Posted on 09/09/2011 8:11:32 AM PDT by shield
According to the commentariat, Governor Rick Perry has stepped into a pile of electoral cow manure. Perry had the unrivaled gall to tell the truth about Social Security — that the program is, by design, a Ponzi scheme. As President Eloquent might say, the talking heads are “all wee-weed up.”
Personally, I’d like to give Rick Perry a medal for courage and a laurel wreath for leadership. He has signaled his intention to speak truth boldly in terms real people can understand.
Of course, Social Security is essentially a Ponzi scheme, fully dependent upon adequate numbers of new “investors” (workers) to pay off prior “investors” (retirees). But this week, Reason delineated three major Social Security facts that make it far worse than a Ponzi scheme, and audaciously added that Rick Perry was “soft-pedaling” his rhetoric on the subject. From Reason:
One, a Ponzi scheme collects money from new investors and uses it to pay previous investors — minus a fee. But Social Security collects money from new investors, uses some of it to pay previous investors, and spends the surplus on programs for politically favored groups — minus the cost of supporting a massive bureaucracy. Over the years, trillions of dollars have been spent on these groups and bureaucrats.
Two, participation in Ponzi schemes is voluntary. Not so with Social Security. The government automatically withholds payroll taxes and “invests” them for you.
Three: When a Ponzi scheme can’t con new investors in sufficient numbers to pay the previous investors, it collapses. But when Social Security runs low on investors — also called poor working stiffs — it raises taxes.
(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...
It’s not the complete book...again go to the library and check it out. That online book is limited.
The Stock market is a ponzi scheme, regardless social security needs reform, first current beneficiaries should not be affected, it’s a program that even we, Republicans, have benefitted from, especially those of us who didn’t save for retirement for whatever reasons, health, etc. So our candidates don’t need to be making irresponsible statements, WE MUST win against O and can’t afford radical comments. I strongly support reforming the program by privatizing it for future generations.
Thanks, shield.
I’ll order it soon but will use the link for a quick preview of it at least.
Obama is shrinking even further under his growing profile.
It will be interesting to watch the next several weeks in the polls.
Did you see what I posted that Jack Wheeler said today about the debate? It is post #56.
BS...it wasn’t the least bit irresponsible...
the fact is, social security would be just fine if the government hadn’t stolen all of the money out of the trust fund and replaced it with IOUs that they can not now afford to repay (because they have mismanaged the fund and the country). Social security isn’t a criminal ponzi scheme, it is a victim of theft perpetrated by the US government. The money to meet the obligations would be there if not for the government’s use of the FICA receipts for general fund expenses. turning social security into the bad guy here simply draws attention away from the fact that the US government took the surplus of FICA receipts from the trust fund in order to pay for general tax fund expenses and replaced them with IOUs that they can not afford to repay. This is the narrative Perry should be telling.
Why do you think that was allowed to happen? Hint; it was designed to be that way from the beginning. The government presented it to the SCOTUS as a tax which means it is revenue. Congress can do whatever it wants with tax revenue, and they did. BTW, what you wrote is partially true, but even that would not make SS sustainable, it just would have lasted longer before going belly up. It would be a better funded ponzi scheme. Many people who paid 6% of their $10K annual wage in the 1970s into the system are now getting more than that back every month in benefits. That does not sound sustainable to me, but what do I know?
“This is the narrative Perry should be telling.”
Yes. But if Perry had been slightly selective in his verbiage, he could have made the point without giving Romney such softball Helen Keller could knock it out of the park.
The commentariat hasn’t caught up yet with the fact that there’s a new generation of SS recipients to whom SS is NOT the ‘third rail of politics.” As the “greatest generation” passes on, and as the failure of SS as a continuing and viable program becomes all to clear, its need for total overhaul is becoming an acceptable topic of discussion. I’m pleased to see Gov. Perry lead the charge.
My contemporary friends. SS eligible all, are the most vocal in proclaiming SS a frightful Ponzi Scheme. We know that payments to US are taken from the ‘contributions’ of our kids, and don’t much like it.
The fact that it was the Congress over the past decades that spent SS “trust fund” moneys doesn’t alter the fact that the current under-40 generation will never see a dime from their ‘contributions.’ I don’t understand how it could be called anything else.
I must admit, this is starting to develop nicely, sort of like I thought it would.
