Obamanomics: A Ponzi Scheme?

Lots of name calling but no discussion of the OP and how SS is nothing like a ponzi scheme. Seems to me it's pretty similar considering if we were all to ask for our SS that we've "invested" with the government, the money would not be there.

Also, in all fairness, many of us do not need to affirm the belief that allowing people to take more money from a retirement-fund (for example) than they put in, and then taking money from those who do not yet need it to cover obligations promised above and beyond initial investment, by Rush. In addition, I don't think it's too far a stretch to call that fraud.

If I did it privately, you'd call it fraud.

When when the government does it, why is it called a social program?

RTD did it on the Fasttracks project, they spent the entire levy for construction on operating costs, and then apologized and asked for more of our money... same thing. If I apply for a bank loan or take out a business loan from a bank to rennovate a retail space, and then buy a boat instead, that's fraud, why is it any different when public companies, or the government, do it?

Notice that the same Liberals are always attacking anything that is posted by a true Conservative. Oh, wait, it's Bush's fault.

Looks like the latest talking point from the right is "social security is a ponzi scheme."

Never mind it's been going on for decades under presidents of BOTH major parties.

Suddenly, because Rick Perry says it's so, it's so. Well then, support Rick Perry and dump the ponzi scheme. Let me know how that works out for you. I prefer to let Perry burn himself out, alienating one group of Americans at a time.

If Congress hadn't kept raiding Social Security it wouldn't be in the financial mess it's in. I'm with Mitt Romney on this one.

WayneLeeH wrote: Looks like the latest talking point from the right is "social security is a ponzi scheme."

Never mind it's been going on for decades under presidents of BOTH major parties.

Suddenly, because Rick Perry says it's so, it's so. Well then, support Rick Perry and dump the ponzi scheme. Let me know how that works out for you. I prefer to let Perry burn himself out, alienating one group of Americans at a time.

If Congress hadn't kept raiding Social Security it wouldn't be in the financial mess it's in. I'm with Mitt Romney on this one.

Lets hear what your definition of a Ponzi Scheme is....would that be too much to ask for?

WayneLeeH wrote: Looks like the latest talking point from the right is "social security is a ponzi scheme."

Never mind it's been going on for decades under presidents of BOTH major parties.

Suddenly, because Rick Perry says it's so, it's so. Well then, support Rick Perry and dump the ponzi scheme. Let me know how that works out for you. I prefer to let Perry burn himself out, alienating one group of Americans at a time.

If Congress hadn't kept raiding Social Security it wouldn't be in the financial mess it's in. I'm with Mitt Romney on this one.

I don't disagree with anything you said, it's been a fraud perpetrated upon the voters by both parties for a very long time. The minute those funds went to anything but SS, when they were collected for SS, it became fraud. And yes, its structure fits closely with a Ponzi scheme and a pyramid scheme, and on the plus side, everybody profits! (well, until we run out of people to fill in the bottom of the pyramid... oh wait! We already did!)

Also, I was watching a show a few weeks ago and they showed part of clip where Ron Paul thanked Perry for making him look like a centrist... and I laughed really hard, he's not kidding!

The way I look at it is Social Security is a government version of a lifetime annuity that you can get from a private insurer. You collect money from a group of people and later pay them a certain amound during retirement. Some people get more back than they put in, some don't.

The big difference is the government can change the terms of the annuity on the fly at its whim. You can never be certain of just what you will get back for what you put in. A private insurer can't get away with that. Plus you are required by law to pay into Social Security.

Both private and government plans can get hit hard if people start living longer than expected. If, for example, there were a cure for cancer that extended people's lives by 5-10 years, it might put private annuities out of business. Social Security would also be devastated, but the government can just pass new laws (higher taxes and/or lower benefits) and "reinvent" it.

I still wouldn't call Social Security a Ponzi Scheme though. Ponzi Schemes eventually fall apart and as has been mentioned, Social Security has paid every check for decades. Once a Ponzi Scheme fails, it can't be fixed. Social Security has gotten in trouble a few times, and has been fixed as it was in the 1980s. I wouldn't expect Social Security to ever fail so long as we have a viable government. But you might not like what you eventually get out of it as we continue to get more retirees and fewer new workers to feed the checks.

CriticalBill wrote: Lets hear what your definition of a Ponzi Scheme is....would that be too much to ask for?

Ask Rick Perry.

I don't think Social Security ever promised a high return (or more than they put in) to investors -- one of the main attributes of a Ponzi scheme.

Social Security funding has been mismanaged. To be truthful, if it were handled properly it wouldn't run out of money since it gives back much less than what is put into it.

I agree with some of the other Republican candidates at the debate: let's fix it, not dismantle it.

The solution to fix it has been offered time and time again...But it might actually require some people who make over $250K to put a little more in... (The Horror! The Horror!) Those poor job-creators just couldn't stand it.