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

Originally Posted by LiberalActivist

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.

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.

Originally Posted by CoolWalker

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.

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.

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.

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.

Originally Posted by stonehorse

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.

A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from any actual profit earned by the individual or organization running the operation.

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.

Originally Posted by hiimjered

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.

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.

Originally Posted by stonehorse

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.

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.

ponzi scheme?

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.

Originally Posted by hiimjered

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.

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.

Originally Posted by stonehorse

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.

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.