The desperate ones are starting to melt down.....nowuttameen?
You don't think your statement has a bit of irony there? Maybe had the US not killed off a good chunk of it's own we would have plenty of replacement workers to keep the scheme afloat. Sometimes we are our own worst enemy.
It was designed to keep elderly people from dieing in the streets from exposure and starvation which is what was happening prior to its inception. It’s primary purpose was to be a social safety net but it eventually became an indirect extension of the general tax fund. The underlying problem with social security is unemployment and underemployment which have led to decreased economic growth. This decreased employment/revenue/growth coupled with the inflationary nature of fractional reserve banking/federal reserve banking has formed something of a perfect storm; however, regardless of the government’s capital mismanagement, I have been paying into social security for over 20 years and the government owes me some money (me and millions of other Americans). This is not an entitlement, it’s more of a contract and this is, of course, what makes social security the third rail of politics.
Perry and his team are very cunning...too fast for the average joe...it takes time for the fullness to be realized...Jack Wheeler is very fast on the uptake...and grasp Perry and is style quickly. I’ve had years to watch him and have had time to learn how Perry works.
I have been paying into it for 35 years. I doubt I will ever see any of what I paid into it. I don’t think the under-employment/unemployment now is the underlying problem, it just exacerbated the already rotten situation and is causing it to go broke a few years sooner than it would have anyways. I have been hearing some politicians warn since the 1980s that SS was going to go broke sometime around 2020 or 2030. I don’t know how many elderly died in the streets in the 150 years of US history before SS, but I believe that was probably not the norm back in those days. I also do not think that SS was started with good intentions to help the “little guy”, it was started by FDR to lock voters into voting ‘rat. FDR and the other politicians from the 1930s up to now all knew that they could abuse the SS system as much as they wanted and as long as it lasted until they were out of office or dead, they did not care. SS was just a clever vehicle politicians have used to raise tax revenue to spend on other stuff that they never could get under any other pretense. Demographics kept it looking healthy for years but now that the first boomers are retiring, the whole program is clearly unsustainable and something has to be done or it will just go broke in a few years. I have thought it was a scam for as long as I can remember and if I had a choice I would never have put a penny into it.
Bottom line: I and millions of other Americans have been paying into SS for over 20 years and, as such, we are owed a substantial amount of money by the US government. This is not an entitlement, this is a contract between Americans who have worked hard and played by the rules and the US government and the US government isn’t going to easily weasel out of its obligation to us because it’s inconvenient for Rick Perry and a handful of his supporters. Furthermore, it was the government that ran the system into the ground, not us. I don’t care what they have to cut to meet their obligations to American retirees. I don’t care. This could all be solved, incidentally, if they would create some GD jobs in this country.
The SS mess is not Rick Perry’s fault, he is not even a part of the federal government. He is simply telling the truth about it. You can choose to believe it or not. Any politician saying SS can be sustained in its present form is lying. This has been known to be problem for a long time. I remember Nebraska Senator Robert Kerry talking about the impending SS crisis 20 years ago. SS will either change or go broke under any President. Here are a whole slew of proposals to modify it already being looked at by the government: http://www.ssa.gov/oact/solvency/index.html
The SS site says the OASDI fund will be exhausted 2036-41. Of course this is the same bunch that said SS would take in more than it spent until 2018, but we actually hit that point last year so take their 2036 estimate with a huge grain of salt. It will likely be much earlier. Do not misunderstand; I have paid into this mess since 1974. I am as dismayed as anybody about what is happening with this ponzi scheme. I have been forced to support it my entire working life. I just recognize it for what it is. The quicker they can fix this problem, the better off the country will be. I would gladly accept my “contributions” being returned to me and calling it even but I do not expect to get that good a deal. Hopefully they can find a way to end it that does not screw people as badly as just having it go belly up. At the end of the day, I do not want my kids and their kids to get screwed by it too just because I did.
None of this is the fault of the social security administration, the social security recipients, or the workers paying into social security however. It is all a result of the US government’s capital mismanagement. They stole the FICA revenue. It wasn’t a ponzi scheme until the government started using FICA revenue for general fund expenses. so arguing that it is unsustainable is kind of like liberals arguing against the death penalty because it costs more to execute criminals than to lock them up for life because they have managed to make it that way over the years through the various appeal processes. Both are disingenuous arguments that ignore the cause of the effect.
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.