Sorry KOAJ, but even the most diehard extreme right wingers i know who hate govt, dont even remotely have the same thoughts as you.
You have got to be a product of some whacked out internet blogs, because your ideas are not what a civilized society like ours is about.
I dont understand, since you have no kids and you hate it here so bad, why havent you packed up and moved out of the country to one where you wont have to deal with or pay for the things you hate so much? You must realize America, does indeed benefit you or else you would be gone. If you havent realized by now, that in order for us to have the type of country we have, it takes money to run and that money isnt just gonna come out of the sky, the people living in the country have to for that.
You need to forgot about how it was in 1776 with a population of 13 million. Our 300 million people dont want to live like that.
Also you still havent addressed why are you paying for medical insurance, when you arent forced to take it? And please dont use the tax benefit line, because that only helps you so much. You would do alot better just not paying for health insurance, so why are you sending that money in? You complain about it, but you arent doing anything about it.
Far as pensions go, you will never get it and understand it, until the day you get a job that gives you one. Its a benefit of the job. Instead of the employer paying the employee 20 bucks an hour, he pays them 15 bucks an hour and gives them the pension benefit instead.
And like Wallstreet , said, pension systems have just been underfunded and they also got to stop letting workers pad their pensions. Fix those 2 things and pensions would be just fine.
Everything isnt a ponzi scheme, thats just the talking heads telling you that bullshit
0
Sorry KOAJ, but even the most diehard extreme right wingers i know who hate govt, dont even remotely have the same thoughts as you.
You have got to be a product of some whacked out internet blogs, because your ideas are not what a civilized society like ours is about.
I dont understand, since you have no kids and you hate it here so bad, why havent you packed up and moved out of the country to one where you wont have to deal with or pay for the things you hate so much? You must realize America, does indeed benefit you or else you would be gone. If you havent realized by now, that in order for us to have the type of country we have, it takes money to run and that money isnt just gonna come out of the sky, the people living in the country have to for that.
You need to forgot about how it was in 1776 with a population of 13 million. Our 300 million people dont want to live like that.
Also you still havent addressed why are you paying for medical insurance, when you arent forced to take it? And please dont use the tax benefit line, because that only helps you so much. You would do alot better just not paying for health insurance, so why are you sending that money in? You complain about it, but you arent doing anything about it.
Far as pensions go, you will never get it and understand it, until the day you get a job that gives you one. Its a benefit of the job. Instead of the employer paying the employee 20 bucks an hour, he pays them 15 bucks an hour and gives them the pension benefit instead.
And like Wallstreet , said, pension systems have just been underfunded and they also got to stop letting workers pad their pensions. Fix those 2 things and pensions would be just fine.
Everything isnt a ponzi scheme, thats just the talking heads telling you that bullshit
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulentinvestment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from profit earned by the individual or organization running the operation. The Ponzi scheme usually entices new investors by offering higher returns than other investments, in the form of short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent. Perpetuation of the high returns requires an ever-increasing flow of money from new investors to keep the scheme going.
0
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulentinvestment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from profit earned by the individual or organization running the operation. The Ponzi scheme usually entices new investors by offering higher returns than other investments, in the form of short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent. Perpetuation of the high returns requires an ever-increasing flow of money from new investors to keep the scheme going.
Is it just because it is widely accepted not to be a "Fraudulent investment"?
I thought that we were all in agreement that dipping into it and using it for budget voodoo was fraudulent. Thus making subsequent investment a fraudulent investment right??
Terribly confused.
0
Is it just because it is widely accepted not to be a "Fraudulent investment"?
I thought that we were all in agreement that dipping into it and using it for budget voodoo was fraudulent. Thus making subsequent investment a fraudulent investment right??
I wasnt discussing SS, but the same thinking exists..if the future funding is not done with current contributions, then in reality it is a ponzi because we are not wanting to take responsibility with current actions.
There is the concept of actuarial calculations which adds a wrinkle to the discussion.
