Posted on 01/24/2005 10:20:14 AM PST by jmc813
social security was supposed to be old age insurance. In reality, it has been functioning like a ponzi/pyramid scheme since the inception of the program ... which is illegal ... except for the social security program.
Pon·zi scheme ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pnz)
n.
An investment swindle in which high profits are promised from fictitious sources and early investors are paid off with funds raised from later ones.
Ponzi scheme = social security system.!
Why does it have to be forced? I'm being a political realist. Otherwise, nothing will be changed.
how do you know I haven't been "involved" in pushing for ideas like these for the past 20 years?
obviously some of these things should have been done 10-20 years ago ... but it didn't happen ... now, at least it is being talked about again.
Most of us have been describing it that way since we passed puberty.
social security was supposed to be old age insurance.
No, that's the lie they told to nationalize private retirement programs. Old commie FDR and cronies never actually believed their own lies.
Too late. The horse has been stolen, the barn burned and the thief sits in Washington D.C., laughing at us.
I noticed you resisted the urge to play make believe.
now, at least it is being talked about again
It has been talked about non stop by many of us.
if we don't raise the age ... with the average boomer living until their mid 80s ... we just pass more of the problem unto future generations ... the ponzi scheme just continues with the govt. raising the FICA tax and/or securing more revenue (i.e. other direct and indirect taxing) to pay for it.
I don't want to rob my kids and grandkids generation ... just because other generations have robbed my generation legally through FDR's screw deal.
and what has been accomplished?
Just because you have no imagination doesn't mean it can't be done.
the ponzi scheme just continues with the govt. raising the FICA tax and/or securing more revenue (i.e. other direct and indirect taxing) to pay for it.
They will do both if allowed.
I don't want to rob my kids and grandkids generation ...
Neither do I. Or any other thinking person or group who has been working on the problem for decades.
just because other generations have robbed my generation legally through FDR's screw deal.
Other generations were robbed too.
You propose having the government repudiate their commitment to some citizens. Why are your grandchildren any better than them?
If you insist on keeping this system you claim to hate, the right way to raise the age is for people coming in now. All those who have been promised should get what was promised. New entries should be told a different age. That way we could achieve this goofy "actuarial balance" you keep talking about without further eroding trust in government.
It is being talked about today because of us. That is the accomplishment.
It was the third rail, it is no more. If you don't think that's an accomplishment, you don't get it.
The only honest solution to the future insolvency of the program is for Congress to stop spending so much money.
Yeah and the best way to stop the hemmorhaging of our tax dollars is for the Congress(Senate and House members)to stop the utter corruption of their lying and stealing of these tax dollars for their pork barrel friends!
Do you as the elected to the U.S.Congress wonder who is to blame, take a look at yourself in a mirror!
Surprise, Surprise!
So if you vote against all the spending you are still guilty by association?
so ... what would you suggest be done with the Social Security system?
Maybe something along the lines of "an IOU you write to yourself is worthless".
It needs to be privatized. Totally.
It has been done in other countries. No one has had their promises repudiated in those cases.
Chile had a notable success.
I'm not saying it would be easy to do so in a country where half the people want a socialistic nanny state. But it can be done if hard choices are made.
Many of the suggestions you made have already been suggested by others for a long time. They have merit.
BUT....your suggestion that government repudiate their committment to it's citizens is so wrong it needs to be challenged at every turn. People are cynical enough already.
Calling Social Security a Ponzi scheme is actually unfair to Charles Ponzi. Sure he ran a scam, but he never forced anyone to participate at gunpoint.
thanks true ... i'm sorry
in Lake Jackson TX? That is where I live right now.
Angleton, near Houston a long time ago, before he tried running for President. Of course, my aunt was one of his supporters.
well ... i would agree with you ... but the chances of that happening in the near term are less than a tsunami hitting Kansas.
Only way the current system would be scrap overnight/in a short term period ... is total financial collapse. And the politicians still wouldn't do it ... they would print alot of worthless paper.
Also ... unfortunately ... too many republicans don't want to do anything ... becbause they want to be re-elected. My republican congressman included (basically he the kerry line of don't do anything) ... and both of my republican PA senators probably won't do anything (especially Arlen and Santorum has gone soft on the issue ... oh, and is up for re-election in 2006).
That is exactly the topic, and you are well aware I am male.
Which debate class taught you that name calling and misdirecting the discussion was a good technique? Intelligent mature adults learn those tactics don't work by the time they graduate high school.
Why do you keep pinging me to threads to learn some "Facts" when you can't defend or even comprehend the facts that are in the articles. Do you actually read beyond the headlines or is that too difficult for you?
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.