The Republicans’ Social Security Choice (Is it helpful to call it a 'Ponzi' Scheme?)

National Review ^ | 09/09/2011 | The Editors

[ml/nj]

In 1968 when I started working and the government started taking from me, I predicted to my mother, "Social Security will be the ultimate undoing of the United States." Who knew we would elect Obama first?

ML/NJ

[Red6]

Like all social programs, they use please of emotions and other fallacies to argue for them and vilinize all those that expose the economic dysfunction or human nature to abuse these systems. Like all social programs, it starts small but before long becomes a monstrosity. Like all social programs, it doesn't take long before these programs become political ploys for politicians to “buy votes,” legally.

Eventually these programs end up becoming like a big anchor around the economies ankle. Eventually governments find themselves in the odd predicament of playing shell games and robbing Perter to pay Paul. Of course those politicians that benefited from creating these schemes are long-long gone and you're left with people that are addicted or dependent on this scheme.

[norwaypinesavage]

"Ponzi schemes are run to make their originators a profit. The federal government is running Social Security at a loss that is set to increase."

Are the editors at NR blind? There is no profit in a Ponzi scheme. The originators simply spend the excess money that is taken in. The federal government has also spent all the excess money taken in from Social Security taxes. There is absolutely NO DIFFERENCE

[Red6]

Most Ponzi Scheme's even if not detected by law enforcement will implode within a few years. However, Social Security though it is very similar to a ponzi scheme and will fail for the same reasons, because of it's vast size and far horizons is simply where this eventual collapse comes decades or even generations later.

There are some who truly believe that a system not tied to economic output, based on a transfer payment between those working and retired is sustainable. It's only a matter of time and when we do hit the end of the road, the solutions proposed will be increasing the ages of retirement, decreasing amounts, only paying a select group certain amounts (means testing), increasing the burden on those working presently... The way the decision will be made isn't based on who paid what for how long, rather it will be what benefits the policy makers have and which group can influence him most. Instead of a market and people choosing, it becomes a political decision. Those advocating these social schemes essentially believe this is the better form because it's somehow more socially just in their eye's. It's not a question “if,” rather just “when.”

[zeugma]

I really think a more accurate description is a ponzi scheme based on intergenerational theft.