Quote from: Shooterman on March 02, 2012, 11:11:26 AM
Just possibly, Elmer, you have misunderstood. It is the people's money. It never was the government's money. The people paid into the system fully expecting a ROI. ( though ROI is not quite what I would call it more like forced theft ) If Uncle Sugar and his Minions of Mischief ( PUBS and DIMS ) had not stolen the money to pay for other shit, the program would not be in the hole it is in.

I think it is you that has misunderstood.  But I gotta go.  Average post count too high and got things to do.  No money was ever stolen, though.  That is a complete canard. 

QuoteEverybody did indeed contribute and everybody, then as now, did not benefit.  That's the way insurance works.  I have had fire insurance for YEARS but never had a single fire. 

Note I said an annuity policy, where you build up the value of the policy based upon your contributions AND your survivors get all of it back if you don't make it. Not the cheesy little payment the government gives your kids or your widow. Social Security was sold as annuity, not as term.

QuoteYou will note that the rates have grown, too.  When a much smaller percentage (but still over half) of the people did not make it to 65 the rates were like 2% each for employer and employee.  As that percentage has increased, the rates have gone up.

Sure with a Ponzi scheme like Social Security, a growing population could hide the basic unsustainability of the program - for a while.

QuoteI am also fully aware that it's not really insurance.  FDR had to disguise it as that to combat all the nervous nellies who were scared absolutely out of their wits by anything that even remotely resembled "socialism." Which is what it clearly is. So is Medicare.  And you're right about black males.  Also women.  At first social security did not cover nearly all occupations and the ones it didn't cover were, coincidentally?, those heavily employing blacks and females.  Now, I am not suggesting racism or sexism had anything to do with that.  But it IS a remote possibility.

If he wanted it to not be socialism he could have structured it as a deferred tax on savings and interest - a 401K. Oh yeah, no make that Hell yeah, not sexism but definitely racism - the backbone of the Democratic party was the "Solid South". What do you think?

Quote from: mdgiles on March 02, 2012, 11:14:25 AM
Note I said an annuity policy, where you build up the value of the policy based upon your contributions AND your survivors get all of it back if you don't make it. Not the cheesy little payment the government gives your kids or your widow. Social Security was sold as annuity, not as term.Sure with a Ponzi scheme like Social Security, a growing population could hide the basic unsustainability of the program - for a while. If he wanted it to not be socialism he could have structured it as a deferred tax on savings and interest - a 401K. Oh yeah, no make that Hell yeah, not sexism but definitely racism - the backbone of the Democratic party was the "Solid South". What do you think?

Anybody who seriously believes social security is a ponzi scheme would not know a ponzi scheme if it walked up to him and slapped him upside the head with a wet dishrag. 

G'day mates.

Quote from: elmerfudd on March 02, 2012, 11:15:59 AM
 

Anybody who seriously believes social security is a ponzi scheme would not know a ponzi scheme if it walked up to him and slapped him upside the head with a wet dishrag. 

G'day mates.

And any one who doesn't recognize that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme has ALREADY been slapped upside the head - with a mailed fist. Then you were knocked down, and while you lay there - the government went through your wallet.

Now that taxed has figured out I have only the intellect of your typical nine year old, I guess I can share this.

In between the Dick and Jane books, I was assigned to read a book on FDR in the remedial English class I am taking.  (A book.  I know you guys get all your info by "scouring the web" but surely you can recall what a book looks like.)

Anyway, there was this guy in FDR's administration who could do a dead on impersonation of Eleanor.  I mean dead on.  Voice, hand movements, the whole nine yards.  Any time Franklin was in a real funk they'd send for this guy and he'd come running in the oval office screaming "FRANKLIN! YOU'VE SIMPLY GOT TO DO SOMETHING FOR THE NEGROES!'  Franklin laughed so hard every time he nearly cried. 

