Isn't it obvious that the so called "safety nets" are ponzi schemes?

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by austingtr, Jul 23, 2013.

  1. austingtr
    Online

    austingtr VIP Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    8,979
    Likes Received:
    216
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings Received:
    +547
    Read it, and realize that Medicare/SS wealth redistribution programs, and the less you put into the program, the more you get out of it.

    The reason why I post this is to ask a simple question:
    Who should be paying your medical expenses and retirement? You? The Guvmint with your money?

    And, are you happy entering a ponzi scheme, when you know the population is getting older, and not really expanding? When is the ponzi going to break?
  2. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    57,052
    Likes Received:
    595
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,878
    Both were poorly designed from the start - the models all showed static or growing population growth with no accommodations for slowdowns.
  3. austingtr
    Online

    austingtr VIP Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    8,979
    Likes Received:
    216
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings Received:
    +547
    I keep hearing people being outraged when they want to cut Medicare, because people have a right to get what they paid into, but the fact is they didn't pay into enough.

    People think money/benefits are magical, they should be there for free.
  4. T3goalie
    Offline

    T3goalie VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    2,752
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +22
    OPM... OPW...
  5. QGator2414
    Online

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    12,810
    Likes Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +574
    Beyond the Ponzi/Communistic/Socialistic similarities of these disasters...they have done just as much damage to society by promoting dependence on the government rather than the family.

    I am fine with a "safety net" for those who cannot take care of themselves. Now the vast majority of people can especially when family, charity and community step in. Then my only issue would be these safety nets should be handled by the states...
  6. QGator2414
    Online

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    12,810
    Likes Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +574
    Just wait for one of our resident libs to chime in that people like "Medicare" or "SS". No Duh! They are getting more than they paid for...
  7. austingtr
    Online

    austingtr VIP Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    8,979
    Likes Received:
    216
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings Received:
    +547
    Safey nets should be provided by our own families/communities. People think they will be taken care of with Medicare/SS, so they don't plan for the future.

    The growth of guvmint has destroyed the culture of community taking care of each other, because this was replaced by federal programs, that were ponzi schemes, that are ultimately going to fail.

    We have helped family with emergency money, and to set up business. Nobody forced us, we were very happy to do it, and we will keep on doing it. But we are overtaxed, and just taking care of baby mama's popping them out to get bigger and bigger checks. Overtaxed, so that entities like the IRS can go on meetings, and waste millions.

    We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. Medicare/SS are just glaring examples. Why are we giving out more benefits, than the money people put in?
  8. 108
    Online

    108 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    18,011
    Likes Received:
    369
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings Received:
    +1,383
    while it is set up similar to one, it is not a "Ponzi" scheme, because a Ponzi scheme is an illegal investment operation where investors believe their return is coming from profits and do not know the Ponzi is taking place

    that being said, the numbers going out need to match what is going in
  9. dadx4
    Online

    dadx4 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    29,646
    Likes Received:
    529
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Greenville SC
    Ratings Received:
    +1,491
    You would be correct sir.
  10. 108
    Online

    108 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    18,011
    Likes Received:
    369
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings Received:
    +1,383
    as for the other questions, I personally believe the market is too volatile, Wall Street is too shrewd and ethically devoid, and Americans as a whole are too dumb to successfully navigate the aforementioned, to completely get rid of SS....this reality needs to be taken into account

    figure out how to fund it properly
  11. QGator2414
    Online

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    12,810
    Likes Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +574
    Kind of ironic you don't trust wall st but appear to trust government considering your comments on how government has handled SS... :)
  12. austingtr
    Online

    austingtr VIP Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    8,979
    Likes Received:
    216
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings Received:
    +547
    Americans are too dumb?

    You can leave me out of it sir, that is not true. Americans have become lazy and self entitled, but dumber than other countries? I don't think so. But I know liberals operate under that premise. Poor black folks, they have to be taken care of. Boohoo. Life is hard. To make a living is hard. Just deal with it.

