Posted on 03/11/2005 7:56:57 PM PST by wagglebee
In the private sector, such schemes are considered criminal. How much more criminal is it for the government to continually subjugate present and future working Americans by fleecing them in this manner?
And that pretty much sums up FDR's Ponzi scheme in a nutshell.
And, interestingly, George Bush wants to "fix" this Ponzi scheme, rather than shutting it down and prosecuting for conspiracy anybody who advocates such fraud and theft.
Bush's SS plan is not about taking away benefits for older people. Look carefully at the numbers: For those who are older, your benefits stay the same. Those who are inbetween, your benefits will lessen but the money you invest in private accounts will more than make up for the loss in benefits. For those of us who are younger, SS will only be what it should be: a minimal safety net for the disabled and those who made bad financial decisions.
Older and younger shouldn't be fighting on this. We should both be rising up against the politicians who are sticking their hands in our cookie jar and protect it from them.
I think a lot of the resistance to making changes in Social Security is because if we don't recognize it yet then it's like the crime has not happened yet.
Listen to me, you impudent whippersnapper! Stop insulting President Bush!!! I have had it with your constant criticism of a fine man. You aren nothing but a nattering nabob of negativism.
Ideologies that you embrace are not acceptable on this site.
That sounds like the eight horrific years of the Klintoons!
Uh, he's been around here a lot longer then you have. (;-)
Whoopie do! The value of a freeper is not determined by his tenure, or seniority. - that is a very Democratic way of thinking! One 's value is determined by loyality to the principles & Leaders of the Republican Party.
I'm here... I'm 25.
I'm here to say that if I hear a 'fatwah' that I recieve 50% LESS benifits, I consider it a 50% INCRASE in benefits.
I've never counted on SS, I've NEVER thoguht it would be there for me.
I'm willing to take benefit cuts, I'm willing to take retirement age increase... BUT ONLY (and I goddamn mean ONLY) If i get my own account to manage outside of the beaurocratic bullshit.
What are you talking about????
Ideologies that you embrace are not acceptable on this site.
Those who bootlick politicians are just so much fun! The hardest part of composing this reply was to think of who else needed a ping.
I hope I got that part right.
"impudent whippersnapper"!!!! Hee-hee; a first for me. Did you swipe that line from Green Acres?
As for "impudent", don't get me started. I'm just warming up.
Well, now you've gone and done it, comrade.
The only appropriate response is this one.
Yo, LarryLazMartinKoz - we may have to retire the Lame Post 'o The Day award with this one. Either that, or I have no value.
Politicians have been raiding SS fund for a looong time
it was these theives that put SS in jeapordy in the first place...
Maybe so - but that is because in the real world adults recognize that one must choose between options that are actually available.......we cannot choose options which are nothing more than pie in the sky type thinking (which is exactly what you suggest by simply dismantling Soc Sec).
Your philosophy is to try and act like the smartest person in the room.....when actually to adults you are still thinking with the maturity level of a child.
Fighting for private accounts is the smartest and most realistic option available for turning around the current Soc Sec system (in both the short and long term).
The loss of wealth that is taking place on the poor and working class via the current Soc Sec system is simply criminal.
Implementing private accounts is the first step in continuing toward an "ownership" society which will lead toward a complete shut down of Soc Sec "as is now" -
But serious adults who want actual results not just "words of smoke" recognize this will only be accomplished in increments.
Which is exactly what President GWB is doing!.
I could swear he left the sarcasm tags off #5 and 8. Please tell me he did.
If so, he's been "forgetting" them for several days on multiple threads.
I know what you mean, though; it's hard to fathom being that thick. Funny as hell, though.
Unfortunately, any reform plan has to maintain that current recipients receive their benefits as promised. You just can't shut down SS and tell seniors to go to hell. Pay them the monies rightfully owed to them, and mandate that younger workers invest a minimum percentage in their own private retirement plan.
Who died and made you the boss?
By the way YOU have a very Totalitarian way of thinking.
What you're saying is that if you're old enough now, you reap the benefits of the Ponzi scheme, as those who are in early enough usually do.
What you're also saying is that people younger than that have to pay off the old people, accept the fact that the system will blow up and pay them nothing and somehow scrape together enough to support themselves in old age after paying off the older ones who've scammed them.
The big problem is that the parasitic frauds who perpetrated this scheme were dead before I was born, so we can't hang them in the public square. Well, we could, but the remnants would probably fall apart.
What needs to be done is to explain clearly to the idiots that this scheme won't work, can't work and is about to blow up. It needs an orderly shutdown, not an illusion that it can be "managed".
And the old people need to share the burden as well; they can't just waltz off to the shuffleboard court and golf course leaving the next few generations to pay for their vacations.
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.