Before modification by Joel at 04/03/2013 01:04:15 AM
It is "fraudulent" because the money contributed is NOT invested for the contributor, but instead redistributed to others,
Um, did you not say you work in insurance? Are you familiar with that "industrys" basis?
It pays policy holder claims with the premiums of OTHER policy holders. Are you running a Ponzi scheme, man? Do you need to call a lawyer? 
Incidentally, SS witholding was increased in 1983 to partially pay current contributors future benefits AS WELL AS current ones.
Social Security was NEVER placed in the General Fund. The WHOLE SS trust fund consists of special Treasury securities ILLEGAL for ANYONE else to hold. It has merely been COUNTED with the General Fund since the late sixties, except for a brief period under Reagan. That just reflects the reality that saying, "I made $1000 last month, spent it all and borrowed another $1000, but my $500 in savings means I am not broke," is nonsense.
The problem is we cannot PAY SSs Treasury securities, because Reagan decision to hand out tax cuts AND continue spending pushed federal debt from <$1 trillion to $3.5 trillion in an effort to "starve the beast" and FORCE spending cuts. The GOPs continued commitment to that has since pushed federal debt to >$16 trillion and "the beast" is going into organ failure while Republicans weep crocodile tears for it. The most infuriating thing about this whole spectacle is that the US holds 25% of ALL global wealth, yet one party deliberately MANUFACTURED a needless debt as an excuse to end the social safety net for which they abhor paying.
The source of the money is not relevant.
The source of money is irrelevant to whether something is a Ponzi scheme?! Did you read your first argument?
So, you think it is "good" because it steals dead people's money to stay solvent... That is an odd position to try to defend. Ponzi's fail because the math does not work, Social Security has only survived this long because it pays such a lousy return.
If Ponzis fail because the math does not work (true) but SSs low return made its math work fine (also true) SS is not a Ponzi. Wow, that was really hard.
At least he understands the definitions of the words used in the English language, and can do 3rd grade math, both of which seem to be beyond you.
A guy who claimed 4% of 14.5X50=1250 says I cannot do third grade math? A guy who works in insurance says it is wrong to pay peoples claims with other peoples money? I dislike personalizing arguments, but if you REALLY want to go there, I suppose we can....