    So your solution is to keep guvmint taking your money in and dolling out whatever they feel like dolling out, but just match the money?
  13. 108
    Online

    108 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    18,011
    Likes Received:
    369
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings Received:
    +1,383
    i think there is a difference with it not being funded correctly and licking your chops to make as much money from the money pot, regardless of how its done..

    that being said, certain administrations have "borrowed" heavily against it
  14. 108
    Online

    108 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    18,011
    Likes Received:
    369
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings Received:
    +1,383
    ok austin, i have no doubt you are very sharp and navigate the market successfully, but just calling it like it is

    trillions of dollars were lost in the last crash, and many by folks who also "knew" what they were doing

    it is Social Security, not Social Insecurity
  15. demosthenes
    Online

    demosthenes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    7,244
    Likes Received:
    193
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Ratings Received:
    +976
    I'm not totally clear on their assumptions for rate of return and inflation. That could drastically affect the numbers involved. Their 2% assumption seems low to me unless I am missing something.

    As an investment this is a very poor substitute. Low rate of return and no ability to cash out or pass on to heirs.

    As an insurance it is working poorly as people who never "purchased policies" or made payments are drawing payments.
    • Like Like x 1
  16. sappanama
    Offline

    sappanama VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,601
    Likes Received:
    79
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +190
    772 in over your years working in modest account with modest return and it is going broke paying not even a 33% return over the life of your investment. Pitiful.
    100 dollars 1970 dollars is wort >600 dollars just taking into acct inflation, does this mean govt hasn't even managed to match inflation, really hasn't even come close
  17. QGator2414
    Online

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    12,810
    Likes Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +574
    Not being funded correctly? We now pay 6.2 times what they did from 1937-1950 (only increased the rate except for the two year employee cut recently) on a max taxable that is more than 3 times inflation...
  18. demosthenes
    Online

    demosthenes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    7,244
    Likes Received:
    193
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Ratings Received:
    +976
    This is what I'm concerned about with the article's assumptions. It paints a pretty picture for their arguments but I'm not sure it aligns with reality.
  19. tegator80
    Online

    tegator80 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    5,681
    Likes Received:
    1,001
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    Ratings Received:
    +2,378
    I am not going to spew facts about the projections of Social Security from the beginning. But from its inception, it had to be about everyone and not just the old poor because they wouldn't have gotten it passed. But it seems to me that there were some serious omissions to the law. The first is that it wasn't tied to the concept of "dying with dignity" instead of the current idea of retirement in the comfort you are used to. I believe that when the law was passed the average age of dying was about 68, or three years after SS kicked in. Since then the average age is at least 10 years higher and probably heading to 18-20 years more by the time we 'boomers are in that age. Automatic adjustments were needed to keep the original plan salvageable.

    Another thing that has happened, and it is human nature, is that once a pot of "benevolent money" gets collected - and more than is necessary to pay the bills - the politicians (with the blessing of the voters) get "creative" an how the money can be used. The role of SS funds has expanded tremendously and while noble in intent does not recognize the original plans. Which is why Obamacare is going to be a financial disaster. We Americans are "creative" with public monies and we aren't going to change anytime soon.

    But I also think that the biggest problem is that without financial discipline, both by the politicians and the general population, the idea of weaning people off their entitlements just isn't politically viable. The last bastion of Old American Values is the generation that fought in WW2 or were born and raised in the depression and are the biggest block of retirees today. They have sent an unmistakable signal to their representatives through their years that "you touch SS and YOU DIE!" We 'boomers can be excused for being narcissistic but that generation? Didn't their parents teach them the lifelong philosophy of building for the children and grandchildren? How they can negotiate those two ideas is beyond me but here we are.
  20. kygator
    Offline

    kygator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    2,818
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +242
    If it were a private company offering this plan the government and media would be fighting to get it shut down.

Share This Page