10 things Social Security won't tell you.

[Svnla]

http://finance.yahoo.com/focus-reti...rement&cat=fidelity_2010_living_in_retirement

For example, a single man who retired in 1980 at age 65 after earning an average wage of $43,500 would have paid about $96,000 in Social Security taxes, and probably received $203,000 in lifetime benefits, according to a study by the Urban Institute, a non-partisan policy think tank in Washington D.C. By contrast, a single man making the same average wage today and retiring in 2030 will likely pay $398,000 in lifetime taxes but receive just $336,000 in lifetime benefits — about 16% less than he paid in. "People who were first in the system got a great rate of return," says Alan Gustman, chair of the economics department at Dartmouth College. "It's the younger generation that is going to be in the most difficult position."

No wonder current benefit receivers or soon to be want to keep the status quo. Young folks are gettting screw.

 

[Doppel]

"People who were first in the system got a great rate of return," says Alan Gustman, chair of the economics department at Dartmouth College. "It's the younger generation that is going to be in the most difficult position."

This is why it's quite accurately referred to as a Ponzi scheme.

Of course, SSA does not agree: http://web.archive.org/web/20011007160228/www.ssa.gov/history/ponzi.html

 

[Ausm]

dp

 

[Ausm]

This is why it's quite accurately referred to as a Ponzi scheme.

One criticism of the analogy is that while Ponzi schemes and Social Security have similar structures (in particular, a sustainability problem when the number of new people paying in is declining), they have different transparencies. In a Ponzi scheme the fact there is no return generating mechanism beyond just contributions from new entrants is obscured[141] whereas Social Security payouts have always been openly underwritten by incoming tax revenue.[142] No true Ponzi scheme can be sustained indefinitely, whereas Social Security's benefits can always be sustained by raising additional taxes. Because of these and other issues, Robert E. Wright calls Social Security a "quasi" pyramid scheme in his book, Fubarnomics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States)#Claim_that_it_is_a_Ponzi_scheme

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/columnist/krantz/2011-06-21-social-security-ponzi-scheme_n.htm

http://www.ssa.gov/history/ponzi.htm

LMAO

 

[nonlnear]

One criticism of the analogy is that while Ponzi schemes and Social Security have similar structures (in particular, a sustainability problem when the number of new people paying in is declining), they have different transparencies. In a Ponzi scheme the fact there is no return generating mechanism beyond just contributions from new entrants is obscured[141] whereas Social Security payouts have always been openly underwritten by incoming tax revenue.[142] No true Ponzi scheme can be sustained indefinitely, whereas Social Security's benefits can always be sustained by raising additional taxes. Because of these and other issues, Robert E. Wright calls Social Security a "quasi" pyramid scheme in his book, Fubarnomics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States)#Claim_that_it_is_a_Ponzi_scheme

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/columnist/krantz/2011-06-21-social-security-ponzi-scheme_n.htm

http://www.ssa.gov/history/ponzi.htm

LMAO

By this very same reasoning any true Ponzi scheme can be sustained indefinitely by raising the price of admission. The only difference is a voluntary Ponzi scheme would collapse when the buyers balk at the price tag. In the Social Security Ponzi scheme the buyers are captive by force of law. Of course the force of law can only hold the ship together for a few extra years before other mechanisms explode the scheme.

 

[Ausm]

By this very same reasoning any true Ponzi scheme can be sustained indefinitely by raising the price of admission. The only difference is a voluntary Ponzi scheme would collapse when the buyers balk at the price tag. In the Social Security Ponzi scheme the buyers are captive by force of law. Of course the force of law can only hold the ship together for a few extra years before other mechanisms explode the scheme.

Umm I don't think you get the crux of the links I posted.

 

[ModerateRepZero]

By this very same reasoning any true Ponzi scheme can be sustained indefinitely by raising the price of admission. The only difference is a voluntary Ponzi scheme would collapse when the buyers balk at the price tag. In the Social Security Ponzi scheme the buyers are captive by force of law. Of course the force of law can only hold the ship together for a few extra years before other mechanisms explode the scheme.

which is why I would argue that another distinguishing characteristic of a Ponzi scheme is the deliberate misinformation/obfuscation. a ponzi scheme always pretends that any above-average returns are due to any factor other than a continual stream of investors.

