Active Users:603 Time:10/03/2025 03:24:13 AM
You just don't get it, or apparently are so in love with your political ideology you won't. HyogaRott Send a noteboard - 04/03/2013 04:58:15 AM

Social Security was NEVER sustainable. The sustainability of the program when it was presented was an illusion. Its sustainability was based on the US population increasing WITHOUT END. This is a complete physical impossibility, not to mention contrary to all the recorded history of advancing civilizations. It is not now, nor was it ever, a perpetually sustainable program, BECAUSE it is structured as a Ponzi. As long as there is no capital investment and growth, it can not survive, PERIOD. It is simple math (though with VERY big numbers).

A secondary argument against the program is that it is a VERY bad program (just how bad it is becomes hidden behind those same really big numbers). For every person you can point to and say "see it helped this person" or "It kept that person out of poverty" I can point to that same person and run the numbers for them and show you how much money they COULD HAVE HAD instead with a real investment plan. It is a very basic time/value of money calculation.

With the exception of a few first generation SS retiree recipients everyone else for the last 65 years has been hosed.

Reply to message
Can You Name the Largest US Program to ANNUALLY Collect More Than It Spent for 75 Straight Years? - 28/02/2013 11:03:18 PM 1370 Views
It's the world's greatest Ponzi scheme, since the government forces us to give money to it. - 01/03/2013 01:05:05 PM 803 Views
Yes, "government forcing people to give money" defines a Ponzi; speeding tickets are Ponzis. - 01/03/2013 03:53:02 PM 895 Views
Good lord my friend..... - 02/03/2013 04:19:35 AM 838 Views
I will just link what Isaac said; maybe then you will pay attention to it. - 02/03/2013 04:56:34 AM 883 Views
I really think you terribly misread what I said *NM* - 02/03/2013 06:59:56 AM 458 Views
Yes he did. He has very poor reading comprehension skills. *NM* - 03/03/2013 01:07:59 AM 478 Views
I really do not think I did. - 04/03/2013 01:43:02 AM 916 Views
I'm pretty confident you have - 04/03/2013 11:49:19 AM 900 Views
We evidently disagree on what constitutes a Ponzi scheme. - 11/03/2013 09:56:27 PM 825 Views
No, I agree with a clear definiton, you seem not to want to absorb that - 11/03/2013 10:24:47 PM 979 Views
It is neither an investment nor fraudulent. - 12/03/2013 02:34:09 AM 1046 Views
Okay, that's a really weird or naive standard to judge SS by - 01/03/2013 05:25:11 PM 848 Views
Great; will you put that on a postcard to Cannoli, A2K, Rick Perry and the rest of your party? - 01/03/2013 07:39:44 PM 874 Views
Your attacks on republican ideals would have more credit if you understood them - 02/03/2013 04:27:34 AM 860 Views
An ironic charge, since their defenses of those ideals typically suffer from the same defect. - 02/03/2013 04:51:32 AM 840 Views
I'm rubber you're glue, whatever you say bounces of me and sticks to you. nyah, nyah, nyah - 02/03/2013 12:58:10 PM 776 Views
"Unsustainable"=/="meeting monthly obligations for 75 YEARS and still having $2.5 trillion left." - 04/03/2013 01:03:09 AM 896 Views
Please look up the definition of sustainable. Hint: "its worked so far" isn't it. - 04/03/2013 04:25:19 AM 865 Views
"As it is currently constructed/funded" is one HELL of a qualifier. - 04/03/2013 04:41:30 AM 926 Views
You just don't get it, or apparently are so in love with your political ideology you won't. - 04/03/2013 04:58:15 AM 726 Views
I believe if you check civilizations record you will find the human population has steadily risen. - 04/03/2013 05:08:38 AM 802 Views
*sigh* - 04/03/2013 12:15:22 PM 795 Views
Birth RATES have fallen; POPULATION steadily rose in every period except the Black Deaths peak. - 11/03/2013 09:56:36 PM 1070 Views
Re: Declining birth rates are the key - 13/03/2013 04:47:41 PM 898 Views
Ironic that you would make my point while arguing against - 04/03/2013 06:12:29 PM 740 Views
? - 11/03/2013 09:56:59 PM 906 Views
aH yes the great liberal investmetn/retirement plan that offers me a NEGATIGVE rate of return... - 02/03/2013 11:51:50 AM 777 Views
Do you sincerely believe people earning $14,560/year can afford investing 4% of it? - 04/03/2013 12:53:30 AM 935 Views
*sigh* - 04/03/2013 03:43:08 AM 773 Views
I tried it with compound interest; $44.80/month at 4% for 50 years still does not get to $1.25 mill. - 04/03/2013 04:24:51 AM 844 Views
Here are some clues. - 04/03/2013 04:37:39 AM 721 Views
It is math, not the Riddle of the Sphinx: EIther it adds up or does not. - 04/03/2013 05:02:39 AM 857 Views
Math is simple - Either you know how to calculate it or you don't - 04/03/2013 11:55:24 AM 943 Views
Indeed. - 11/03/2013 09:53:59 PM 859 Views
Re: Indeed. - 13/03/2013 05:00:10 PM 1006 Views
SS is supposed to supplement a proper pension, not provide your sole income after retirement - 05/03/2013 03:53:03 AM 727 Views
Did you bother to actually read anything? - 05/03/2013 02:32:16 PM 793 Views
do *YOU* know what "living in poverty" means? - 05/03/2013 05:49:14 PM 861 Views
Re: do *YOU* know what "living in poverty" means? --- yeah, I've BEEN there. - 05/03/2013 08:01:33 PM 829 Views
how about respond to a post with logic and civility instead of being a troll for once? - 05/03/2013 11:03:00 PM 933 Views
All I have used is civility and logic, or least as much civility as was warrented. - 06/03/2013 04:28:04 AM 867 Views
yeah, it's my fault for stooping to your level.... - 08/03/2013 07:22:24 PM 914 Views
Re: yeah, it's my fault for stooping to your level.... - 10/03/2013 01:42:26 PM 791 Views
i'm not going to keep going in circles so i will finish with this.... - 11/03/2013 10:08:53 PM 1099 Views
No loss. - 13/03/2013 04:37:41 PM 724 Views
"Rah! Rah! Rah!" Can we please cut out all this blather and bile? - 05/03/2013 11:53:41 PM 804 Views
spoken like a true enemy of the state! - 06/03/2013 12:54:38 AM 772 Views
Re: spoken like a true enemy of the state! - 08/03/2013 03:04:37 PM 824 Views
I was not trolling, but clarifying. - 11/03/2013 09:53:48 PM 857 Views

Reply to Message