It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hypocrisy Alert! Obama's Econ Guru Paul Krugman: Social Security Ponzi Scheme Will Soon Be Over

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:27 PM
link   
With all of the wailing and gnashing of teeth on the Left resulting from Rep. Paul Ryan's call for Social Security reform, and the breathless attacks from the Left and the Right over Gov. Rick Perry's labelling of the New Deal's retirement fund for those who would never reach "retirement age," you would think such claims were compeltely baseless, "scare tactics" of heartless Right-wingers who would lie to their parents and children for political gain.

Well, it turns out that they are not alone in their concern, and that those concerns are backed by a Nobel-laureate economist. In fact, both the "Global Paper of Record" and Barack Obama, as well as most Liberal/Dem/Progressive hecklers, rely upon the same "Social Security Ponzi Scheme" authority for support in their attacks upon those on the Right brave enough to tell the fiscal and obvious truth.

Here's what Paul Krugman said in the Boston Review about the end of the game for the New Deal's biggest scam"


Social Security is structured from the point of view of the recipients as if it were an ordinary retirement plan: what you get out depends on what you put in. So it does not look like a redistributionist scheme.

In practice it has turned out to be strongly redistributionist, but only because of its Ponzi game aspect, in which each generation takes more out than it put in. Well, the Ponzi game will soon be over, thanks to changing demographics, so that the typical recipient henceforth will get only about as much as he or she put in (and today's young may well get less than they put in).

www.bostonreview.net...

How, then, does the Left and its MSM lackeys and mouthpieces get awat with this double standard?

Why is Krugman's accurate description of Social Security less worthy of a vicious or mocking rebuke than the truth-telling of those on the Right who might actually pose a real and present threat to the Obama administration and its redistributionist policies?

deny ignorance

jw
edit on 14-9-2011 by jdub297 because: abbr., underline




posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:36 PM
link   
Good catch OP.

While some here love to say "deny ignorance" every chance they get, I prefer "deny hypocrisy" because IMO there is far more of that being posted than posts out of ignorance.

Another example of it's only bad if a conservative says it.




posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:43 PM
link   
I don't understand how anyone could actually believe this isn't a Ponzi scheme. When it first started, it wasn't, but as soon as the Democrats and Johnson dipped their greedy little paws into the account and replaced the money with IOU's, it became a Ponzi scheme. Fact!



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by centurion1211
 


it's only bad if a conservative says it.


Reminds me of Hypocrite in Chief Obama's calls for "civility" and "civil discourse" while ignoring Waters, Trumka, Hoffa and Biden wishing the Tea Party Movement barbarian sons of bitches could be taken out and sent straight to hell.

This is going to catch up to them sooner than later.

jw



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 



Friend:

Remember:

www.msnbc.msn.com...

Regards and Nameste,

-Chung



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by ChungTsuU
 

Thanks for the link, but you should've elaborated a bit:

Madoff: 'Whole government is a Ponzi scheme'

jw



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


'Course, just ignore the rest of the article. Nothing to see there, move along, citizen



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 12:29 AM
link   
hey whne your paying 6% percent and pass the buck off to someone else and make them pay the other 6%

and then expect to get paid more than you ever pay in but get back that is a ponzi scheme

whose only means of funding is new suckers to pay for you.

social security is one of the biggest legal scams ever conceived thats a fact we all know.

they wont touch it they wont relenquish their power and control because they know its as crooked and it can be.

perpetuate the myth because they dont want the mass sheep to find out just how screwed they are.

i been think about this the other day and since its inception it has destroyed trillions of wealth and tax revenue for millions of americans.

the more you make the more you pay in taxes also the more you make the better life style you will live

social security is a guranteed vow of poverty for millions of americans and they just gotta have it

the fact is iras and 401s will give you more money and a better lifestyle than social security ever will

and the best part is your money grows with inflation compared to an 800 check for the rest of your life

thats what most live on thats totally unacceptable.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


I'm sure you'll be first in line to help out all those poor old farts who end up losing their savings when the market doesn't play well for them? 'Cause.. .well, to put it bluntly your "idea" is the same idea it was when the Republicans first proposed it; a naked transfer of wealth from the needy to the wealthy in the form of investment, with absolutely no buffers; i.e., it's designed to make your grandma "sink or swim." Either you're a skilled business magnate at age 75, or you deserve to live in a cardboard hut eating cat food.