 

[pcgeek11]

Oh no! All the yunguns are getting screw!

You want some cheese to go with that whine?

 

[nonlnear]

Umm I don't think you get the crux of the links I posted.

I know you weren't arguing that SS isn't a Ponzi scheme, but there are many others who use that line of reasoning (which you were deriding - I think) to make the case that SS isn't a Ponzi scheme.

 

[KB]

Oh no! All the yunguns are getting screw!

You want some cheese to go with that whine?

Seniors are already whining about the lack of increases in SS payments the last 2 years.
Its not just the youngins who will get bilked by this program.

And with continued high levels of unemployment don't expect any large future increases.

 

[Macamus Prime]

They seem to have forgotten the most important parts,...

SOCIAL Security,... SOCIALISM - SOCIALIST.

My GOD. It has been staring at us all this time!!! This country is 3 letters away from becoming a Socialist government!!!

AAAAAGGGGG!!!!!!!

 

[Axon]

They seem to have forgotten the most important parts,...

SOCIAL Security,... SOCIALISM - SOCIALIST.

My GOD. It has been staring at us all this time!!! This country is 3 letters away from becoming a Socialist government!!!

AAAAAGGGGG!!!!!!!

Hah.

 

[rudder]

When SS the ratio of payees to recipients was 8 to 1... now it is 3 to 1 and will be 2 to 1 in a few years.

SS was never meant to be permanent and never meant to replace responsible saving and investing. But who the hell is responsible anymore? People just better hope walmart keeps growing and demand for greeters grow.

 

[rudder]

One criticism of the analogy is that while Ponzi schemes and Social Security have similar structures (in particular, a sustainability problem when the number of new people paying in is declining), they have different transparencies. In a Ponzi scheme the fact there is no return generating mechanism beyond just contributions from new entrants is obscured[141] whereas Social Security payouts have always been openly underwritten by incoming tax revenue.[142] No true Ponzi scheme can be sustained indefinitely, whereas Social Security's benefits can always be sustained by raising additional taxes. Because of these and other issues, Robert E. Wright calls Social Security a "quasi" pyramid scheme in his book, Fubarnomics.

LMAO

Social Security's benefits can always be sustained by raising additional taxes. A lot of this country's problems can be resolved by raising taxes...medicare can be rolling in cash, unemployment can be extended another two years, public employee pension issues would disappear...

But in anywhere else other than liberal la la land... this will create worse problems.

 

[child of wonder]

This is why Social Security is not even included in my retirement plans. If it's still around in 30 years then I guess I'll have more disposable income.

 

[Ausm]

Social Security's benefits can always be sustained by raising additional taxes. A lot of this country's problems can be resolved by raising taxes...medicare can be rolling in cash, unemployment can be extended another two years, public employee pension issues would disappear...

But in anywhere else other than liberal la la land... this will create worse problems.

Ok...if we don't raise taxes or address the TRUE problems such as Healthcare for profit which is blowing Medicare out of the water how do we fix it then? Or should we use your sides answer...Don't get sick and if you do get sick and are unfortunate enough to get healthcare then FUCK YOU? This is the way to solve the problem in Conservative land.

 

[Ausm]

This is why Social Security is not even included in my retirement plans. If it's still around in 30 years then I guess I'll have more disposable income.

If the GOP has their way to privatize Social Security their wildest wet dream will come true and it will totally fail after the next inevitable Wall Street crash.

 

[airdata]

Sounds like a ponzi scheme to me...

 

[Ausm]

Sounds like a ponzi scheme to me...

You have me totally convinced with that indisputable argument.

 

[quest55720]

If the GOP has their way to privatize Social Security their wildest wet dream will come true and it will totally fail after the next inevitable Wall Street crash.