0
rick,
I wasnt discussing SS, but the same thinking exists..if the future funding is not done with current contributions, then in reality it is a ponzi because we are not wanting to take responsibility with current actions.
There is the concept of actuarial calculations which adds a wrinkle to the discussion.
I would say that the "fraudulent" use of the funds.
When SS was set up, it was never supposed to be touched. It is my understanding that this is not the case anymore?
Rick, if the politicians never took money out of SS for other things, there was enough money in SS to last another 100 years without changing anything. Pretty good for a ponzi scheme. Really so sick of hearing ponzi scheme and unsustainable from the talking goofballs on tv. They just beat some words to death, until they are entrenched in regular folks heads. Maybe they should start chanting overseas labor or no import tax for American companies making their products overseas.
Also Rick, if employers didnt offer pensions to employees, they would have to pay more per hour for the jobs. Pensions are just a trade off and maybe when you finally get that cops job you said you were gonna go after, your tune will change.
0
Quote Originally Posted by rick3117:
I would say that the "fraudulent" use of the funds.
When SS was set up, it was never supposed to be touched. It is my understanding that this is not the case anymore?
Rick, if the politicians never took money out of SS for other things, there was enough money in SS to last another 100 years without changing anything. Pretty good for a ponzi scheme. Really so sick of hearing ponzi scheme and unsustainable from the talking goofballs on tv. They just beat some words to death, until they are entrenched in regular folks heads. Maybe they should start chanting overseas labor or no import tax for American companies making their products overseas.
Also Rick, if employers didnt offer pensions to employees, they would have to pay more per hour for the jobs. Pensions are just a trade off and maybe when you finally get that cops job you said you were gonna go after, your tune will change.
If I am funding my future SS, should I not also have the choice how to do that? IE privatize social security
If they ever privatized ss, the majority of people wouldnt save shit and when they got older, the govt {us} would still have to take care of them, so in reality, its way better off to just keep it the way it is, that way, you know you will have a check when you get older. And yes they will fix the system, so dont get your panties in an uproar
0
Quote Originally Posted by J_Galt:
@#33
If I am funding my future SS, should I not also have the choice how to do that? IE privatize social security
If they ever privatized ss, the majority of people wouldnt save shit and when they got older, the govt {us} would still have to take care of them, so in reality, its way better off to just keep it the way it is, that way, you know you will have a check when you get older. And yes they will fix the system, so dont get your panties in an uproar
If they ever privatized ss, the majority of people wouldnt save shit and when they got older, the govt {us} would still have to take care of them, so in reality, its way better off to just keep it the way it is, that way, you know you will have a check when you get older. And yes they will fix the system, so dont get your panties in an uproar
Minus the sarcasm the rest is quite true.
0
Quote Originally Posted by cd329:
If they ever privatized ss, the majority of people wouldnt save shit and when they got older, the govt {us} would still have to take care of them, so in reality, its way better off to just keep it the way it is, that way, you know you will have a check when you get older. And yes they will fix the system, so dont get your panties in an uproar
I can see your point. When I set privatize, I probably did not use the right word.
What I would like is still for a mandatory deduction, but I get to choose where it is invested. Apple? Gold? US treasury bills? Or even go the old fashion way, let Uncle sam hold it for me.
Where I can see it being called a ponzi scheme is to the young people.
Those that are ready to collect social security may have worked and contributed since they were 15 years old.
Now 50 years later they are ready to collect....
Todays 15 year old may have to work 60 or more years to collect
0
@#37
I can see your point. When I set privatize, I probably did not use the right word.
What I would like is still for a mandatory deduction, but I get to choose where it is invested. Apple? Gold? US treasury bills? Or even go the old fashion way, let Uncle sam hold it for me.
Where I can see it being called a ponzi scheme is to the young people.
Those that are ready to collect social security may have worked and contributed since they were 15 years old.
Now 50 years later they are ready to collect....
