A caveman could understand this: - Page 2
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33

Thread: A caveman could understand this:

  1. Duke, you are entitled to what you paid in including interest, no doubt about it. The problem is that the money you invest all those years was a privatized investment firm you would be receiving a considerable amount more then what you are receiving now. I have no problem with a pool to help out as we age but just keep it out of the F>>>ing governments hands, government can not do what the private sector can do. I will not label you as a socialist you did that. I, and the majority are more then willing to pool into a catastrophe fund program, but when the government runs it we all lose. Huston Texas, they privatized social security those folks will retire with more then they were making at the time. I am self employed with employees as well I understand your lack of trust in our government. We are all in deep sh.t come January when the OBAMA Care Kicks in.

  2.   
  3. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by THE DUKE OF ESSEX View Post
    For 42 years I paid into the Social Security system, both for me and my many employee's. After a drunk hit me head on at 130+ mph, I was left with broken spine, no tail bone,shattered right leg,and head injuries. I have been in a wheelchair ever since 2004. I am on Social Security and Medicare not by choice,but by someone's impaired actions. After paying into a program for all this time, are you now going to label me a Socialist, because I need the money back? I agree the system is broken, people who are not entitled to benefits are getting them without ever having to contribute. (No cost of living allowance for the next 2 years) And this I blame on the Government. They (the Government) have borrowed so much from the Social Security system, and given away monies to people who don't deserve it, that their is a deficit coming soon and I am mad as hell that the program I paid into all those years is being raped daily, by the liberals who think everyone is entitled to monies set aside for the sick, and the elderly who paid in good faith. I should also mention that the person who hit me with her car had no insurance, and was driving on a suspended license. So I had no recourse for the damage done to me. My insurance company picked up the bills from the 2 years of rehab,doctors visits, etc... but didn't pay me anything nor did I expect them too. I paid my insurance in good faith as well, and they did their part by paying back the monies I had put in. I expect the same of My Government as I see this as an insurance program and should not be used as a scheme. What started out with good intentions has now deteriorated into a free for all with my money So to all who think it is just hysterical that the Social Security system is in such financial trouble, all I can say is I am sorry for you. And I certainly expected more out of you Conservative Wife and Mom! Where's that christian attitude when you are lumping all persons on Social Security in the same group. In closing let me state: I don't want your money, sympathy, or time. I just want what I paid in back, so I can have what's left of my life.
    Duke, in no way did I mean to insult you or anyone else who is presently on Social Security. My own mother-in-law is a widow and her ONLY source of income is social security. She is an amazing woman who, with that small monthly stipend alone has managed to pay for vinyl siding on her two-story house plus detached garage, pay for double-pane replacement windows throughout her house. I've told her, more than once, that she could get rich going on a the road teaching folks how to survive well on social security income. My statement in no way was meant to reflect on Social Security recipients, but rather on the government's handling of the program.

    No matter how you cut it, Social Security IS a ponzi scheme. I refer you to this article at businessweek.com

    Is Social Security a Ponzi Scheme? - BusinessWeek
    Is Social Security a Ponzi Scheme?
    Posted by: Michael Mandel on December 28

    (This is the first in a series on technology and the crisis)

    In the aftermath of the Madoff implosion, quite a few people have pointed out the parallels between a Ponzi scheme and Social Security. Arnold Kling, whom I respect, has written:

    I’ve been thinking that Madoff is a perfect analogy for the public sector. The government gives people money, which it expects to obtain by taking the money from people in the future. Even the Center on Budget Policy and Priorities, not known as a right-wing organization, sees the U.S. fiscal stance as unsustainable (pointer from Ezra Klein via Tyler Cowen)—in other words, a Ponzi scheme.

    Other people have gone farther. Paul Mulshine of the New Jersey Star Ledger wrote a column entitled “The Ponzi scheme that Baby Boomers are waiting to cash in on.” And Jim Cramer has called Social Security the biggest Ponzi scheme in history.

    Superficially, these critics have a point, and there is a parallel between Social Security and a Ponzi scheme. But on a fundamental level, they are very wrong, and it’s worth explaining why.

    First, the parallel. Social Security taxes current workers to pay Social Security benefits for current retirees. In other words, the new entrants into the Social Security system, the young workers, pay off the previous entrants, the older workers. And despite the fact you have a Social Security “account”, there is no necessary link between what you paid into the system in taxes, and what you receive.

    That’s very similar to the structure of a Ponzi scheme, where new investors pay off the original investors. As long as enough new ‘victims’ are brought into the scheme, it keeps growing and growing. But when the new investors runs out, the Ponzi collapses. Analogously, the slowdown in population growth puts pressure on Social Security finances.

    But there is one enormous difference between Social Security and a Ponzi scheme: Technological change. Over the past century, new technologies have enabled the output of the country to grow much faster than its population. To be more precise, the U.S. population has more than tripled since the early 1900s, while the U.S. economic output has gone up by more than 20 times.

