. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,044
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not if the politicians modify the terms of the original social contract. Can you just hear them saying, "there is just not enough money!" ?

    The solvency of SS is very much tied to the solvency of American debt. Retirees might get the money they are entittled to, but by then the money might be worth much less than it is now [sudden high rates of inflation].

    A number of economists are under the false idea that the USA Treasury will be able to print its way out of debt. They fail to realise that Federal Reserve can legally only order more money to be printed if it aquires more collateral "assets" with a market price equal to the new notes. Roughly half the "assets" already held by the Federal Reserve are merely Treasury bonds/notes. There is a very strong correllation between the printing of money and government debt. In other words, the government cannot get into more debt without creating more money, and more money cannot be created without creating more government debt. Under the present system therefore, it simply would not be possible for the government to print its way out of debt.

    There is some flexibility in potential options, however. The Treasury likely will allow the Federal Reserve to overvalue its assets, thus allowing the printing of more federal reserve notes than is technically legally allowed. But the two institutions together can only stretch the law so far, and the Treasury Secretary, in such a case, would only be acting in tandem with presidential policy. One could easily foresee a future crisis in which half of the congress is threatening to impeach the president for refusing to appoint another treasury secretary, as a debate arrises over the constitutionality of the Treasury enabling such monetary policy, in the wake of a looming national debt crisis.
     
  10. stonehorse

    stonehorse New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Messages:
    563
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If things get that bad Social Security won't be our worst problem.

    By then there won't be a United States of America. We'll be China's Eastern province.

    But until then SS will be there for us.
     
  11. CoolWalker

    CoolWalker New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2010
    Messages:
    3,979
    Likes Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The "concept" is not a Ponzi Scheme because the population is always growing. What congress has done by pilfering the money was probably illegal. SS helps many people and is probably the only good program to come from FDR...it's just that it had no safe guards.
     
  12. PatrickT

    PatrickT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2009
    Messages:
    16,493
    Likes Received:
    352
    Trophy Points:
    83
    You just gave part of the definition of a Ponzi Scheme in arguing SS isn't a Ponzi Scheme. A Ponzi Scheme works well as long as the "population" is still expanding but at some point it stops. We are approaching a time when the baby boomers will be drawing out and fewer and fewer Americans are working. The Ponzi Scheme called SS in facing collapse and liberals will do nothing to save it.
     
  13. hiimjered

    hiimjered New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    7,951
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Even when the population was growing quickly the government had to keep taking more and more of the workers' money to keep Social Security solvent. Now that the population growth has slowed significantly it can only get worse. Don't be shocked if the percentages are raised again.
     
  14. stonehorse

    stonehorse New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Messages:
    563
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You can call SS a Ponzi scheme only if you know nothing about SS.

    But then if arguments could not be based on false "facts" this site would not exist.
     
  15. hiimjered

    hiimjered New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    7,951
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you consider Social Security to be an investment program, then it is a Ponzi scheme.

    If you think of it as insurance, then it is just a really expensive and poorly designed insurance program - one that few people would buy into if they weren't forced.
     
  16. stonehorse

    stonehorse New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Messages:
    563
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    SS isn't fraudulent so it doesn't fit the dictionary definition.

    But you are right about few buying into an insurance plan that mimicked SS.

    Who would buy a blanket policy that covered;

    benefits for your minor children in the event of your early demise,

    disability benefits if you can't work,

    a pension.

    It covers so much that few would think they would ever need it. But since it is so often cited as the major reason for the decline of poverty among the elderly, one might say that SS does more for most folks than does the "market".

    As a retirement plan, my 401k beats SS by a mile. But when you consider the other things it does you can see it's value.

    I have seen lots of folks to whom SS makes a huge difference in their lives.
     
  17. hiimjered

    hiimjered New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    7,951
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Any term life program will pay your minor children if you die. A healthy young person can get a $500,000 plan for about $20 a month. Any good disability insurance will provide benefits if you are disabled. The cost of such insurance isn't much more than the term life plan I mentioned above. So you can get the coverage that Social Security offers for maybe $50 a month. The only difference is the pension. So look at your monthly Social Security withholding and consider how much your 401k would be at if all but $50 of that went to your 401k instead of the government.

    Considering that you can average about a 2% return on the money you pay into Social Security, it is a terrible investment - and one few would buy into if it wasn't forced.
     
  18. Mr_Truth

    Mr_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    10,471
    Likes Received:
    353
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Yeah, like conservative pundit and goddess of the far right Ayn Rand said, Social Security is a fraud and that anyone who collects funds from it is a "leech". Funny thing is, when she got old and spent all her money, she went on SS under her husband's name.

    Thus, it turned out the Christ hater was a welfare "leech" besides being a hypocrite.
     
  19. stonehorse

    stonehorse New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Messages:
    563
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Who do you know that has that kind of insurance?

    How much would it cost them when they are over 30?

    That's why SS works. Too few have the discipline to cover themselves.

    SS also has a lower overhead than any corporate insurance company - by a considerable amount.
     
  20. hiimjered

    hiimjered New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    7,951
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have life insurance on both my wife and I. I also have disability on her (my job provides disability for me.)

    Once you lock in a rate, it doesn't change, so the price will stay the same when you are 30, 40 or even 50. After that, you shouldn't need life insurance, since you'll have your retirement savings to pass down or live off instead.

    Part of the reason many people don't have coverage is because they are already paying for coverage through Social Security.

    Regardless, how is it acceptable for the government to punish the responsible among us because some people are irresponsible? Some bureaucrats have the arrogance to decide how everyone should live their lives and spend their own money. Even you have that attitude, by deciding that people aren't responsible enough to be trusted to take care of themselves.

    Leave people alone to live their own lives in their own way.
     

Share This Page