Todays 15 year old may have to work 60 or more years to collect
Rick, if the politicians never took money out of SS for other things, there was enough money in SS to last another 100 years without changing anything. Pretty good for a ponzi scheme. Really so sick of hearing ponzi scheme and unsustainable from the talking goofballs on tv. They just beat some words to death, until they are entrenched in regular folks heads. Maybe they should start chanting overseas labor or no import tax for American companies making their products overseas.
Also Rick, if employers didnt offer pensions to employees, they would have to pay more per hour for the jobs. Pensions are just a trade off and maybe when you finally get that cops job you said you were gonna go after, your tune will change.
You are agreeing with me.
I said that once the money in SS started being diverted, and used for the Voodoo budgets, it became illegitimate.
I think that SS is a good idea, I think that you should be able to opt out, and the money should never be touched, but govt. has shown time and time again it is incapable of not funneling large sums of money to benefit them and their political aspirations, and personal wealth.
the bastardization of the program has made it into a classic ponzi scheme, it is just the way it is. If it makes you feel better to blame Republicans for that bastardization, then go right ahead, I am sure someone will pop up and remind you of Clinton's Ballanced (lol) budget that fucked with SS. I am not concerned with who did it I am concerned with how we fix it, make it sustainable, and fair.
I do not begrudge pensions, but they should be planned for and should stay solvent. Larger contributions may be needed to make that happen.
Have been approached by the Union at my new job and am having a bit of a personal crises deciding if it is for me or not.
0
Quote Originally Posted by cd329:
Rick, if the politicians never took money out of SS for other things, there was enough money in SS to last another 100 years without changing anything. Pretty good for a ponzi scheme. Really so sick of hearing ponzi scheme and unsustainable from the talking goofballs on tv. They just beat some words to death, until they are entrenched in regular folks heads. Maybe they should start chanting overseas labor or no import tax for American companies making their products overseas.
Also Rick, if employers didnt offer pensions to employees, they would have to pay more per hour for the jobs. Pensions are just a trade off and maybe when you finally get that cops job you said you were gonna go after, your tune will change.
You are agreeing with me.
I said that once the money in SS started being diverted, and used for the Voodoo budgets, it became illegitimate.
I think that SS is a good idea, I think that you should be able to opt out, and the money should never be touched, but govt. has shown time and time again it is incapable of not funneling large sums of money to benefit them and their political aspirations, and personal wealth.
the bastardization of the program has made it into a classic ponzi scheme, it is just the way it is. If it makes you feel better to blame Republicans for that bastardization, then go right ahead, I am sure someone will pop up and remind you of Clinton's Ballanced (lol) budget that fucked with SS. I am not concerned with who did it I am concerned with how we fix it, make it sustainable, and fair.
I do not begrudge pensions, but they should be planned for and should stay solvent. Larger contributions may be needed to make that happen.
Have been approached by the Union at my new job and am having a bit of a personal crises deciding if it is for me or not.
I said that once the money in SS started being diverted, and used for the Voodoo budgets, it became illegitimate.
I think that SS is a good idea, I think that you should be able to opt out, and the money should never be touched, but govt. has shown time and time again it is incapable of not funneling large sums of money to benefit them and their political aspirations, and personal wealth.
the bastardization of the program has made it into a classic ponzi scheme, it is just the way it is. If it makes you feel better to blame Republicans for that bastardization, then go right ahead, I am sure someone will pop up and remind you of Clinton's Ballanced (lol) budget that fucked with SS. I am not concerned with who did it I am concerned with how we fix it, make it sustainable, and fair.
I do not begrudge pensions, but they should be planned for and should stay solvent. Larger contributions may be needed to make that happen.
Have been approached by the Union at my new job and am having a bit of a personal crises deciding if it is for me or not.
Trust me Rick, am blaming both parties for raiding SS for their own pet bullshit projects. SS should have never been able to be used for anything other then what it was designed to be used for. The structure of the system isnt a ponzi scheme, for the simple fact that there is always going to be people paying into the system, because its highly unlikely our population is going to go backwards.
