Posted on 01/26/2013 6:06:59 PM PST by Advocatus Sancti Sepulchri
This was too funny; an animated Thomas Jefferson makes the case that Social Security violates the Constitution of the United States and operates like a ponzi scheme. Here it is - Why We Should Abolish Social Security
It ain’t gonna happen anytime soon so in the meantime maybe we should call for cuts in a thousand other less politically sensitive things.
After all, $100 million for a freakin aquarium in Brazil? Jets to Egypt?
I’m lost as to the humor here as SS IS unconstitutional, and is a Ponzi scheme.
Do we get all of our forced contributions back?
No, when the ponzi scheme finally breaks down..we unfortunately lose our so-called contributions.
I just like the idea of an animated Thomas Jefferson narrating it..that’s all.
I realize the progressive solution would be to require whites to pay more but that would be the open door for a constitutional challenge based on equal protection.
As many business experts who appear on Melissa Francis and Gerri Willis shows on Fox Business channel have said, numerous times, the Social Security system is nothing more than a Ponzi scheme.....
We should? Who’s we and how will those “we” go about it? Mastrurbation.
The idea of reforming SoSecurity has been around for something like 30 years, since Reagan. At least. The same as the idea for reforming the tax code. What’s happened? Yopu’ve been voting the same losers to Congress every two years since then, who do nothing about it, not a single thing.
Anyone who’s worked for a good size corporation will tell you how the company adjusts, improves their 401K program every year. I recall that at one point I had at least a dozen investment choices which I could adjust at any time with full control over my money. Why couldn’t Social Security be managed in the same way? Because it’s government, it’s elections, it’s bribes in Washington, lobbies, corruption, it’s low info voters.
Agreed, Social Security’s in-flows are the out-flaws..pretty straightforward ponzi scheme. They’re paying investors with the cash of new investors.
Well, the problem is the reformers you talk about are mostly people that are trying to “save” Social Security. Why not just create an account for retirees and give them T Bonds & Bills equal to what’s owed to them..and to all workers..end FICA and give them accounts for what’s been “paid” so far..a hell of a lot cheaper than tweeking the ponzi scheme or doing nothing..the babyboomer tsunami will wipe the system out 10,000 per day for the next 20 years..with a $2 trillion unfunded liability.
$20 trillion.
The problem with our political system, and even Soetero talks about it (for his own reasons) that it is so difficult if not impossible to reform anything, and that’s been the case with Social Security and with the tax code. Nothing moves, everything’s frozen.
There are no contributions. There are however taxes collected under a different name to make people feel entitled. They’re just taxes.
Exactly...yet it’s has been going on for how long?
And nothing is done? Sad.....
As a member of generation Y, my children and I will undoubtedly feel the impact of this trainwreck. While registering the birth of my first son at the County office a few years ago, I inquired of the clerk whether it was possible to withhold his registration in the Social Security system. She looked at me like I was as dumb as bricks and sniped that it was not optional. She did not seem to understand why anyone would not want to participate (she was near retirement).
She is saying that your son is an indentured servant at birth. This violates the Fourteenth Amendment. It also violates Article Four, Section Four:
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
A "republican form of government is one where the citizen is "represented" by someone at the Government table. Your son, before he was born, could not possibly be represented by anyone. Yet, those who claim the ability to represent him have spent HIS money without him being there to have the ability to vote them out of office. He is not getting that "Guarantee that was made in writing right there in Article Four.
Social security is nothing more than the Federal financial imprisonment of the elderly. At retirement, you are no longer free. This alone makes it unconstitutional.
A foreign journalist I spoke to told me he thought that our system is so immune/resistant to reform (taxes, Social Security, War on Poverty) because it is a two party political system, whereas multiple party systems tend to be more dynamic, more open to ideas. It made sense. Why can corporations that I mentioned above can alter and improve their employees 401K systems all the time and at will? Because they are in effect dictatorships, and not democracies such as our dear country (go ahead, educate everyone that we are a republic and not a democracy!) A dictatorship once in a while could perhaps take out the trash, as it often does in South America and elsewhere. But, horror, how can anyone suggest that?! Well, that’s as likely as the suggestion at the top of this thread. We should, yeah, we should!
“Social security is nothing more than the Federal financial imprisonment of the elderly. At retirement, you are no longer free.”
—
Maybe I’m dense and it’s getting late for me but I don’t understand one word of your post.
Could you explain the imprisonment aspect of your statement. Also the loss of freedom for retirees.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.