The entire idea of "social security" is the "security" part. The program itself is perfectly fine, in fact; it's hitting some turbulence as the Most Useless Generation is now starting to collect, but with all the drugs and fats they cramemd themselves with, they won't be around too long and the bump evens out.
edit on 15/9/2011 by TheWalkingFox because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 12:46 AM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


Krugman is a moron.

Not only is the current retiring population going to get screwed, they are not going to get a hill of beans period.

We are going to have a currency crisis in the next few years and no one will get a damn thing.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by ChungTsuU
 

Thanks for the link, but you should've elaborated a bit:

Madoff: 'Whole government is a Ponzi scheme'

jw


Friend:

From ACIM:

Lesson #1 Nothing I see in this room[on this street, from this window, in this place] means anything.

Lesson #2 I have given everything I see in this room [on this street, from this window, in this place] all the meaning that it has for me.

lesson #3 I do not understand anything I see in this room [on this street, from this window, in this place]

You friend, have decided that a series of 001001001000100100011111001001001 represent the value of MONEY.

The dollar used to be tied to a value...now it is a series of 0's and 1's!

Your world will be shocked when we return to the GOLD STANDARD prior to 1933! Give it 3 weeks, then get back to me.

Please do the appropriate research for yourself till then.

Regards and Nameste,

-Chung



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Point of mild, tenuous agreement: Pretty much everyone who advertises themselves as an "economist" is an idiot. it's sort of like being an alchemist or an astrologer. Sure, you might be well-studied and knowledgeable about hte field... but that doesn't actually make the luminiferous aether real, does it?

Mild, tenuous agreement over. proceed.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 12:56 AM
link   
The Federal Employees under the old Federal Retirement program get paid the same amount to sit at home, as they did working.

Ronald Reagan ended that and created FERS. The new Federal Retirement system where Social Security is the major payer of your Retirement. Plus a portion of their own pay went into a Fund every 2 weeks and when they retire they would get a tiny check from that as well.

Plus whatever they invested into the TSP program.


The Baby Boomer Generation right now is getting:

The OLD Federal Retirement System....plus Social Security since they worked after Federal Service in another job getting enough credits.....PLUS they served in the Reserves and will get a military retirement.....PLUS they will be getting a VA Disability check.

Baby Boomers are making money hands over fist.

The actions Ronald Reagan took to cut Federal Liability actually made it worse.

And now today's Generation is suffering to support that +70 million Baby Boomer Generation. Jobs all overseas so Corporate/Government can profit from stock.....but even that plan fell through because Americans can't buy anything any more and profits from Corporate/Stock....are gone.

Now we're at the end game....Europe/Russia/US gang bang on China to re-create the Boxer Rebellion. After they are defeated get them to pay us "reparations" for 50 years to keep it all going again.

.....or will the US be the one that gets gang banged this time?

Watching the military officers put all their money overseas....say there's a flight occuring.

Obama now lets Veterans get paid their VA Disability checks in foreign countries....paid in foreign currency.

Something sure is about over.....

Thank the Baby Boomers and what they did. They robbed us all.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by jdub297
 

'Course, just ignore the rest of the article. Nothing to see there, move along, citizen


If you'd read Krugman's analysis of Friedman ("the rest of the article"), or Friedman's original (and later) propositions,
you'd know that their analysis is colored by their 'ideology du jour' approach to a given problem.

Either way, Krugman's words are his own and were clearly expressed: the Social Security Ponzi game is going to end in the bankruptcy of the fund.

Misdirection? Ignorance? Both?

deny ignorance (if you can)

jw



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by neo96
 

I'm sure you'll be first in line to help out all those poor old farts who end up losing their savings when the market doesn't play well for them?


You are either being disingenuous, or you do not know what you are saying. Freedom to put your earnings into something other than Social Security does not equate to "the market." There are many alternative investment and savings vehicles available other than stocks.

Since the US has replaced the cash in the Trust Fund with Treasuries, why shouldn't I be able to buy and hold the Treasuries myself? Especially if I need the tax-free coupon income once in a while? Or buy a Remington or Tarkay? Or a company? Or gold?
Your "market" straw man doesn't cut in in the real world.


