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 ...
Right it’s time to end this Ponzi scheme and tell the young people to step up and care for their retired and ill parents. They will have to live with them like the days before SS.
OK fast forward the date for the young people to step up..
I am glad Perry spoke up. It is a Ponzi scheme. Maybe back in the 30s when it was initiated it worked better for many reasons. People didn’t live so long, there weren’t all the other entitlements attached to Social Security like people getting nut checks who never worked a day in their lives, and people were having more kids to replenish the work force. There are quite a few other sociological reasons as well why it won’t work as well. Thank Rick Perry for your brutal honesty.
That genocidal crime against humanity was and is an act of treason against the United States. Justice will not be done until those government, business, medical, and civic leaders responsible for such an abortion slaughter are brought to trial, conviction, and punishment.
The Commentariat thought it was a jump the shark moment (a Fonzi scheme?), but in fact Perry will get a big boost for courage and boldness on a very controversial issue. This was a big win for Perry and ultimately for all of us.
The Commentariat thought it was a jump the shark moment (a Fonzi scheme?), but in fact Perry will get a big boost for courage and boldness on a very controversial issue. This was a big win for Perry and ultimately for all of us.
It was and is a continuing genocidal crime against humanity.
You are right.
The changes I’d like to see with SS are:
• GREATER accountability in the management of funds
• NO politicians using SS funds for things outside what the SS funds were originally intended
• Taxpayers’ options OTHER than the SS system
Given the mess it is now, I don’t think any of these suggestions are unreasonable.
And this is because.....?
The article does a fair job of explaining it.
You know he lays this out in his book 'Fed Up'...he looks at the 3 counties in Texas that elected the Chilean model. Those retirees have such a nice monthly income...this is what he will do, if elected President. W tried to with Republican majorities but did not have the mess Perry will walk into which will now give them no choice. Workers 55+ will receive what they'd have received with SS and the elderly will continue to receive their same SS they are depending on...workers 55 and under will have the ability to choose the Chilean type system.
That date will be NEVER unless we start the talk now. Perry's doing that. Hell, the whole country is talking about it now. For my money, that's a good thing. It's a start.
Very very clever!!! I love it!!
There are l000’s and 1000’s of people who disagree with you. It is nothing more than a Ponzi Scheme that will self destruct in a short period of time.
??!! From the article ....
Reason delineated three major Social Security facts that make it [not only a] Ponzi scheme ... but far worse.
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.
There are l000’s and 1000’s of people who disagree with you. It is nothing more than a Ponzi Scheme that will self destruct in a short period of time.
Why wouldn't this also be an argument for open borders? If we're just after warm bodies we've got 50 million and more over that time period in immigrants.
It's a poor utilitarian argument against abortion. Abortion arguments need to be "we don't because it's wrong", not a specious argument to save a failed socialist program.
The difference is that SS was created with the best of intentions, whereas a Ponzi is set up with criminal intentions.
However, the principal that new contributor’s funds pay off the older ‘investors’ is the same. As long as you have enough $ coming in you can manage to cover the out going $.
Right now SS is billions of $ underfunded.
The bonds in the Social Security trust fund are counted both as an asset of the trust fund and as a liability, since they are part of the total federal debt.
SS is not only supplying retirement checks but disability funds and funds for children and widows who have never contributed, however qualify as long as they were wife or child of someone who did contribute.
I agree with part of what you said, but not all.
Opening the borders isn’t the same thing as stopping the abortion holocaust, not by a long-shot, even if you’re only talking about the effect on SS. Opening the borders may have some positive affect on SS, but also a lot of negative. A lot of people go on welfare and those funds come out of the common pot, as does SS, all pretense aside.
And yes, abortion is wrong because it is wrong, not because it hurts the economics of society.
But still, it does hurt the economics of society, and pretending it doesn’t, or not discussing the fact that it does, doesn’t help anybody, including and especially the unborn.
“Social security is not a Ponzi scheme and Perry shouldn’t have gone there.”
Actually it’s worse than a Ponzi scheme, but no one serious about getting elected should “go there”.
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.