re: Social Security - Help me understand better

quote:

---

I guess, or otherwise just leave them to their own devices but about 80% of Americans think SS is preferable to either choice...only the hateful and greedy gripe about it.

---

Bullshat. People with a brain gripe about SS because they know there is a better alternative.

The country would do well to teach EVERYONE about compound interest and how it works at the high school. Simple math. Drill it into their heads.

This goes back to the "give a man a fish and feed him for a day" _"teach him how to fish, feed him for life."

quote:

---

Yeah, people in this country can't be trusted to save because we've trained them not to. This is the exact same thing the libs do with school lunches; look at the growing numbers and assume those children will all starve to death without the lunch program.

---

WHo taught Americans not to save for retirement before social security?? They did not then either. Someone must have taught them, no? The funny thing about Social Security is that the first generation of Americans who were born prior to its existence and watched those around them age, become disabled and orphaned and how they suffered for their ill behavior to become old, disabled or orphaned were ADAMANT in their support for social security as has every generation of American's yet EXCEPT for a small % of baby boomers who thought flower power was a good idea in the 1970s and Supply Side economics was a good idea in the 1980s. Those idiots started the villification of a program which was and is a booming success in its core mission and is nothing more than a promise from the able bodied and adult to the feeble and the child with no means that they will be taken care of with some modest income and dignity. Those same idiots are now staunch supporters of THEIR social security but the raised a bunch of mal-adjusted kids who carry on their idiocy and hateful ways. It is a shame that so many people have been deluded into thinking that because they have a 401K they belong to the investor class...

quote:

---

"Using new investor funds to pay prior investors" is a key ingredient of a ponzi scheme. How it was "sold" is irrelevant.

---

No one who is not trying to villify social security has ever referred to anyone paying into the trust fund as an investor nor any recipient of benefits a prior investor because social security has never been sold, promoted, marketed or otherwise presented to anyone as a financial investment. People paying into the fund are workers and benefit recipients are just that, recipients.

Anyone claiming that social security is an investment knows nothing or is being dishonest. You can sell an investment or stop investing. You can do neither with social security. Social security benefits are backed by the United States Government and as such are about as sure as death and taxes. No investment can make that claim outside of bonds and treasury notes, which can be cashed in at any time or opted out of anytime...so there is that. Social security benefits are also adjusted for inflation....investments are not in any way shape form or fashion. Finally social security benefits are payable as long as you or your spouse lives and ends then, or when your child becomes and adult. You can will an investment to an heir...you can't social security because it ain't an investment.

Not being an investment prevents it fitting the definition of a ponzi scheme. But most people who claim otherwise know this and pretend to think differently or they are ignorant.

quote:

---

It does not operate as a ponzi scheme

---

quote:

---

A ponzi scheme is sold to potential investors

---

You are equating operating with sold. I don't care how it was marketed, I care how it's financed. No private insurance company could get away with how SS is financed.

quote:

---

Social security, on the other hand, has NEVER made any claims that anyone would be paid from their money being invested in anything. It has always been upfront in how it would be funded

---

Who is "Social security?" Maybe the trust is honest, but the politicians and interest groups that have control and influence over social security law and policy have done nothing to disabuse people of the notion that any policy that "cuts" benefits is taking away benefits that they "paid for." You are ignoring this to the point of dishonesty.

And let's side aside that point. Even then, the best you can say is "Social Security is honest about being a ponzi scheme."

quote:

---

WHo taught Americans not to save for retirement before social security?? They did not then either. Someone must have taught them, no? The funny thing about Social Security is that the first generation of Americans who were born prior to its existence and watched those around them age, become disabled and orphaned and how they suffered for their ill behavior to become old, disabled or orphaned were ADAMANT in their support for social security as has every generation of American's yet EXCEPT for a small % of baby boomers who thought flower power was a good idea in the 1970s and Supply Side economics was a good idea in the 1980s. Those idiots started the villification of a program which was and is a booming success in its core mission and is nothing more than a promise from the able bodied and adult to the feeble and the child with no means that they will be taken care of with some modest income and dignity. Those same idiots are now staunch supporters of THEIR social security but the raised a bunch of mal-adjusted kids who carry on their idiocy and hateful ways. It is a shame that so many people have been deluded into thinking that because they have a 401K they belong to the investor class...