    This long track record of technology-powered growth has enabled the enormous rise in living standards in the U.S. and other developed countries. In fact, this increase in productivity—output per worker—is the key fact which gives us our way of life today.

    Assuming that technological progress continues over the next 70 years, and output productivity growth continues over the next 70 years, the finances of Social Security are relatively easy to fix. A fairly minor cut in benefits, combined with a relatively small increase in taxes, will bring the system back into balance again. (the latest Social Security report projects a 75-year deficit of $4.3 trillion. That sounds like a lot of money, but over 75 years it’s roughly $60 billion a year…not chicken feed, but not overwhelming).

    But here’s the rub. Ultimately our ability to make good on the “Ponzi-like” nature of Social Security depends on the continued march of technological progress—and in particular, innovation which boosts output and living standards. If we leave the younger generation a good legacy—a sound scientific and technological base, combined with an innovative and flexible economy and an educated workforce—then Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme. The economy grows, and there’s more than enough resources for everyone.

    But if instead we—the current generation—invest in homes, flat-screen televisions and SUVs, then we don’t leave the next generation with the technological “seed corn” they need. If the technological progress slows, then Social Security does turn out to be Ponzi-like—with unfortunate consequences for everyone.


    Finally, Duke, it realy wasn't nice of you to question my "Christian attitude". I never inferred that the financial crisis of Social Security was "hilarious" or in the least bit amusing. Communicating in a forum, like this, leaves much to be desired, as we can't "read" voice inflection or see expressions on the faces of the posters. PLEASE DON'T EVER JUDGE CHRISTIANITY ON MY PERSONAL STATEMENTS...that is a burden TOO heavy for me to bear, My Friend. Christians are far from perfect and I'm the MOST imperfect of all.
    Conservative Wife & Mom -- I'm a Conservative Christian-American with dual citizenship...the Kingdom of God is my 1st home and the U.S.A. is my 2nd.

  4. #13
    Oh, no you don't, CWM...I am the most imperfect of all!

    Definitely seems to me that were a private citizen run a program like the politicians have run SS, they would be arrested forthwith. Not only has the gov't developed and promoted and MANDATED OUR PARTICIPATION in a Ponzi scheme, they then proceed to raid the monies in the fund. Oh, hell yeah, I'd be doing jail time if I invented and administered a scheme like this. But, as we've seen, it's one set of rules for us serfs and another set for the ruling aristocracy.
    Prov. 27:3 - "Stone is heavy and sand a burden, but provocation by a fool is heavier than both"

  5. #14
    I am not sure what the original intention of SS was but I hioe that the original intent was not what it has become. Ome of the major problems that has put it in such a bind was that it started out as requiring only a few to put in but allowed almost anyone to take out. I remember back around 1960 a fellow on our farm had never paid a dime into SS. At that time you could back-pay in several quarters and be eligible. My Grandfather gave him the money to back-pay in when he reached 65 I think it was at that time. This fellow also had a young wife and several children. His first SS check including the children's benefits was more than the total amount he had paid in. Not only that but his wife and children would receive benefits for the next 20 years at least no matter what happened to him. Probably less than one third of the working population was required to pay in during their working time. However almost anyone who paid in just a few quarters (as little as 6 quarters or 1.5 years) could draw out, usually at a higher rate than those who had paid in their entire career, for the remainder of their life.

  6. #15
    Dear Conservative, Wife and Mom, I questioned your religious attitude based on your agreement of the 1st. Post by wooddoctor "Yep...both are ponzi schemes. One (Madoff's) was an individual crime against many. The other (Social Security) is a governmental crime against ALL. Sickening..." I thought your comments were directed at people like me, and I apologize. And as for my comments about people on this post thinking it was hilarious that Social Security was crashing down around us...That was not directed at you. I thank the wooddoctor for pointing out this comparison, and think he hit's the nail on the head. It is sad though that Social Security has turned into this ugly mess, and can now be compared to a ponzi scheme. As for the inflection in my voice, it is one of sorrow. I can't believe what has happened to this once great nation in such a short amount of time. I enjoy reading your post's and the wooddoctor's as well. I feel you both bring issues to light that may not have been noticed otherwise. With all we have to contend with today, it is easy to miss what is really going on behind our backs. Still friends I hope, Duke P.S. good luck with your surgery.