Another group that has contributed to ruining a pretty decent system besides the politicians robbing it like it was their own personal piggy bank, is the large corporations, who by moving the job overseas, has reduced the amount of people paying into the system. If these 2 factors alone were removed from the equation SS would be fine for every generation after generation.
0
Quote Originally Posted by rick3117:
You are agreeing with me.
I said that once the money in SS started being diverted, and used for the Voodoo budgets, it became illegitimate.
I think that SS is a good idea, I think that you should be able to opt out, and the money should never be touched, but govt. has shown time and time again it is incapable of not funneling large sums of money to benefit them and their political aspirations, and personal wealth.
the bastardization of the program has made it into a classic ponzi scheme, it is just the way it is. If it makes you feel better to blame Republicans for that bastardization, then go right ahead, I am sure someone will pop up and remind you of Clinton's Ballanced (lol) budget that fucked with SS. I am not concerned with who did it I am concerned with how we fix it, make it sustainable, and fair.
I do not begrudge pensions, but they should be planned for and should stay solvent. Larger contributions may be needed to make that happen.
Have been approached by the Union at my new job and am having a bit of a personal crises deciding if it is for me or not.
Trust me Rick, am blaming both parties for raiding SS for their own pet bullshit projects. SS should have never been able to be used for anything other then what it was designed to be used for. The structure of the system isnt a ponzi scheme, for the simple fact that there is always going to be people paying into the system, because its highly unlikely our population is going to go backwards.
Another group that has contributed to ruining a pretty decent system besides the politicians robbing it like it was their own personal piggy bank, is the large corporations, who by moving the job overseas, has reduced the amount of people paying into the system. If these 2 factors alone were removed from the equation SS would be fine for every generation after generation.
Privatizing SS will never work, no matter how much some of you want to believe thats the answer. Apply a little common sense with some street smarts and you will be able to realize all the bad things that would happen. They just need to stop raiding the fund as a first step towards fixing it.
0
Privatizing SS will never work, no matter how much some of you want to believe thats the answer. Apply a little common sense with some street smarts and you will be able to realize all the bad things that would happen. They just need to stop raiding the fund as a first step towards fixing it.
telling them to stop raiding the fund ... LOLOLOLOL talk about addicts.... those pols on both sides spend spend spend always spend because they make more money and it costs them nothing and they get more votes.....
never ending.....been going on for a long time and now it is coming to the tipping point.
this summer should see a lot of action....
0
telling them to stop raiding the fund ... LOLOLOLOL talk about addicts.... those pols on both sides spend spend spend always spend because they make more money and it costs them nothing and they get more votes.....
never ending.....been going on for a long time and now it is coming to the tipping point.
SS is a ponzi that has collapsed in part because the fund was plundered, and mostly because of demographics and inflation. SS pays out more money than they take in. B
blame the baby boomers, they are the ones that didn't want to have enough children to keep the scam going
0
SS is a ponzi that has collapsed in part because the fund was plundered, and mostly because of demographics and inflation. SS pays out more money than they take in. B
blame the baby boomers, they are the ones that didn't want to have enough children to keep the scam going
SS is a ponzi that has collapsed in part because the fund was plundered, and mostly because of demographics and inflation. SS pays out more money than they take in. B
blame the baby boomers, they are the ones that didn't want to have enough children to keep the scam going
Be, your post is pure bullshit and totally not true. you keep blaming the baby boomers, but the fact is, they didnt destroy the fund. The politicians are the ones who destroyed it, by constantly pulling money out of it, to use on other shit. If they didnt touch it, that fund would have lasted another 100 years easily, without changing one thing to it.
Also wouldnt your parents be baby boomers? Dont you have any friends or other relatives who collect SS? Do you bitch at them about it?
One other thing, you still never addressed my health insurance question. Whya re you paying 6k a year for it, if you dont need it? Your not being forced to take it and dont use the tax thing, because you would make out alot better keeping your 6k in insurance payments and filing your taxes with 6k more income. There is no huge benefit, in using health insurance as a dedcution on your taxes.
