No, my attitude on SS, beyond my ideological objections to the current form and my pragmatic objections to its administration, is simply that it is unsustainable as it is in conjunction how we are. That lack of stability relates to the payments at their current level exceeding what the average individual's contribution has actually produced, this is the nature of a Pyramid Scheme, I just don't believe it qualifies as fraud since fraud requires a person to know they are saying something false for the purpose of deceiving someone to their harm and your benefit, and I don't think most people or politicians who favor SS would qualify. I happen to think Islam is not a true religion, nor Buddhisms, nor Catholicism, nor Wicca, etc, that hardly makes them fraud, just not true in my eyes. However, unlike religion or a lack thereof in civilized society, I can't ignore that it is wrong if not maliciously or fraudulently so because nobody makes me attend their temple but they do make me pay SS.
That I may differ with the others about the motives of the opposition's supporters really has jack to do with my view as to the actual flaws in SS, as I've said, and their remarks seem to support, we are of like mind.
If it is solely a matter of restructuring benefits to less than or equal to contributions we do not have a Ponzi scheme; one can rob Peter to pay Paul so long as there are always more Peters than Pauls, and steady population growth ensures that for the foreseeable future. The core problem with Ponzis is not the size of return but that they 1) require ever more investors yet 2) promise returns (size does not matter) so quickly the investor pool is static. Ponzis run out of new investors, and quickly; social security insurance is all but assured there will always be several times as many people working as >65, disabled and/or the surviving dependent of a worker.
The others remarks are, in summary, that SS was always unsustainable on any basis, because, as all Ponzis, beneficiaries must eventually exceed contributors. You say you disagree with their statement yet are in like mind with them, which is a logical contradiction.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.