Re: Does nobody at this retirement site ever talk about retirement issues???

rg wrote:

( previous post snipped-follow thread )

Alan, I don't know where you get your idea that a Ponzi scheme must imply fraud in order to be one.

A Ponzi Scheme, better know as a pyramid scheme, promises EACH investor the ultimate prize that is only obtained by those at the top. Since the creators of the scheme know and understand that after a certain point, such can NEVER occur, there is a clear attempt to defraud, since the perpetrators know that they can never deliver on their claims.


Do you think SS is a pyramid?

Its current funding mechanism would certainly suggest that.

If not, then will 1 worker and 1 recipient still function




Social Security has never defaulted on its promises, giving each individual who has paid in exactly what was promised, and hence, cannot be called a fraud. You need to have a greater understanding of the use of language and greater insight and critical evaluative abilities than what you demonstrate on the surface to see those nuances.


Do you think SS will ever default on it's promises?

No. No political party would be able to take the heat for such an event and survive. That doesn't mean the solution will be sound and complete, however.

Perhaps you can teach me better use of the language then, and greater insight and critical evaluation.

I would suggest that you peruse the dictionary before making assertions. Your major difficulty is that you cloud meanings of words, lumping terms together which in reality have subtle differences.

Here is the Wikepedia def. and I don't see implied fraud anywhere.

Where? And besides, you need to know how the term is applied in Law, because use determines definition. I rely on the legal application to determine the definition.


Since SS is an involuntary taking of property by the State for re-distrubution it qualifies as Socialism.

Wrong. Social Security is a legal program which has withstood congressional and judicial scrutiny, and is consequentially legal and appropriate under our Constitution. It is involuntary in the sense that I suppose any taking of a tax is involuntary, but hey, that's democracy in action. You do support democracy, don't you?


Are all things legal, also ethical?

What is ethical is a matter of conjecture, and irrelevant. Only the legal aspects count.

I only support a very narrow slice of democracy called Republican Democracy. Can you tell me the difference and if you agree with my position or not?

Kindly define what YOU mean by Republican Democracy. Such a qualification is necessary, as you have already demonstrated a fundamental penchant for creating your own definitions for words.

And obviously I do not agree with the positions you have posted so far.

And furthermore, if you knew and understood how even Social Security functions in its present form, it is more like an insurance program, in which those who pay into it receive a later return. There is no redistribution of income, as ALL who pay into it receive benefits at some time.


It is my understanding that SS actually is composed of two parts. The first part is SS welfare benefit and the second part is SSI.

then your understanding is erroneous. Social Security is NOT a welfare program in any shape fashion or manner.

The first part is a function of government welfare and the second part is kind of strange to me. It appears on the surface as an insurance annuity, but then it also is a direct pay-through system in which monies going in are immediately dispersed out to recipients. If there is an excess, then the government uses the excess for general revenue spending. A ticket or IOU is made and dropped in the box.

Welfare programs are funded out of general tax revenues and have limited eligibility requirements. Social Security is funded out of a special tax, through FICA. ALL who pay into Social Security receive a benefit. Consequently, it is NOT a welfare program, as there are no restrictive qualification which would eliminate individuals. The work requirement only demonstrates its annuity-like structure.

The fact that The government is acting inappropriately by spending the excess and writing an IOU to the trust so that the dim-witted American Public can think that taxes are being kept low is only adding to the problem.

If there is a shortfall, then Congress must "appropriate" funds to cover that shortfall. Although, I have no idea where they get those funds.

They raise taxes, obviously, or cut spending, or some combination of both.

Am I right here? If not, and you know, please explain.

You're doing well so far.

As I have repeatedly stated, you lack understanding of how these things work, and buy into the slogans due to that ignorance. You are the perfect patsy for the Republican Party. You support things which are clearly AGAINST your interest.


Well, I have never voted Republican in my life.

Regardless, your views on these items put you in line for that charge.

See George Z's reply to you. He says it better than I. And so did Harry.


Perhaps you and Harry can enlighten me.

Lord, how we have tried. Are we getting through?

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The SS funding crisis, and possible push back options..
    ... > the short run you think the govt will pay a dividend on the pay out ... the government will not renege on the promises made. ... become eligible for Social Security benefits. ... who works for some organization are the ones paying the taxes. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Attention Bush fans ~ Bush says global warming is real
    ... When one party takes money from the earnings of another, ... >>This is a pyramid scheme I think, and the head schemer is trying to get ... > Social Security Scheme, so it is in their best interest to keep it as ... > pillage the Producers for the benefit of the Takers. ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
    ... >>>>> Chicken Little thing with Social Security that he did with the ... >> would have more money to spend when they retire. ... Social Seucity is a welfare program for all practical purposes, ... and found to be a lot less than what retirees receive now. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Obamas Remarks on Retirement Security
    ... future of Social Security while meeting our obligations to the ... retirees of today and the future without raising taxes. ... John McCain will not leave office ... promises that cannot be kept -- what the hell does he mean by ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: McCain promises to balance budget in 4 years
    ... >> Sen. John McCain plans to promise on Monday that he will ... >> The vow to take on Social Security puts McCain in a political>> danger ... > entitlement program and say he's going to overhaul it. ... The program has made promises it cannot possible keep. ...
    (soc.retirement)
Loading