And it's not that he didn't want to. But he was a politician and he knew it took baby steps. That's why occupations filled largely by blacks were omitted from social security originally.  (Also note they didn't pay into it, either.) He knew better to get what he could when he could and then expand it later (which is what happened) than not get anything at all (which was the only other option at the time).

Quote from: elmerfudd on March 02, 2012, 11:15:59 AM
 

Anybody who seriously believes social security is a ponzi scheme would not know a ponzi scheme if it walked up to him and slapped him upside the head with a wet dishrag. 

G'day mates.

Of course it is a ponzi scheme, Elmer. People paying into it now are supporting the already retired folks. It might also be telling that at the time of inception, there were about 15 workers for every retiree, Now, there are approximately two per retiree.

Quote from: Shooterman on March 02, 2012, 12:25:47 PM
Of course it is a ponzi scheme, Elmer. People paying into it now are supporting the already retired folks. It might also be telling that at the time of inception, there were about 15 workers for every retiree, Now, there are approximately two per retiree.

Which is exactly what it was designed to do on the front end and everbody knew it. With your ponzi scheme, it's all under wraps. Those contributing THINK they're "investing." They've been lied to.  Nobody lied to anybody with respect to social security.  It's doing exactly what it was set up to do just like it was set up to do it.  And lots and lots of old folks, my grandparents included, maybe yours, too, escaped an old age of grinding poverty because of it.  They paid in very little, got a lot out. 

I will get much less out as a percentage of what I paid in than they will.  I have been blessed with well paying gainful employment all my life despite having the intellect of a nine year old.  But I don't begrudge those who will get a higher percentage of their pay in out than I will.  I am still better off than they are, and God gets all the credit.

Quote from: elmerfudd on March 02, 2012, 01:05:19 PM
Which is exactly what it was designed to do on the front end and everbody knew it. With your ponzi scheme, it's all under wraps. Those contributing THINK they're "investing." They've been lied to.  Nobody lied to anybody with respect to social security.  It's doing exactly what it was set up to do just like it was set up to do it.

Mot quite true, Elmer. It has and is operated like a ponzi scheme. Much smarter people that I have called it such. I believe they are correct.

QuoteAnd lots and lots of old folks, my grandparents included, maybe yours, too, escaped an old age of grinding poverty because of it. They paid in very little, got a lot out.

I still have my grandfathers social security card. To my knowledge, he never collected a dime from the system as he died in January of '43, Before that he sold used cars and did not know how to drive, but my Dad supported my mother's parents, himself, my mother, and I and my brother who was six weeks old when Dad was recalled to active Navy duty in May '41. He did this driving a truck for a wholesale grocery and produce house.

In later years my Grandmother, who continued to live with us after the War until she passed in '65, may have collected a small amount of old age survivors benefits, but it was negligible.

With 15 workers paying into the system for everyone one not paying, it was sustainable, but not with two supporting one.

QuoteI will get much less out as a percentage of what I paid in than they will.  I have been blessed with well paying gainful employment all my life despite having the intellect of a nine year old.  But I don't begrudge those who will get a higher percentage of their pay in out than I will.  I am still better off than they are, and God gets all the credit.

Good for you, Elmer, but many, if not most, are not that fortunate. Being on SS myself,I do not begrudge any getting money from the system. They paid into it the same as any of us. I've paid into it from the time I was 15. Wasn't much then, but pay I did.

Quote from: Shooterman on March 02, 2012, 01:45:09 PM
Mot quite true, Elmer. It has and is operated like a ponzi scheme. Much smarter people that I have called it such. I believe they are correct.

I still have my grandfathers social security card. To my knowledge, he never collected a dime from the system as he died in January of '43, Before that he sold used cars and did not know how to drive, but my Dad supported my mother's parents, himself, my mother, and I and my brother who was six weeks old when Dad was recalled to active Navy duty in May '41. He did this driving a truck for a wholesale grocery and produce house.

