Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Chris Matthews’ Social Security admission: ‘It is a Ponzi scheme’
Daily Caller ^ | September 9th, 2011 | Jeff Poor

Posted on 09/09/2011 7:02:13 AM PDT by shield

Betcha didn’t see this one coming.

On MSNBC’s Thursday broadcast of “Hardball,” host Chris Matthews committed the mortal sin — he nearly parroted the theory that mortified so many of the network’s hosts and guests throughout the day. Matthews called Social Security “a Ponzi scheme” the day after Republican Texas Gov. Rick Perry doubled down on his previous statements echoing that sentiment in the Republican debate (h/t Matt Lewis)

Matthews first put forth what he thought Social Security was originally intended to be: “You pay for it while you work. When you retired and have no other form of income, this will help you out. In fact, a lot were impoverished in the old days without Social Security. It’s a great anti-poverty program. But then people started to live past 65. Even the great Franklin Roosevelt didn’t make it to 65. In those days, if you made it to 65, you were lucky. You got a few bucks on Social Security.” (RELATED: Has Chris Matthews lost his mind?)

Then he put forth what it has become: “Today, lots of people fortunately make it past 65,” he said. “They live into their 80s and 90s. They’re still getting checks. The system doesn’t work that way anymore. It’s not as healthy as it once was. So, how does a Republican deal with the fact it is a Ponzi scheme in the sense that the money that’s paid out every day is coming from people who have paid in that day. It’s not being made somewhere.”

Todd Harris, Matthews’ guest and a Republican strategist agreed. “That’s absolutely right,” Harris said. “And you will never get back the amount of money that you paid into it under its current structures.”

“Certainly, poor people did pretty well,” Matthews replied. “That’s the idea.”


TOPICS: Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: chrismatthews; ponzischeme; presidentperry

1 posted on 09/09/2011 7:02:17 AM PDT by shield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife; RoosterRedux; jonrick46; deepbluesea; RockinRight; TexMom7; potlatch; ...
Perry Ping....

IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.

IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.

2 posted on 09/09/2011 7:03:12 AM PDT by shield (Rev 2:9 Woe unto those who say they are Judahites and are not, but are of the syna GOG ue of Satan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shield

What this means..is that they’ve already decided that OBama can’t win..so they’re starting to distance themselves..


3 posted on 09/09/2011 7:06:52 AM PDT by ken5050 (Save the EARTH...it's the ONLY planet with CHOCOLATE!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shield

The NYTimes on Palin and NOW this? EVERYONE hurry look out your windows and tell me if you see pig’s flyin!


4 posted on 09/09/2011 7:06:52 AM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid! (Cash for clunkers, subsidies - none has worked. The left =one-trick pony on the economy $pend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ken5050

From what I’ve read/heard...the dems know barry is burying the dem party...and they are in the mod to rid their selves of him...they want him out...they are even working with republicans to help that to happen.


5 posted on 09/09/2011 7:10:52 AM PDT by shield (Rev 2:9 Woe unto those who say they are Judahites and are not, but are of the syna GOG ue of Satan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: shield

“Certainly, poor people did pretty well,” Matthews replied. “That’s the idea.”


So...communism.


6 posted on 09/09/2011 7:10:52 AM PDT by Grunthor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shield

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.


7 posted on 09/09/2011 7:11:33 AM PDT by paterfamilias
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paterfamilias

Ponzi Scheme is traveling ... people are talking of it ... this is how Rick Perry and his team campaign...nothing new to me since I’ve watched him campaign for years like this.


8 posted on 09/09/2011 7:15:07 AM PDT by shield (Rev 2:9 Woe unto those who say they are Judahites and are not, but are of the syna GOG ue of Satan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Grunthor

Right, but it makes everyone else poor in the process. I don’t think that works.

“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.” Winston Churchill


9 posted on 09/09/2011 7:15:15 AM PDT by SMARTY (A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: shield

I’ve got a very liberal step-daughter who’s called it a Ponzi scheme. I think this is one area Pubbies can make inroads if they explain it carefully. Of course the Dems will demagogue the issue. As they always do.


10 posted on 09/09/2011 7:15:37 AM PDT by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftless2
People who structure their ‘enterprise’ this way in the commercial world get themselves arrested.

Why is it OK for the Gov’t.?

It is just a system of corruption so politicians can have ready access to funds to buy votes and keep office.

PERIOD

11 posted on 09/09/2011 7:19:22 AM PDT by SMARTY (A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Grunthor
“Certainly, poor people did pretty well,” Matthews replied. “That’s the idea.”

