Active Users:1178 Time:22/11/2024 11:31:20 PM
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 1302 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 741 Views
Yes, "government forcing people to give money" defines a Ponzi; speeding tickets are Ponzis. - 01/03/2013 03:53:02 PM 867 Views
Good lord my friend..... - 02/03/2013 04:19:35 AM 782 Views
I will just link what Isaac said; maybe then you will pay attention to it. - 02/03/2013 04:56:34 AM 822 Views
I really think you terribly misread what I said *NM* - 02/03/2013 06:59:56 AM 430 Views
Yes he did. He has very poor reading comprehension skills. *NM* - 03/03/2013 01:07:59 AM 457 Views
I really do not think I did. - 04/03/2013 01:43:02 AM 859 Views
I'm pretty confident you have - 04/03/2013 11:49:19 AM 845 Views
We evidently disagree on what constitutes a Ponzi scheme. - 11/03/2013 09:56:27 PM 767 Views
No, I agree with a clear definiton, you seem not to want to absorb that - 11/03/2013 10:24:47 PM 911 Views
It is neither an investment nor fraudulent. - 12/03/2013 02:34:09 AM 981 Views
Okay, that's a really weird or naive standard to judge SS by - 01/03/2013 05:25:11 PM 788 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 815 Views
Your attacks on republican ideals would have more credit if you understood them - 02/03/2013 04:27:34 AM 797 Views
An ironic charge, since their defenses of those ideals typically suffer from the same defect. - 02/03/2013 04:51:32 AM 775 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 721 Views
"Unsustainable"=/="meeting monthly obligations for 75 YEARS and still having $2.5 trillion left." - 04/03/2013 01:03:09 AM 841 Views
Please look up the definition of sustainable. Hint: "its worked so far" isn't it. - 04/03/2013 04:25:19 AM 800 Views
"As it is currently constructed/funded" is one HELL of a qualifier. - 04/03/2013 04:41:30 AM 861 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 673 Views
I believe if you check civilizations record you will find the human population has steadily risen. - 04/03/2013 05:08:38 AM 781 Views
*sigh* - 04/03/2013 12:15:22 PM 729 Views
Birth RATES have fallen; POPULATION steadily rose in every period except the Black Deaths peak. - 11/03/2013 09:56:36 PM 1003 Views
Re: Declining birth rates are the key - 13/03/2013 04:47:41 PM 830 Views
Ironic that you would make my point while arguing against - 04/03/2013 06:12:29 PM 687 Views
? - 11/03/2013 09:56:59 PM 846 Views
aH yes the great liberal investmetn/retirement plan that offers me a NEGATIGVE rate of return... - 02/03/2013 11:51:50 AM 712 Views
Do you sincerely believe people earning $14,560/year can afford investing 4% of it? - 04/03/2013 12:53:30 AM 876 Views
*sigh* - 04/03/2013 03:43:08 AM 706 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 788 Views
Here are some clues. - 04/03/2013 04:37:39 AM 650 Views
It is math, not the Riddle of the Sphinx: EIther it adds up or does not. - 04/03/2013 05:02:39 AM 803 Views
Math is simple - Either you know how to calculate it or you don't - 04/03/2013 11:55:24 AM 880 Views
Indeed. - 11/03/2013 09:53:59 PM 789 Views
Re: Indeed. - 13/03/2013 05:00:10 PM 973 Views
SS is supposed to supplement a proper pension, not provide your sole income after retirement - 05/03/2013 03:53:03 AM 667 Views
Did you bother to actually read anything? - 05/03/2013 02:32:16 PM 735 Views
do *YOU* know what "living in poverty" means? - 05/03/2013 05:49:14 PM 802 Views
Re: do *YOU* know what "living in poverty" means? --- yeah, I've BEEN there. - 05/03/2013 08:01:33 PM 777 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 860 Views
All I have used is civility and logic, or least as much civility as was warrented. - 06/03/2013 04:28:04 AM 810 Views
yeah, it's my fault for stooping to your level.... - 08/03/2013 07:22:24 PM 851 Views
Re: yeah, it's my fault for stooping to your level.... - 10/03/2013 01:42:26 PM 721 Views
i'm not going to keep going in circles so i will finish with this.... - 11/03/2013 10:08:53 PM 1069 Views
No loss. - 13/03/2013 04:37:41 PM 662 Views
"Rah! Rah! Rah!" Can we please cut out all this blather and bile? - 05/03/2013 11:53:41 PM 738 Views
spoken like a true enemy of the state! - 06/03/2013 12:54:38 AM 709 Views
Re: spoken like a true enemy of the state! - 08/03/2013 03:04:37 PM 764 Views
I was not trolling, but clarifying. - 11/03/2013 09:53:48 PM 786 Views

Reply to Message