Proof SS is Ponzi Scheme from the USA balance sheet!

[healthmyths]

Down load this file from the Government Accounting Office (GAO)
www.gao.gov/financial/fy2010/10stmt.pdf

Financial Statements of the United States Government
for the Years Ended September 30, 2010, and 2009

Go to
Page 14.. Social Insurance Summary..
(copied exactly as stated)

Expenditures for Scheduled future benefits :
$63.287 TRILLION!

Present value of future expenditures in excess of future revenue:
$31 Trillion!

In other words $31 trillion WILL BE OWED then what will be available!

Does the above fit the definition of Ponzi scheme?
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from any actual profit earned by the individual or organization running the operation.

The system is destined to collapse because the earnings,
if any, are less than the payments to investors.
Ponzi scheme - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

change "investors" to beneficiaries and the definition fits!

So I ask ANY logical sane, rational person to agree that if the GAO states
there will be $31 trillion shortfall, i.e. less money then available to pay out,
i.e. PONZI SCHEME..
IT IS A PONZI SCHEME AND THEREFORE ILLEGAL!

 

[ScienceRocks]

Yeah, one that most of this country relies on to get through life(retirement years). Most people work there ass off paying into such for 20, 30, 40 years...You think the vast majority of this country is going to do that than vote to take it apart? You must be from another planet. Who cares if it is a ponzi sheme--- It's the kind that most people want and strongly support in this country. Only the far right supports people saving up their own money as that would take to much brain power for most of the idiot to understand. You have to understand the majority.

 

[Old Rocks]

Make the amount the individual pays in applicable to all income. SS is secure for the foreseeable future.

 

[Full-Auto]

Down load this file from the Government Accounting Office (GAO)
www.gao.gov/financial/fy2010/10stmt.pdf

Financial Statements of the United States Government
for the Years Ended September 30, 2010, and 2009

Go to
Page 14.. Social Insurance Summary..
(copied exactly as stated)

Expenditures for Scheduled future benefits :
$63.287 TRILLION!

Present value of future expenditures in excess of future revenue:
$31 Trillion!

In other words $31 trillion WILL BE OWED then what will be available!

Does the above fit the definition of Ponzi scheme?
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from any actual profit earned by the individual or organization running the operation.

The system is destined to collapse because the earnings,
if any, are less than the payments to investors.
Ponzi scheme - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

change "investors" to beneficiaries and the definition fits!

So I ask ANY logical sane, rational person to agree that if the GAO states
there will be $31 trillion shortfall, i.e. less money then available to pay out,
i.e. PONZI SCHEME..
IT IS A PONZI SCHEME AND THEREFORE ILLEGAL!

The only problem I see with the breakdown that I disagree with... SS is already broke. Democrats insisted they spend the money and now its gone.

 

[healthmyths]

Yeah, one that most of this country relies on to get through life(retirement years). Most people work there ass off paying into such for 20, 30, 40 years...You think the vast majority of this country is going to do that than vote to take it apart? You must be from another planet. Who cares if it is a ponzi sheme--- It's the kind that most people want and strongly support in this country. Only the far right supports people saving up their own money as that would take to much brain power for most of the idiot to understand. You have to understand the majority.

So I take it that you aren't in favor of anyone under 55 being allowed to tell social security to take their forced payments each paycheck and to direct deposit into a SAVINGS account that the worker can't touch until retirement and left to the power of "compound interest" could grow to over $400,000 just at simple interest of 3%?

You're saying with the Internet, and millions of workers now using 401Ks, that these same "idiots" couldn't at the minimum have accumulated that money so at retirement.. THE GOVT. doesn't have to pay?

Your indictment of the majority of workers is the issue.. you just believe as the intellectual elites that 60% or more (majority) of Americans are stupid!

I KNOW for a FACT YOU ARE WRONG!

I KNOW for a fact that ONE of the culprits in fostering this elitism attitude is the Mainstream Media! Note how often people like Obama clearly state their superiority to the rest of us!
The MSM, the Democrats/ Obama supporters ALL clearly believe they are smarter then MOST people!

 

[JakeStarkey]

The OP fails by definition.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Yeah, one that most of this country relies on to get through life(retirement years). Most people work there ass off paying into such for 20, 30, 40 years...You think the vast majority of this country is going to do that than vote to take it apart? You must be from another planet. Who cares if it is a ponzi sheme--- It's the kind that most people want and strongly support in this country. Only the far right supports people saving up their own money as that would take to much brain power for most of the idiot to understand. You have to understand the majority.