So...communism.

Poorer people have fared well, because there's a lot of productivity in the system right now, or at least there had been. But communism has not historically treated people well; if anything, communism assures that if one person is living in misery, everyone will be living in misery!

12 posted on 09/09/2011 7:21:02 AM PDT by Lou L (The Senate without a fillibuster is just a 100-member version of the House.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: shield

Exactly. By being bold and telling it like it is, at a prez debate no less, the idea gets talked about a lot and this prepares the way for further discussion as the campaign continues. Perry is right for calling ss a ponzi scheme and I think most people agree with him. This can only help him. Mitt’s schadenfreude was premature and will get thrown back at him. What a fool, and what a windsock.


13 posted on 09/09/2011 7:21:52 AM PDT by HerrBlucher ("It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Lou L

The point I was making was; “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”


14 posted on 09/09/2011 7:29:21 AM PDT by Grunthor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: HerrBlucher

Those moderators thought it was a gotcha question...they fell right into the Perry and his team’s trap so did Mitt. Nothing happened that the team didn’t won’t to happen in this debate. It’s even thrown supporters of Perry off...those folks do not know how to look at the big picture Perry and his team are looking at. They are most cunning...


15 posted on 09/09/2011 7:29:42 AM PDT by shield (Rev 2:9 Woe unto those who say they are Judahites and are not, but are of the syna GOG ue of Satan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: shield

The only way to shut down a Ponzi scheme is all at once.
People whining about “I just want back what I put in” don’t understand the problem.


16 posted on 09/09/2011 7:36:06 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

There are some rather smart ideas out there. Dealing with Social Security and Medicare as the Ponzi schemes that they are — would pull the plug on the deadly third rail, cut the central government’s real estate (30% of all land in the US) down to Constitutional size, make the victims whole, and give everyone a non-inflationary 15.3% increase in after tax wages that could be used for real productive capital investments in a Chilean type system.


17 posted on 09/09/2011 7:40:10 AM PDT by shield (Rev 2:9 Woe unto those who say they are Judahites and are not, but are of the syna GOG ue of Satan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: shield

Samuelson called it a Ponzi scheme in 1967:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2775889/posts


18 posted on 09/09/2011 7:54:28 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shield

The LEFT knows that voters know this is doomed, so their line has to change — it now must be used to rally their base, — scare old women, the poor and blacks — have them all marching with the union thugs.


19 posted on 09/09/2011 8:03:20 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shield

This is not a defense of Social Security. I would prefer that it didn’t exist. It is an attempt to view things from a 1935 perspective:

1. I doubt that even FDR envisioned that the government would take Social Security funds and use then for general spending
2. In 1935 people never envisioned birth control pills and abortion. Since Roe vs. Wade, there have been 55 million abortions. This represents approximately 43% of the country’s 127 million population in 1935. If approximately 35 million unborn that were aborted were in the workforce, making Social Security payments, things would be different.
3. I doubt that even Roosevelt could have imagined 20-30 million illegal immigrants in the country, sucking up welfare rather than making a contribution.


20 posted on 09/09/2011 8:06:48 AM PDT by bwc2221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shield

It is ridiculous to call Social Security a Ponzi Scheme. Governments for hundreds of years, maybe thousands, have provided a pension plan for the elderly, disabled, and military retirees.

This is a reasonable thing for our government to do. The fact that our economists and politicians have let us down by allowing it to become financially damaged does not make it deserve the title “Ponzi” scheme. I’ll bet Ponzi would agree with me.


21 posted on 09/09/2011 8:22:20 AM PDT by frposty (I'm a simpleton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frposty

Interesting assertion: which governments did this?


22 posted on 09/09/2011 8:31:14 AM PDT by milagro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: frposty

Excepting ONLY military retirees, your tagline is right on the mark.


23 posted on 09/09/2011 8:33:12 AM PDT by dcwusmc (A FREE People have no sovereign save Almighty GOD!!! III OK We are EVERYWHERE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: frposty
This is a reasonable thing for our government to do.

Is it constitutional?

24 posted on 09/09/2011 9:03:53 AM PDT by Constitutionalist Conservative (Palin or Perry, whoever is ahead in the delegate count on primary day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: shield

1. Liberals generally know the truth, they just choose to ignore it.

2. Chrissy has had moments of lucidity in the past.


25 posted on 09/09/2011 9:04:04 AM PDT by RockinRight (Carter Obama and Reagan the nation!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shield

You know, Perry just might sail away with this.