In later years my Grandmother, who continued to live with us after the War until she passed in '65, may have collected a small amount of old age survivors benefits, but it was negligible.

With 15 workers paying into the system for everyone one not paying, it was sustainable, but not with two supporting one.

Good for you, Elmer, , are not that fortunate.but many, if not most Being on SS myself,I do not begrudge any getting money from the system. They paid into it the same as any of us. I've paid into it from the time I was 15. Wasn't much then, but pay I did.

Pay I have, too. Also since I was 15.  Including time in the army.  Only 61 now.

Those who are less fortunate than I are the very ones I am talking about. I know smarter people than you and I have called it a ponzi scheme.  But they're playing pollyticks.  Not being truthful.

Quote from: elmerfudd on March 02, 2012, 01:50:55 PM
Pay I have, too. Also since I was 15.  Including time in the army.  Only 61 now.

Those who are less fortunate than I are the very ones I am talking about. I know smarter people than you and I have called it a ponzi scheme.  But they're playing pollyticks.  Not being truthful.

Whether they labeled it that as a political tactic or not, it still happens to be true. Like all Ponzi schemes the initial investors are paid off by the later investors, with the scheme working as long as the number of investors continues to rise. That's why it's also referred to as a pyramid scheme. Social Security seemed to worked for so long because after WW2 our parents got busy. They had so many babies and there were so many boomers paying into the system, that it seemed the good times would never end. But now the Boomers are starting to draw out and people are beginning to realize that those paper IOU's the government put in the fund to replace the money they stole, can't be paid.

Quote from: mdgiles on March 03, 2012, 05:37:44 AM
Whether they labeled it that as a political tactic or not, it still happens to be true. Like all Ponzi schemes the initial investors are paid off by the later investors, with the scheme working as long as the number of investors continues to rise. That's why it's also referred to as a pyramid scheme. Social Security seemed to worked for so long because after WW2 our parents got busy. They had so many babies and there were so many boomers paying into the system, that it seemed the good times would never end. But now the Boomers are starting to draw out and people are beginning to realize that those paper IOU's the government put in the fund to replace the money they stole, can't be paid.

Those "paper IOUs" are US Government Bonds.  Considered the safest investment known to man by any credible financial adviser.  If they're just paper IOUS, what does that make common stocks?

When receipts exceeded outgo, the receipts needed to be invested.  They were invested in USG bonds.  That meant the USG had funds to use that would later have to be retired with taxes, of course, but the alternative wss to levy taxes now or do without whatever was procured.  Some of what was procured during that time included national defense items, not the least of which was WWII.  Some of what was procured we probably would have been better off without. 

It is not a ponzi scheme.  USG bonds are not just paper IOUs.  You are merely parrotting fire breathers like the Rushman when you say stuff like that. 

Quote from: elmerfudd on March 03, 2012, 12:30:40 PM
 

It is not a ponzi scheme.  USG bonds are not just paper IOUs.  You are merely parrotting fire breathers like the Rushman when you say stuff like that. 

Cut the bull shit!
You just made a statement, I want you to back it up with a link!

Quote from: Solar on March 03, 2012, 12:35:30 PM
Cut the bull shit!
You just made a statement, I want you to back it up with a link!

The old "Link! Don't think!" bit, huh?

Up yours, doofus.

Quote from: elmerfudd on March 03, 2012, 12:39:20 PM
The old "Link! Don't think!" bit, huh?

Up yours, doofus.

Wrong Dumb ass, you claimed Giles listens to Rush and was parroting him.
So the burden of proof is on you.
Prove Rush said our economy is a Ponzi scheme, or take it back.
Do you want to recant?

Quote from: Solar on March 03, 2012, 12:47:59 PM
Wrong Dumb ass, you claimed Giles listens to Rush and was parroting him.
So the burden of proof is on you.
Prove Rush said our economy is a Ponzi scheme, or take it back.
Do you want to recant?

See my earlier post, doofus.  Take it down yourself if you don't like it.