All I want is the option to opt out of SS and take care of my own retirement. The rest of the country can continue to believe in a failing system if they want to, but leave me out of it.

 

[healthmyths]

Make the amount the individual pays in applicable to all income. SS is secure for the foreseeable future.

Evidently YOU'VE NEVER been an employer!
If so you would KNOW how totally STUPID that comment is!
Employee pays 4.2% today.. EMPLOYER STILL pays 6.2%!
Did you know that?
Did YOU KNOW YOUR employer pays 6.2% of your salary up to the cap of $106,800 for YOUR benefit in social security?
NO I don't think you did.BECAUSE IDIOT ...
IF as you suggested the cap is lifted ..
ALL employers would be paying 6.2% ON ALL SALARIES paid.
IDIOT!!!
What kind of skyrocketing employee costs would that create?
As an employer I would immediately stop:
1) All health insurance plan payments!
2) All 401k contributions.

And guess what?? YOU the employees" costs skyrocket!

The Social Security tax is also capped at a maximum wage base of $106,800 for the year 2011.

BUT here are the TAX REVENUE FACTS!!!
down load this file:www.gao.gov/financial/fy2010/10stmt.pdf

United States Government
Statements of Social Insurance Page 12
Present Value of Long-Range Actuarial Projections
In 2010 there was $672 billion paid in by employers and employees on then an estimated $10.838 Trillion in wages/salaries ($672 billion/6.2%)

Doing what YOU suggested:
Taxing ALL $10.838 trillion at 6.2% and the employer paying 6.2% would generate an additional $455 billion!

When you divide the SS shortfall of $31 trillion (Income less outgo)
that means 68 years of taxes at $455 billion per year to make up the
differences!

AND Then you haven't calculated the AFFECT on the GDP!
Take out $455 billion a year from the economy!
FACT: You evidently never heard of "economic multipliers".
According to this web site:
http:www2.econ.iastate.edu/research/webpapers/paper_13143.pdf

For every one million dollars spent in the economy:
• $1.188 million in total economic activity takes place
• Each million represents 7.7 workers and assuming payroll taxes, FICA,
FUTA, Medicare, SS of 25%
• Each million spent provides $205,829 in labor incomes

BUT YOU WANT $455 billion REMOVED and SPENT by the Govt instead???

 

[NYcarbineer]

Down load this file from the Government Accounting Office (GAO)
www.gao.gov/financial/fy2010/10stmt.pdf

Financial Statements of the United States Government
for the Years Ended September 30, 2010, and 2009

Go to
Page 14.. Social Insurance Summary..
(copied exactly as stated)

Expenditures for Scheduled future benefits :
$63.287 TRILLION!

Present value of future expenditures in excess of future revenue:
$31 Trillion!

In other words $31 trillion WILL BE OWED then what will be available!

Does the above fit the definition of Ponzi scheme?
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from any actual profit earned by the individual or organization running the operation.

The system is destined to collapse because the earnings,
if any, are less than the payments to investors.
Ponzi scheme - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

change "investors" to beneficiaries and the definition fits!

So I ask ANY logical sane, rational person to agree that if the GAO states
there will be $31 trillion shortfall, i.e. less money then available to pay out,
i.e. PONZI SCHEME..
IT IS A PONZI SCHEME AND THEREFORE ILLEGAL!

The only problem I see with the breakdown that I disagree with... SS is already broke. Democrats insisted they spend the money and now its gone.

How can SS be broke if everyone is getting their SS checks every month?

 

[NYcarbineer]

[
So I take it that you aren't in favor of anyone under 55 being allowed to tell social security to take their forced payments each paycheck and to direct deposit into a SAVINGS account that the worker can't touch until retirement and left to the power of "compound interest" could grow to over $400,000 just at simple interest of 3%?

!

What 'savings' account pays 3% interest currently?

 

[healthmyths]

[
So I take it that you aren't in favor of anyone under 55 being allowed to tell social security to take their forced payments each paycheck and to direct deposit into a SAVINGS account that the worker can't touch until retirement and left to the power of "compound interest" could grow to over $400,000 just at simple interest of 3%?

!

What 'savings' account pays 3% interest currently?

1987 6%
1989 9%
1990 5%
1993 3%
1996 2%
1999 5%
2002 1%
2005 4%
average for the above 8 year snapshot: 4.3%
Savings: Historical chart of savings rates

BUT you also if you weren't such an idiot KNOW that anyone who at age
23 starting out in the workforce with 40 productive work years would NOT
direct their forced contributions at savings rate of 3%!
ONLY idiots like you would do that!
NO at age 23 in 1971 a worker would be in high appreciation assets.
Then at say age 40 leave a portion in high appreciation.
And closer to retirement move more into interest generating assets.

THUS a worker who started out at $10,600 a year making progress over 40 years and paying into his self directed account over $157,000 from his and employer's contributions would have ACCUMULATED at an average growth rate over 40 years Using the Dow Jones Industrial Average used to measure value the thousands of stocks average of over 40 years or 5.96% from December 29, 1967 to August 2, 2010
Measuring Worth - Measures of worth, inflation rates, saving calculator, relative value, worth of a dollar, worth of a pound, purchasing power, gold prices, GDP, history of wages, average wage

This worker would have $732,428 at retirement!

Why are people LIKE YOU so against the Ordinary worker like the above accumulating at a forced savings rate over time $700,000?

What gives YOU the right to say the Ordinary worker is NOT smart enough to manage their own forced savings account?

 

[Dragon]

Ponzi scheme - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from any actual 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."

In order for Social Security to be a "Ponzi scheme" it would have to be:

1) Fraudulent
2) An investment opportunity
3) Offering an unrealistically high rate of return

As none of these things are true, it is not a "Ponzi scheme." Nor did the OP present any evidence that it is one.

 

[JakeStarkey]

What 'savings' account pays 3% interest currently
1987 6%
1989 9%
1990 5%
1993 3%
1996 2%
1999 5%
2002 1%
2005 4%
average for the above 8 year snapshot: 4.3%

And for the last eight years less than 1.2% annually?

OP is fail.

 

[healthmyths]

What 'savings' account pays 3% interest currently
1987 6%
1989 9%
1990 5%
1993 3%
1996 2%
1999 5%
2002 1%
2005 4%
average for the above 8 year snapshot: 4.3%

And for the last eight years less than 1.2% annually?

OP is fail.

PROOF???

Here is the actual savings account interest rates for last 8 years!
$1,000 starting in 2003 left for 8 years to 2010 would yield 2.3%
Measuring Worth - Historical US Savings Calculator

 

[Dragon]

Here we see Healthmyths' MO once again: an inflammatory assertion followed by a blizzard of data that, even if true, DO NOT LOGICALLY PROVE THE ASSERTION.

The data are the bait. To refute the data themselves is to fall into the trap. The reality is that the data are irrelevant to the assertion. To invalidate the argument, all that is necessary is to point this out, as I did in post no. 12.

None of the numbers presented in the OP contribute IN ANY WAY to demonstrating that Social Security is a "Ponzi scheme." Therefore, there is no need to argue against those numbers. All that is necessary is to show that SS is neither fraudulent nor an investment operation nor something that offers unrealistically high returns, all of which are NECESSARY parts of a Ponzi scheme.

As Social Security has NONE of these attributes, it is NOT a Ponzi scheme. Q.E.D.

 

[kyzr]

SS is solvent thru 2037, then we get 70% of promised benefits if nothing is done. If the DC whores tweak it a small amount SS is fine, SS isn't a ponzi scheme, it is a retirement system that needs better cost controls.

Medicare and Medicaid are bankrupt. We need to strictly enforce limits on benefits to those who didn't pay into the system. My health insurance has a "Maximum lifetime benefit". Medicare needs to implement a max-life-benefit to protect it for those who actually paid into the system.

50% of the medical system is spent on 5% of the population, and 25% is spent on the dying. We need to manage resources better.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[
So I take it that you aren't in favor of anyone under 55 being allowed to tell social security to take their forced payments each paycheck and to direct deposit into a SAVINGS account that the worker can't touch until retirement and left to the power of "compound interest" could grow to over $400,000 just at simple interest of 3%?

!

What 'savings' account pays 3% interest currently?

1987 6%
1989 9%
1990 5%
1993 3%
1996 2%
1999 5%
2002 1%
2005 4%
average for the above 8 year snapshot: 4.3%
Savings: Historical chart of savings rates

BUT you also if you weren't such an idiot KNOW that anyone who at age
23 starting out in the workforce with 40 productive work years would NOT
direct their forced contributions at savings rate of 3%!
ONLY idiots like you would do that!
NO at age 23 in 1971 a worker would be in high appreciation assets.
Then at say age 40 leave a portion in high appreciation.
And closer to retirement move more into interest generating assets.

THUS a worker who started out at $10,600 a year making progress over 40 years and paying into his self directed account over $157,000 from his and employer's contributions would have ACCUMULATED at an average growth rate over 40 years Using the Dow Jones Industrial Average used to measure value the thousands of stocks average of over 40 years or 5.96% from December 29, 1967 to August 2, 2010
Measuring Worth - Measures of worth, inflation rates, saving calculator, relative value, worth of a dollar, worth of a pound, purchasing power, gold prices, GDP, history of wages, average wage

This worker would have $732,428 at retirement!

Why are people LIKE YOU so against the Ordinary worker like the above accumulating at a forced savings rate over time $700,000?

What gives YOU the right to say the Ordinary worker is NOT smart enough to manage their own forced savings account?

The law says I'm right. The American people could end SS any time they wanted to. With their votes.

I guess they're too stupid to do that, by your logic.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yeah, one that most of this country relies on to get through life(retirement years). Most people work there ass off paying into such for 20, 30, 40 years...You think the vast majority of this country is going to do that than vote to take it apart? You must be from another planet. Who cares if it is a ponzi sheme--- It's the kind that most people want and strongly support in this country. Only the far right supports people saving up their own money as that would take to much brain power for most of the idiot to understand. You have to understand the majority.

All I want is the option to opt out of SS and take care of my own retirement. The rest of the country can continue to believe in a failing system if they want to, but leave me out of it.

I want an option to opt out of my share of 50% of the defense budget I pay for that I don't believe we need.

 

[Toro]

Down load this file from the Government Accounting Office (GAO)
www.gao.gov/financial/fy2010/10stmt.pdf

Financial Statements of the United States Government
for the Years Ended September 30, 2010, and 2009

Go to
Page 14.. Social Insurance Summary..
(copied exactly as stated)

Expenditures for Scheduled future benefits :
$63.287 TRILLION!

Present value of future expenditures in excess of future revenue:
$31 Trillion!

In other words $31 trillion WILL BE OWED then what will be available!

Does the above fit the definition of Ponzi scheme?
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from any actual profit earned by the individual or organization running the operation.

The system is destined to collapse because the earnings,
if any, are less than the payments to investors.
Ponzi scheme - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

change "investors" to beneficiaries and the definition fits!

So I ask ANY logical sane, rational person to agree that if the GAO states
there will be $31 trillion shortfall, i.e. less money then available to pay out,
i.e. PONZI SCHEME..
IT IS A PONZI SCHEME AND THEREFORE ILLEGAL!

Go away.

 

[healthmyths]

SS is solvent thru 2037, then we get 70% of promised benefits if nothing is done. If the DC whores tweak it a small amount SS is fine, SS isn't a ponzi scheme, it is a retirement system that needs better cost controls.

Medicare and Medicaid are bankrupt. We need to strictly enforce limits on benefits to those who didn't pay into the system. My health insurance has a "Maximum lifetime benefit". Medicare needs to implement a max-life-benefit to protect it for those who actually paid into the system.

50% of the medical system is spent on 5% of the population, and 25% is spent on the dying. We need to manage resources better.

I agree with you..tweaking SS can be done very simply!
A) First unlike the Demo scaremongers saying oh GOP want to destroy
SS/Medicare.. Agree on this:
No one on Medicare/SS today will have ANY changes!
B) Give people a choice. If under age 55 you can choose:
1) To stay exactly as SS is today.. you have the choice.
2) You can choose to have your forced deductions set aside in
accumulation plans of YOUR choosing..
a) Best for young workers - assets that will appreciate ..
b) Then when nearing retirement.. switching to less risk.
But either way the worker HAS the choice unlike today!

With those choices Americans can accumulate easily over their working lifetime $300,000 or more.. and it is THEIRS at retirement!
AND THEIR responsibility to use that and if they die.. it is their heirs!

Just consider the tremendous growth opportunities if this capital were
available!
In addition there is a concept called Venture Capital Insurance Corp modeled after the FDIC that will insure up to $10,000 investors who keep their equity and once it is sold the VCIC guarantee stops.. but in the meantime any small investor will have up to $10,000 principal guaranteed by VCIC!
VCIC would be a foundation block for young SS choosers!
Think if Apple computer had VCIC insurance and young workers had the guarantee of VCIC...today these workers would be millionaires!

So are you against that plan to "tweak" SS?