26 posted on 09/09/2011 9:05:49 AM PDT by RockinRight (Carter Obama and Reagan the nation!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: bwc2221

From what Mark Levin said in his book, Liberty and Tyranny, Soc. Sec. was a deliberate attempt on part of FDR to get and keep Dem voters...Interesting comment by FDR at end...

David Limbaugh excerpts from Levin’s book: Just look at the history of Social Security, for one. In his explosive best-seller “Liberty and Tyranny,” Mark Levin details how FDR rejected the idea of direct welfare payments to the aged and unemployed because he believed it would result in Social Security’s being rolled back by taxpayers forced to fund it. In order to sink in his government hooks fully, he had to make sure that “even the lowest wage earner covered by the program (would) pay the same fixed payroll tax as the millionaire.” When criticized about the regressive nature of the payroll tax, FDR unapologetically said, “With those taxes in there, no damn politician can ever scrap my Social Security program.”

http://www.creators.com/opinion/david-limbaugh/don-t-give-obamacare-a-life-raft.html


27 posted on 09/09/2011 9:23:11 AM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: frposty

With all due respect, How does it differ, and can you give examples of governments?


28 posted on 09/09/2011 9:27:16 AM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: shield

Social security was, in essence, allowing the Federal government to take your money and do your retirement investment for you.

You gave your retirement money to the Government???

And you expected reasoned and prudent behavior from those to whom you gave your money????


29 posted on 09/09/2011 9:27:54 AM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is necessary to examine principles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bwc2221
1. I doubt that even FDR envisioned that the government would take Social Security funds and use then for general spending

Of course he did. They did it from Day 1.

2. In 1935 people never envisioned birth control pills and abortion. Since Roe vs. Wade, there have been 55 million abortions.

That's because back then the topic was sterilization which FDR was a big proponent of.

30 posted on 09/09/2011 9:46:27 AM PDT by triumphant values
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

“How does SS differ from a Ponzi Scheme”.

The concept of assisting the elderly is entirely independent of how it is financed. We have a problem with the financing of our SS system. The current financing scheme is a Ponzi scheme except for one thing: future recipients have no contract with the government as to how much their pension will be.

Someone asked which other countries had assistance programs for the elderly. I don’t remember specifics but in a history book on Western Civilization, assistance to the needy was was a component in the evolution of systems of governing.


31 posted on 09/09/2011 9:47:15 AM PDT by frposty (I'm a simpleton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: shield
Personally, I realized that it was a Ponzi scheme when I read an article about the first woman beneficiary receiving her first check circa 1935.

Obviously she couldn't have payed enough in to receive the benefit of investment, so she had to be getting it from the current involuntary donors.

32 posted on 09/09/2011 9:53:36 AM PDT by chb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frposty
I don’t remember specifics but in a history book on Western Civilization, assistance to the needy was was a component in the evolution of systems of governing.

Alms to the poor from the monarch is light years away from a universal check handout based on age.

And in case you hadn't noticed America was set up to do things a bit differently than they had in continental Europe.

33 posted on 09/09/2011 9:54:00 AM PDT by triumphant values
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: frposty

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme

A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors, not from any actual profit earned by the organization, but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors. The Ponzi scheme usually entices new investors by offering returns other investments cannot guarantee, in the form of short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent. The perpetuation of the returns that a Ponzi scheme advertises and pays requires an ever-increasing flow of money from investors to keep the scheme going.

I don’t think the contractual guarantee of return is a differentiating factor. A Ponzi scheme is also a pyramid scheme. It was started by FDR as a shrewd move to ensure democrat voters...it had nothing to do with taking care of the elderly.**

Sadly, just like other government social programs, the government has replaced family and local charities like churches from taking care of family and friends.

I am not happy with the fact that many 40 and 50-somethings are going to get the short end of the stick...having paid in for 20-30+ years. However, the reality is that it is a now merely another tax, and even if the government had not mismanaged the funds, the demographic math shows it would not have been sustainable.

IMHO It is criminal generational theft to continue this scheme. We cannot tax our children at 80%+ to pay for all these programs.

**Read Liberty and Tyranny - I posted about it today...
Oh, and countries...well I know Greece has had such a program...I don’t want to turn out like them.


34 posted on 09/09/2011 10:02:31 AM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: bushwon; frposty

I an going to edit my post and amend comment that Soc. Sec. had NOTHING to do with taking care of elderly...I am sure it did, but there was a very shrewd ulterior motive by FDR...get and keep dem voters...it was true start of the socialist march down the road on which we find ourselves.