'Cause.. .well, to put it bluntly your "idea" is the same idea it was when the Republicans first proposed it; a naked transfer of wealth from the needy to the wealthy in the form of investment, with absolutely no buffers;

More of your stock market straw man? Get over it.


The entire idea of "social security" is the "security" part.

A promise of security is only a promise, it is not "security" except for the foolhardy and gullible. Ask a Medicare provider how "secure" they are in the government's "promise" to pay them a set amount for a given service. The government is a liar.


The program itself is perfectly fine, in fact

Even Barack Obama is on the record that it is NOT "fine." This is a blatant lie.


; it's hitting some turbulence as the Most Useless Generation is now starting to collect, but with all the drugs and fats they cramemd themselves with, they won't be around too long and the bump evens out


What bull crap! The problem is that current and incoming recipients are living far longer than anyone ever considered when they sold the program to a population in which the overwhelming majority would never reach the "retirement" age of 65. Even Roosevelt didn't. Now, instead of a few years of payments, the system is called upon for 10, 15, and 20 years of payments. You are lying or completely oblivious to reality.

deny ignorance

jw



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by ChungTsuU
 

Thanks for the link, but you should've elaborated a bit:

Madoff: 'Whole government is a Ponzi scheme'

jw



P.S.

Look into Credit Default Swaps! The ULTIMATE PONZI SCHEME...I was asleep also, If you choose to stay asleep, that is all cool by me Bro.

Regards and Nameste,

-Chung



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChungTsuU
Look into Credit Default Swaps! The ULTIMATE PONZI SCHEME...I was asleep also, If you choose to stay asleep, that is all cool by me Bro.


This is not only off the topic, it is a non-sequitur.

No one is compelled to buy or trade CDSs. No one was told they were going to provide retirement income. They were a gambling scheme of private parties with other private parties.

You have no idea what you are posting, do you?

jw



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 06:45 AM
link   
The only difference between SS and a Ponzi scheme is that the flow of money changes in SS. Instead of more at the base supporting the cap, there are fewer at the bottom than at the cap. The flow is always up to the capstone in a pyramid scheme. But the idea is still the same. In both Ponzi schemes and SS the base crumbles from lack of support.

Anyone with two neurons to rub together can take a look at a pyramid scheme chart and put it together in about 5 seconds.

/TOA



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 06:49 AM
link   

In practice it has turned out to be strongly redistributionist, but only because of its Ponzi game aspect, in which each generation takes more out than it put in. Well, the Ponzi game will soon be over, thanks to changing demographics, so that the typical recipient henceforth will get only about as much as he or she put in (and today's young may well get less than they put in).


Trying to dicipher the econo speak on this one. So it has "ponzi game aspects" but not enough of a ponzi scheme for it to be illegal? Or, is this just a way to make people think it's not a scam? Each generation takes more out than it put in, well what about the new generation which may not even get it? Plus this is an outright lie because with inflation NO ONE takes more out than they put in. They might take quantitatively more out but not qualitatively. These "economists" like Krugman know what this means, and it's just a sophisticated lie they tell the public. Then they end it with saying no one will take out more than they put in, also impossible with inflation, that just guarantees people will get ripped off. Then they end it (not sure if this was the article or Krugman) saying "today's young may well get less than they put in." So, how is that not a ponzi scheme again? They start with the premise that old people take more out than they put in, not true, and then end it with saying the young won't get as much as they put in, a truth we already knew, but they say it like "ha ha we'll teach those young."

Morons, complete and total morons.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American
The only difference between SS and a Ponzi scheme is that the flow of money changes in SS. Instead of more at the base supporting the cap, there are fewer at the bottom than at the cap. The flow is always up to the capstone in a pyramid scheme. But the idea is still the same. In both Ponzi schemes and SS the base crumbles from lack of support.

Anyone with two neurons to rub together can take a look at a pyramid scheme chart and put it together in about 5 seconds.

/TOA


In 1950 there were 16 workers for every beneficiary.
Today there are 1.75 full-time private sector workers for each.
The "base" is irreparably crumbling.

jw



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join