ok, but just don't go around saying socialism is good and Social Security and Medicare are socialist and see how good they are. I'll give you social security aint bad and can be fixed with a tax hike, but that's just more money out of my pocket into the governments pocket. Medicare? who knows, just don't use them when trying to convince me we are a socialist country and medicare and ss are proof. Not very convincing if you want me to feel the Bern.
I like Bernie, but...
- Thread starter futurecurrents
- Start date
As I pointed out Wall Street has been very successful in their disinformation campaign. Do you know of any Ponzi scheme that employs a bevy of actuaries? Do you know any that have a Board of Trustees that regularly calls for adjustment in the contribution rate to the Ponzi scheme? You are now officially part of the Disinformation campaign. You are a tool of Wall Street, and you probably weren't even aware of it.. The correct information is out their. Why don't you avail yourself of it?I see a trend in this chart that doesn't look good for current workers. Yeah, i know, if only congress would take ss recommendations, right? Like hiking the tax on what the current saps, I mean workers, put in, everything will be alright. sheesh
=============
Is Time magazine a bunch of right wing whackos, too?
Social Security Now Takes More Than it Gives
Social Security has reached another critical threshold: For the first time, a typical husband and wife retiring today can expect to collect less in benefits than it paid in payroll tax over the course of their life.
By Dan Kadlec @dankadlecAug. 07, 2012
http://business.time.com/2012/08/07/social-security-now-takes-more-than-it-gives/
--------------------------
One last point on gov't using the money from social security contributions.
They placed the excess money received from ss contributions into gov't bonds. Once the money has been placed in gov't bonds, the gov't then has the money. What are they supposed to do with it? How do they keep it separate?
If you don't like them placing the money in gov't bonds, then what is the alternative? Would you prefer that the excess contributions were placed with hedge fund managers like soros? Do you want the excess contributions invested in aapl, junk bonds, cdo's, triple inverse etf's or what? Gov't bonds are theoretically the safest place to park the excess contributions ( it is considered the risk free rate) and once the gov't has issued the bonds for those contributions, there is not any sane, coherent way to keep that money separate from the rest of the budget.
The whole argument against gov't spending the excess ss contributions is not very well thought through.
Last edited:
wow, "in modern history"...astounding...
Even The Onion would blush at this level of slurping obsequiousness.
I have no problem with anyone who wants to criticize Social Security or Medicare as long as they have their facts straight. So far, all I see here is an endless litany of misinformation.
It's just true. The Times editorial board also thinks so.
But I am surprised that a moron conservative like yourself knows a word with more than two syllables.
Yeah, that's your answer. If only they would continually hike the taxes on the current poor working stiffs everything would be ok.
Wow, it does sound remarkably similar to every other ponzi scheme. I wonder why.
Maybe the reason that Charles Ponzi didn't need a board of directors with a 'bevy of actuaries' is because any idiot can deduce that if you keep hiking the amounts the investors have to pay, it will keep the scheme going. Until it collapses. A board and actuaries are nothing more than part of the con to lend a veneer of credibility to the scheme.
So in other words the current Social Security systems as defined by law is broke and will not be able to pay the expected benefits in 2032.
Already I am not even going to get back in social security payments what I put into the system (formerly I would be getting what I put in during my lifetime back with about 1% interest).
You answer to this is that Congress should force all the tax payers to contribute more to Social Security - a system that people don't even get back the money they put into it. Why don't they just allow us to set-up mandatory 401K accounts in safe basic investments instead. Many other "socialist" countries have gone in the direction of using private investment accounts instead of social security.
That's nice excpet there isn't any real money in the fund. Just a bunch of worthless IOU's.