I would rather have control over my money than the alternative. Which is all the money I put in is basically stolen to give to the current and near future benificiaries. Give me my own account that I have some control over. If I die before 65 I can leave that account to someone instead of the government getting that money. The current system will not work in the long term and something needs to be done. No way the GoP agrees to tax increases or increasing the cap. I see no other alternative except to scew over the young with the status quo.

 

[bfdd]

Ausm, healthcare for profit exists because education for profit exists. Where do you get the best medical education? At the best schools. The best schools cost lots of money, so doctors want lots of money because they have invested heavily into their education. So your problem comes back around to a group of mostly liberal educators who want more money. Who will then turn around and preach the exact opposite to their students.

You can give me shit for attackign "liberal" educators, but most professors identify themselves under that moniker and this is a pretty well documented fact. Want to make healthcare cheaper? Make the bar of entrance cheaper/easier. Until then, healthcare will be expensive.

 

[Ausm]

I would rather have control over my money than the alternative. Which is all the money I put in is basically stolen to give to the current and near future benificiaries. Give me my own account that I have some control over. If I die before 65 I can leave that account to someone instead of the government getting that money. The current system will not work in the long term and something needs to be done. No way the GoP agrees to tax increases or increasing the cap. I see no other alternative except to scew over the young with the status quo.

You sound like a younger person and I can understand why you are worried. Social security the main program will be solvent for 20 to 30 more years. I believe in order to maintain solvency we have to give Americans a choice to either increase what they pay in or if you don't like SS the option to GTFO without the ability to EVER be able to use it down the road this would greatly increase the length of solvency.

 

[Jaskalas]

No true Ponzi scheme can be sustained indefinitely, whereas Social Security's benefits can always be sustained by raising additional taxes.

Additional taxes for it seem like an option given the economy?

 

[Ausm]

Ausm, healthcare for profit exists because education for profit exists. Where do you get the best medical education? At the best schools. The best schools cost lots of money, so doctors want lots of money because they have invested heavily into their education. So your problem comes back around to a group of mostly liberal educators who want more money. Who will then turn around and preach the exact opposite to their students.

You can give me shit for attackign "liberal" educators, but most professors identify themselves under that moniker and this is a pretty well documented fact. Want to make healthcare cheaper? Make the bar of entrance cheaper/easier. Until then, healthcare will be expensive.

I think Professors deserve what they are paid and I realize there are worthless one but I would argue there are plenty of worthless doctors also.

Now getting back to healthcare the main thing that would have most certainly helped control costs would have been the public option...but the Healthcare for profit lobby fought this tooth and nail because they KNEW it would have killed their outrageous profit margins.

Luckily I have VERY good insurance and when my healthcare provider charges me 500 dollar for an emergency room visit they say fuck you it is only worth 75 bucks. When they charge me 150 for the doc to shove his fist up my ass they say screw you and he gets 50 bucks. When the Hospital charge me 6 bucks for a bandaid they say fuck you it's only worth a buck.

Our Healthcare system is so fucked up and THE only way I believe we can control costs is by having Gubermint competition.

 

[woolfe9999]

I know you weren't arguing that SS isn't a Ponzi scheme, but there are many others who use that line of reasoning (which you were deriding - I think) to make the case that SS isn't a Ponzi scheme.

What difference does it make whether you call it a "Ponzi scheme" or not? You can call it whatever you want. It's all political rhetoric, whether pro or con. The financial realities of SS, i.e. it's long term sustainability and expected payouts matter. Arguing over buzzwords and catchphrases is a waste of our time and it's part of what is wrong with our political culture.

Take Rick Perry, for example, referring to it in this manner. If he really thinks it is a "Ponzi scheme" then it is a criminal enterprise that ought to be eliminated right now. But he doesn't advocate that. He was just kidding after all. It was just a catchphrase to appeal to the tea party, right? The joke is on the voter who doesn't realize that it's all semantics and political theater. What gets me is that ordinary people on a political discussion board waste time on such nonsense.