0
Quote Originally Posted by be easy:
SS is a ponzi that has collapsed in part because the fund was plundered, and mostly because of demographics and inflation. SS pays out more money than they take in. B
blame the baby boomers, they are the ones that didn't want to have enough children to keep the scam going
Be, your post is pure bullshit and totally not true. you keep blaming the baby boomers, but the fact is, they didnt destroy the fund. The politicians are the ones who destroyed it, by constantly pulling money out of it, to use on other shit. If they didnt touch it, that fund would have lasted another 100 years easily, without changing one thing to it.
Also wouldnt your parents be baby boomers? Dont you have any friends or other relatives who collect SS? Do you bitch at them about it?
One other thing, you still never addressed my health insurance question. Whya re you paying 6k a year for it, if you dont need it? Your not being forced to take it and dont use the tax thing, because you would make out alot better keeping your 6k in insurance payments and filing your taxes with 6k more income. There is no huge benefit, in using health insurance as a dedcution on your taxes.
He is PARTLY correct from how I see it..boomers are to blame, but not for the lack of having kids.
Boomers got all the fun and none of the cost..SS was not properly funded to anticipate future costs and demand, so yes boomers are to blame..the government should have been upping SS at LEAST to the level of inflation if not higher..because the "costs" for people on SS and that inflation is higher than the overall "core" inflation.
0
cd,
He is PARTLY correct from how I see it..boomers are to blame, but not for the lack of having kids.
Boomers got all the fun and none of the cost..SS was not properly funded to anticipate future costs and demand, so yes boomers are to blame..the government should have been upping SS at LEAST to the level of inflation if not higher..because the "costs" for people on SS and that inflation is higher than the overall "core" inflation.
He is PARTLY correct from how I see it..boomers are to blame, but not for the lack of having kids.
Boomers got all the fun and none of the cost..SS was not properly funded to anticipate future costs and demand, so yes boomers are to blame..the government should have been upping SS at LEAST to the level of inflation if not higher..because the "costs" for people on SS and that inflation is higher than the overall "core" inflation.
They might be partly to blame, but they werent the ones controlling the fund. On top of that, if politicians didnt steal money from the fund and use it for other things, the fund would last well over a 100 more years. So if the fund could last that long, how can you blame the boomers, if the money would have been there. On top of that,the boomers during their working years, had many millions of people with good jobs paying into the system.
I really dont blame the boomers for this mess, the politicians get this one on their backs.
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
cd,
He is PARTLY correct from how I see it..boomers are to blame, but not for the lack of having kids.
Boomers got all the fun and none of the cost..SS was not properly funded to anticipate future costs and demand, so yes boomers are to blame..the government should have been upping SS at LEAST to the level of inflation if not higher..because the "costs" for people on SS and that inflation is higher than the overall "core" inflation.
They might be partly to blame, but they werent the ones controlling the fund. On top of that, if politicians didnt steal money from the fund and use it for other things, the fund would last well over a 100 more years. So if the fund could last that long, how can you blame the boomers, if the money would have been there. On top of that,the boomers during their working years, had many millions of people with good jobs paying into the system.
I really dont blame the boomers for this mess, the politicians get this one on their backs.
So do you think that the ammt paid in is lesser or greater than the benefits taken out?
COLA's come from where exactly? From investing the money?
I get a massive kick out of my inlaws and their views on SS, that COLAs were promised and should be given..even though there were not proper pay-in adjustments over the decades they contributed..nor the fact that Medicare IS an extension of SS in reality..and most definitely that has not been funded properly at all.
SS should have been double what it was..maybe even higher.
0
So do you think that the ammt paid in is lesser or greater than the benefits taken out?
COLA's come from where exactly? From investing the money?
I get a massive kick out of my inlaws and their views on SS, that COLAs were promised and should be given..even though there were not proper pay-in adjustments over the decades they contributed..nor the fact that Medicare IS an extension of SS in reality..and most definitely that has not been funded properly at all.
SS should have been double what it was..maybe even higher.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.