  7. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by THE DUKE OF ESSEX View Post
    Dear Conservative, Wife and Mom, I questioned your religious attitude based on your agreement of the 1st. Post by wooddoctor "Yep...both are ponzi schemes. One (Madoff's) was an individual crime against many. The other (Social Security) is a governmental crime against ALL. Sickening..." I thought your comments were directed at people like me, and I apologize. And as for my comments about people on this post thinking it was hilarious that Social Security was crashing down around us...That was not directed at you. I thank the wooddoctor for pointing out this comparison, and think he hit's the nail on the head. It is sad though that Social Security has turned into this ugly mess, and can now be compared to a ponzi scheme. As for the inflection in my voice, it is one of sorrow. I can't believe what has happened to this once great nation in such a short amount of time. I enjoy reading your post's and the wooddoctor's as well. I feel you both bring issues to light that may not have been noticed otherwise. With all we have to contend with today, it is easy to miss what is really going on behind our backs. Still friends I hope, Duke P.S. good luck with your surgery.
    Your apology is accepted, Duke. Of course we're still friends. I'm glad that we cleared the air and now understand each other better. As the situation in our beloved country worsens, we ALL have to be here for each other.

    Like you, most of the members of USACarry feel a terrible sorrow at the immense damage that is PURPOSELY being forced upon our Constitutional Republic. You are so right that, while we're watching the "diversionary" news, unimaginable additional harms are being heaped upon our heads. This is truly "Taxation without representation". It begs the question, how much more are "we the people" willing to take?

    Thank you for wishing me good luck with my upcoming surgery. It's appreciated beyond words, Duke...MY FRIEND!
    Conservative Wife & Mom -- I'm a Conservative Christian-American with dual citizenship...the Kingdom of God is my 1st home and the U.S.A. is my 2nd.

  8. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by FN1910 View Post
    I am not sure what the original intention of SS was but I hioe that the original intent was not what it has become. Ome of the major problems that has put it in such a bind was that it started out as requiring only a few to put in but allowed almost anyone to take out. I remember back around 1960 a fellow on our farm had never paid a dime into SS. At that time you could back-pay in several quarters and be eligible. My Grandfather gave him the money to back-pay in when he reached 65 I think it was at that time. This fellow also had a young wife and several children. His first SS check including the children's benefits was more than the total amount he had paid in. Not only that but his wife and children would receive benefits for the next 20 years at least no matter what happened to him. Probably less than one third of the working population was required to pay in during their working time. However almost anyone who paid in just a few quarters (as little as 6 quarters or 1.5 years) could draw out, usually at a higher rate than those who had paid in their entire career, for the remainder of their life.
    When SS was instituted, it was meant as a social safety net (not a retirement plan) to be funded by many and used by few. At the time, the average life span was 62 years old. Of course, full bennies couldn't be had until age 65; therefore, it was envisioned that more would pay in than would be around to use it. Oh, those rascally gov't actuaries.

    Another fun tidbit: At the time of inception, there were approximately 45 worker bees paying in, to 1 retiree taking out (45:1 ratio). Today, the ratio is about 3:1 and of course, SS bennies of all types are meted out, totally beyond what was envisioned when the program was created. The fund ran a surplus until fairly recently, thus prompting the crooks in Congress to grab the cash. Just some fun facts.
    Prov. 27:3 - "Stone is heavy and sand a burden, but provocation by a fool is heavier than both"

  9. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The High Country
    Posts
    1,029
    Just based on the typical nature of my interaction with most of the folks here I tried my best to come up with some defense of SS and the way it's being used/run. Couldn't do it. You are all right - Govt. sanctioned fraud.

  10. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, WA, USA
    Posts
    733

    Question This isn't reason for a little reflection?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cocked _and_Locked View Post
    Just based on the typical nature of my interaction with most of the folks here I tried my best to come up with some defense of SS and the way it's being used/run. Couldn't do it. You are all right - Govt. sanctioned fraud.
    Dude, you are basically admitting that, whatever the subject, you are simply trying to post things just to piss people off. I mean, if that is not the definition of a Troll, I don't know what is.

    I am glad that you can see the truth behind what is being said about Social Security. I would encourage you to put a little more thought into the threads in which you participate, as opposed to just trying to provoke people. Real, thoughtful discourse is great. Simple provocation without well considered reason, not so great.

    Come into the fold, C&L. We don't have to agree about everything to still be respectful and friendly.

    Here's a hand------>
    "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson

  11. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The High Country
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Boomboy007 View Post
    Dude, you are basically admitting that, whatever the subject, you are simply trying to post things just to piss people off.
    Uh, no "dude," I'm not "admitting" anything. I'm just always looking for THE TRUTH, and this is one of the few cases I happened to agree with the OP.

    Now you want to paint me with your preconcieved picture brush, try to twist that around, Huh?

    Want to get things headed down that road now? Fine, knock yourself out.....
    Quote Originally Posted by Boomboy007 View Post
    I would encourage you to put a little more thought into the threads in which you participate, as opposed to just trying to provoke people
    I would encourage you to kiss my rosie red rectum.
    Quote Originally Posted by Boomboy007 View Post
    Come into the fold, C&L.
    Sorry, I don't participate in "groupthink."

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast