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.
Originally posted by filosophia
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.
heck, they will pull imaginary money our their arses by the tons to save a banking industry that is so embedded in fraud that if it were any of us, we'd be sitting in jail for the rest of our lives!! we can start wars while saying that we might not be able to pay the troops....
but then, it's oh, we can't afford to send a little bit to help out main street, to help the seniors, oh no, there's no money in the fund....and no, no, no!! we can't tax the ones that are reaping the taxpayer money at the end of the giant funnel, oh no......
the system, as well as the people running it are twisted and corrupt!!!
don't worry, you won't have to pitch in for my social security people, but well, I wouldn't count on me pitching into that tax base much longer either....
unlimited money to save wall street, the euro, big banks.....big corporate business....and of course....wars!!!
don't worry, you won't have to pitch in for my social security people, but well, I wouldn't count on me pitching into that tax base much longer either....
In the end, devaluation will be how they solve the problem. Just stop or lower the cost of living adjustments until the value of the benefits are so small that they become insignificant. Plus the money supply will continue to be expanded, because that is how we are paying our debts.
Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by jdub297
if they had saved that money that they were collecting in the 50's and onward, instead of using it to support a bunch of oh I don't want to works, an oh, I don't believe I should have to pay for the kid I helped to create,.....
or for all the corporate welfare that has, and is going on...
or for a bunch of useless wars to lose!!!
well.....the money would be there for the hard times....
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.”
advocate its destruction or elimination
He may in-fact like many on the LEFT ACTUALLY WANT TO MAKE IT BETTER BY RAISING ITS CONTRIBUTIONS.
And rather than raising the retirement age many advocate we should lower it
Originally posted by James1982
I wonder if some people understand a simple FACT.
Social Security is not broken. The SS program TAKES IN MORE than it pays out. I'll say that again, Social Security TAKES IN MORE MONEY than it pays out.
Social Security expenditures exceeded the program’s non-interest income in 2010 for the first time since 1983. The $49 billion deficit last year (excluding interest income) and $46 billion projected deficit in 2011 are in large part due to the weakened economy and to downward income adjustments that correct for excess payroll tax revenue credited to the trust funds in earlier years. This deficit is expected to shrink to about $20 billion for years 2012-2014 as the economy strengthens. After 2014, cash deficits are expected to grow rapidly as the number of beneficiaries continues to grow at a substantially faster rate than the number of covered workers.
After 2022, trust fund assets will be redeemed in amounts that exceed interest earnings until trust fund reserves are exhausted in 2036, one year earlier than was projected last year.
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
Madoff did an earlier New York Times interview in which he accused banks and hedge funds of being "complicit" in his Ponzi scheme to fleece people out of billions of dollars. He said they failed to scrutinize the discrepancies between his regulatory filings and other information.
A Ponzi, or pyramid, scheme is a scam in which people are persuaded to invest through promises of unusually high returns, with early investors paid their returns out of money put in by later investors.
Trust Fund Law & Legal Definition
A trust is a separate legal entity that holds property or assets of some kind for the benefit of a specific person, group of people or organization known as the beneficiary/beneficiaries. The person who creates a trust is called the grantor, donor or settlor. When a trust is established, an individual or corporate entity is named to oversee or manage the assets in the trust. This individual or entity is called a trustee. A trustee can be a professional with financial knowledge, a relative or loyal friend or a corporation. More than one trustee can be named by the grantor. There are two basic forms of trusts: after-death (or testamentary) and living (or inter vivos). Living trusts can be revocable or irrevocable. The most popular type of trust is the revocable living trust, which allows the individual to make changes to the trust during his or her life. Revocable living trusts avoid the often lengthy probate process but, by themselves, don't provide shelter for assets from federal or state estate taxes.
It's true, actually, if you think about it, all of us, especially ion my own Generation, were Promised that if we worked hard, paid out taxes, obeyed the laws, we could realize the American Dream. We were taught that if we paid into the Social Security Trust Fund we could draw a decent payout to meet our needs when we got old, or got hurt on the job.