35 posted on 09/09/2011 10:06:08 AM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ken5050
Hold it! Make sure that everyone is sitting down.

This is shocking.

Even sycophantic liars need a shred of cred or what?

36 posted on 09/09/2011 10:40:40 AM PDT by CPT Clay (Pick up your weapon and follow me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: shield

Rick Perry had the balls to say “the emperor has no clothes”. Now his opponents can either agree with him, or try to argue that the emperor does have clothes, when everyone can see he doesn’t.


37 posted on 09/09/2011 10:56:25 AM PDT by Hugin ("A man'll usually tell you his bad intentions if you listen and let yourself hear it"--- Open Range)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

“I don’t think the contractual guarantee of return is a differentiating factor”

You’re correct.

I’m not so cynical as to think Social Security was a mere shrewd move by FDR. It has been well accepted by Americans, whose only complaint now is that we’re told it’s gonna quit working. It won’t really quit working. As McCain said, we just need to tweak some knobs.

Americans like the idea of helping the needy. Doing it with the federal government sounds like a good idea, but now we see that the federal government has let us down.

I agree that it’s unfortunate that local charities and churches have been largely replaced federal government programs.

As far as 40 and 50-somethings getting screwed, they won’t be completely screwed. What we have here is citizens not paying attention to their government. A lot of grownup people have blindly thought someone else was taking care of them. The greatest sin of our politicians over the last 20 years has been their silence on America’s financial shape.

I agree with Palin, who said in her Iowa speech that an upper class of politicians, industry leaders, finance leaders and lawyers are raking in the big money, passing it around among themselves, giving a little to the poor class, and doing this with money from the middle class.


38 posted on 09/09/2011 11:04:14 AM PDT by frposty (I'm a simpleton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

“I don’t think the contractual guarantee of return is a differentiating factor”

You’re correct.

I’m not so cynical as to think Social Security was a mere shrewd move by FDR. It has been well accepted by Americans, whose only complaint now is that we’re told it’s gonna quit working. It won’t really quit working. As McCain said, we just need to tweak some knobs.

Americans like the idea of helping the needy. Doing it with the federal government sounds like a good idea, but now we see that the federal government has let us down.

I agree that it’s unfortunate that local charities and churches have been largely replaced federal government programs.

As far as 40 and 50-somethings getting screwed, they won’t be completely screwed. What we have here is citizens not paying attention to their government. A lot of grownup people have blindly thought someone else was taking care of them. The greatest sin of our politicians over the last 20 years has been their silence on America’s financial shape.

I agree with Palin, who said in her Iowa speech that an upper class of politicians, industry leaders, finance leaders and lawyers are raking in the big money, passing it around among themselves, giving a little to the poor class, and doing this with money from the middle class.


39 posted on 09/09/2011 11:13:01 AM PDT by frposty (I'm a simpleton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: frposty

Interesting how the Politicians are NOT PARTICIPATING in Social Security. I wonder if their system is in jeopardy


40 posted on 09/09/2011 12:32:35 PM PDT by bushwon ("If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it is free"--PJ O'rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: shield

LOL, there is another thread here today talking about some kind of ‘brain waves’ that will keep a person from lying.

Obviously Chrissy’s tingle up the leg went clear to his brain and he had to tell the truth - for once!!

We’re not quite sure just where Matthews brain is located...


41 posted on 09/09/2011 1:59:32 PM PDT by potlatch (Two Eyes, Two Ears, One Mouth - Use Them Proportionately)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
The NYTimes on Palin...

I missed that one. Do you have a link? Thanks!

42 posted on 09/09/2011 2:04:36 PM PDT by lonevoice (schizophrenic hostage taking hobbit terrorist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lonevoice

Some Of Sarah Palin’s Ideas Cross The Political Divide

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2775820/posts


43 posted on 09/09/2011 4:15:21 PM PDT by txrangerette ("...HOLD TO THE TRUTH; SPEAK WITHOUT FEAR." - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

Thanks!!


44 posted on 09/09/2011 6:56:09 PM PDT by lonevoice (schizophrenic hostage taking hobbit terrorist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: bushwon

followup on Social Security being a Ponzi scheme.

Dick Morris said on Hannity radio today that it wasn’t because our government and it’s power to tax backs up the Social Security commitment. I’m not saying I agree, just passing along what Morris said.


45 posted on 09/12/2011 6:16:57 PM PDT by frposty (I'm a simpleton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson