Some Inconvenient Facts About Social Security

[Toddsterpatriot]

Never said it would, dumbass!

If you held those positions and continued to add to them, you'd have done very well.
If you held them until today you would have done very well, despite Biden's incompetence.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

• Claim: Social Security is a ponzi scheme.
• Fact: A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment strategy that promises high returns with little or no risk. Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme, as it is a social insurance program that is funded by payroll taxes.
• Claim: Social Security is going to go broke.
• Fact: Social Security is not going to go broke. The program has a trust fund that is funded by payroll taxes. The trust fund is projected to be depleted in 2034, but this does not mean that Social Security will go broke. At that point, the program will be able to pay benefits using payroll taxes.
• Claim: Social Security is a waste of money.
• Fact: Social Security is not a waste of money. The program provides important benefits to millions of Americans, including retired workers, disabled workers, and survivors. Social Security also helps to reduce poverty and inequality.

The trust fund is projected to be depleted in 2034, but this does not mean that Social Security will go broke. At that point, the program will be able to pay PARTIAL benefits using payroll taxes.

 

[Lord Long Rod]

• Claim: Social Security is a ponzi scheme.
• Fact: A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment strategy that promises high returns with little or no risk. Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme, as it is a social insurance program that is funded by payroll taxes.
• Claim: Social Security is going to go broke.
• Fact: Social Security is not going to go broke. The program has a trust fund that is funded by payroll taxes. The trust fund is projected to be depleted in 2034, but this does not mean that Social Security will go broke. At that point, the program will be able to pay benefits using payroll taxes.
• Claim: Social Security is a waste of money.
• Fact: Social Security is not a waste of money. The program provides important benefits to millions of Americans, including retired workers, disabled workers, and survivors. Social Security also helps to reduce poverty and inequality.

There is not really a Social Security trust fund. It is funded out of the general fund.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

If you held those positions and continued to add to them, you'd have done very well.
If you held them until today you would have done very well, despite Biden's incompetence.

How many times do I have to tell you that I kept those funds in my 403B until 2022? Are you that stupid?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How many times do I have to tell you that I kept those funds in my 403B until 2022? Are you that stupid?

You kept funds in from before 2008 until 2022 and did poorly?

 

[Westender]

Virtually all of the aged denizens of this great nation express similar opinions on Social Security regardless of political affiliation, to wit: “I paid into Social Security. It’s MY money. I am entitled to get it back when I retire.”



I know you were “promised” this benefit by the federal government, and that you donated 6% of your gross earnings to this purportedly noble system in good faith. Therefore, you are willing to fight tooth and nail to protect this program. I get it. Your feelings are understandable. It is the fair thing to occur.



However, maybe it is time for older Americans to consider Social Security benefits in a very different light. Instead of viewing Social Security as a good faith pact between contributors (forced contributors) and big daddy government, who knows what’s best for you; perhaps try considering Social Security as an elaborate, government sanctioned Ponzi scheme you were drawn into and fucked by.



There is no real Social Security trust fund. You have been lied to in order to gain your trust. Your SS contributions go into the general federal fund. You pay into a fungible fund, the feds draw from said funds to, inter alia, buy weapons, build roads to nowhere, and to finance tranny education in Pakistan. Then Congress authorizes spending a certain amount of SS funding in its periodic appropriations bills. Thus, the federal government receives your “investment”, spends it on whatever, then will pay you a “return” on your investment as funds are available to do so. When funds are no longer available to pay you a return, then you are fucked and there is nothing you can do about it. This is the heart of all Ponzi schemes.



Moreover, the monthly payments you SS trough feeders are receiving today is not YOUR money. YOUR money was spent decades ago. Your benefits are from the money being forcibly taken from people today. Your benefits are being doled out somewhat loosely based on the amount you have “paid in” (I.e., had taken from you involuntarily) over the years. But that is the only nexus between you and the money the government is giving you.



Social Security theoretically should not “go broke”. Every person is forced to give up 6% of their gross incomes. Recipients become eligible for SS payments at 65 (62 if you agree to reduce the monthly payment to which you are “entitled”. Thus, you have revenue funneled into the system by working folks, then being paid out to old, dying folks. If there was a “trust fund” being administered solely for retirement payments, then they could tweak the system to keep it solvent (e.g., increase contribution requirements; raise age of eligibility; reduce benefits; invest corpus of trust in conservative assets - e.g., municipal bonds - that have low risk but will grow the fund; etc…). But this is not how it works. There is no trustee administrator with a fiduciary duty to payees like there is with a private trust. The effective “administrator” of this fake “fund” is 535 senators and representatives who have no fiduciary interest to manage your Social Security benefits in a manner to ensure YOUR best interests are accounted for. A true trust fund would mot be subject to political interests.



If a real trust fund goes broke, then there is a big problem in terms of law and ethics. Somebody is either going to prison or will be subject to civil liability. However, there is no such redress if the fake SS fund “goes broke”. The only redress is political.



As mentioned, there is actually no trust fund to “go broke”. Rather, it boils down to projected spending. The “contributions” to SS (I.e., the 6% involuntary deduction taken from your gross pay) are going down while the benefits payments are increasing, all based upon changing demographics. Moreover, the out of control federal spending is causing the value of the dollar to decrease. This exacerbates the spending shortfall.



So, the nonexistent “fund” is not running out of money. Rather, projections show that it will be impossible to sustain the Social Security hand-outs -which accounts for a HUGE portion of the federal budget - at current revenue levels. In short, you retired Americans who rely upon this scheme to make ends meet are fucked. Perhaps you should go back to school and learn to code?



Don’t feel bad. I understand your anger. This is not the first time big government has lied to its subjects. Most older Americans are essentially dependent upon their Social Security payments. They are economic slaves on the plantation. They were promised Utopian retirement years, free of all obligations so they could spend their golden years fishing, knitting, and catching the “early bird special” down at the Country Buffet. But in reality they are economic slavery. They are made to fight tooth and nail to keep this financial boondoggle in place. They need their meager SS payment, and the government wants this large source of revenue. This is why it is so taboo, and politically destructive, to talk about common sense solutions to this coming disaster.



Americans need to get over their aversion to admitting that the federal government duped them into the Social Security Ponzi game. You were TAXED involuntarily for SS; you did not “contribute”. It is not “your money”, it’s the federal government’s money and they will spend it according to appropriations bills. And YOU let it happen this way.



When you look at this rationally it is clear that we are going to have to make big changes to this program. It cannot be avoided. SS represents a huge part of our budget. We should not run from this challenge. It fact, it is morally indefensible to ignore this. Politicians have been content to kick the can down the road lest they are portrayed in campaign ads as pushing grandma off the cliff.



There’s ways to address this. You can offset SS payments by giving tax cuts and deductions to families who take care of elder family members, in whole or in part. This costs us nothing. Rather, it can be “paid for” (a very misleading political term in this context) by cutting spending elsewhere. Further, it will make the nursing and assisted living homes more competitive and, thereby, lower costs. Hell, cutting Medicaid grants to states will do this too.



Innovation and capitalism will solve this issue, not big daddy government. But attitudes must change. Social Security is a big old socialist government clusterfuck that is not sustainable. Like most big government socialist clusterfucks it was always doomed to fail. Don’t blame the boomers either. SS is the brainchild of leftist Judeo-Christian guilt-think and is not based upon sound economic principles.

I will not "need" my social security and will use it to make payments on a vacation home in the Highlands to go with my beach home in the panhandle of Florida. I will be 63 next month, working on my retirement plan as we speak. I started working at 10 years old delivering newspapers with my aunt while she went to college, raked and mowed yards, worked at the grocery store, carpenter, painter, builder, bartender and have worked for a major college for the last 15 years. Dont lay a guilt trip on me, I gave dearly and will retire with wealth and no remorse

 

[Captain Caveman]

Not sure why you told me all that. Are you happy with that system?

Yes and no, everything has it's pros and cons.

What would replace SS, only 47% of the world's population has access to at least one benefit? I think state pensions should remain, other SS ideas sub be scrapped/reigned in.

 

[Orangecat]

Yes and no, everything has it's pros and cons.

What would replace SS, only 47% of the world's population has access to at least one benefit? I think state pensions should remain, other SS ideas sub be scrapped/reigned in.

I think, in a country founded upon freedom and liberty, there shouldn’t be a mandatory retirement savings plan. Especially one that is run so similarly to a Ponzi scheme. Will some people fail to plan ahead? Yes. Such is the responsibility of liberty.

 

[Captain Caveman]

I think, in a country founded upon freedom and liberty, there shouldn’t be a mandatory retirement savings plan. Especially one that is run so similarly to a Ponzi scheme. Will some people fail to plan ahead? Yes. Such is the responsibility of liberty.

Well, you kinda summed up my, "Too much information", post. With being young and green, if I hadn't lost National Insurance off my wage, it's likely I would retire on a much lower pension income. So I didn't set out not to plan for the future, I just didn't have the brains for probably the first decade or so to know about planning for the future.

 

[Redfish]

NOT TRUE!

bullshit, it is 100% true.