---

You sound like a woman; nothing but emotional arguments.

quote:

---

Bullshat. People with a brain gripe about SS because they know there is a better alternative.

The country would do well to teach EVERYONE about compound interest and how it works at the high school. Simple math. Drill it into their heads.

This goes back to the "give a man a fish and feed him for a day" _"teach him how to fish, feed him for life."

---

People with a brain understand that there has NEVER been an alternative offered that would accomplish what Social Security has accomplished since its inception and implementation. There is no better alternative in the core mission of social security, period. Mankind had several thousand years to find a way for the elderly, the disabled and the orphaned to survive with a modest amount of dignity and failed to do so until about 80 or so years ago. It is not perfect but it is fay superior to anything that preceded it in the history of the species.

The country would do well to teach everyone about investing and the advantages and pitfalls. I would posit they do this but everyone is inundated with images of wealth and leisure that can be purchased on time without a care in the world and way too many people take that to heart while eschewing the virtues of saving and investment until it is too late or nearly so.

Investment, saving and compound interest have absolutely nothing to do with the core mission of social security, however. We would also be well served if this simple and relatively easy to understand concept was taught to everyone. Social security is not an investment. You can't sell it, you can't, for the most part opt out and the return is limited to a dollar amount per month until you die....you can not will it to a successor other than your spouse should you choose a lower benefit amount to begin with. There is NOTHING about social security which would suggest it is an investment and has anything to do with the miracles of compounding interest. That idea is about 180 degrees out of phase with reality.

It is far better to teach a man to fish than give him a fish IF that man is physically able to catch a fish himself. If he is not teaching him to fish is a nice gesture but he will starve if fish is all that is available because he ain't physically able to catch a fish. This parable, while absolutely accurate, is as far off the mark in regards to social security as it could be. Most social security recipients know how to catch a fish...they have been doing it succesfully since they were 18 or so and now that they are 65 are expert anglers. No one is giving them NOTHING. They are, however, many times no longer physically able to catch a fish or enough fish to sustain themselves....so the younger anglers among us reach in our creel and give them some so they can exist in a moderate level of dignity after having contributed so much to the world in their 65 or more years. Anyone who would begrudge that angler a portion of their catch is just a hard hearted old soul.

There are also some potential anglers who do never possessed the physical ability to catch a fish or through some tragedy or accident lost the ability to catch a fish. Again, the able bodied anglers among us gladly reach in our amply creel and hand that would be angler a fish or two so they may survive with some dignity. Again, only a cold a-hole would begrudge that person a fish now and then.

Finally there are young, would be anglers, too young yet to catch their own fish but in the process of learning how to and gaining the physical ability to do so whose teachers were taken from them by cold fate. Again, the able bodied angler reaches in his creel and hands a fish or two over to these orphans. Only a troglodyte would begrudge an orphan a fish.

Social Security has been, is and will continue to be a smashing success in its core mission if enough of us refuse to lower ourselves to our base nature and get so cold and hard hearted that we would indeed begrudge an old person, a person with limited abilities or an orphan some modest income, out of ours, that allows them to survive with some modest dignity instead of being on the dole or worse, resorting to crime, to survive. If we refuse to allow bankers to con us into thinking this, our money and our promise to one another, is an investment meant to enrich ourselves with no regard to the well being of others, social security will continue to do what it was always intended to do....provide a modest income to those unable to earn said income while doing so with some dignity.

quote:

---

SS has a horrible return on investment, but government loves to borrow money with a zero or negative interest rate.

---

While social security is not now, never has been and never will be an investment lets pretend for a moment it is.....the ROI is better than most investments because there is almost NO risk involved. If you do not die before you reach FRA you will receive SOME return on your money...everyone who does not die before FRA and has paid into the system will also receive some return. This return is GUARANTEED and backed by the US Government....there is NO other investment that will return SOMETHING that is close to as risk free as Social Security.

Additionally, should you become diasbled you will see a return on your investment. That is not the case of any other investment if it no longer has any value which can and does happen. Your spouse will also see a return if you took a lower benefit or they have no other income. Again, if any other "investment" has lost value to zero they will see nothing. Finally if your child becomes an oprhan they will see some return until they become an adult. Try that with an investment which has lost all value. Risk is a major consideration when comparing ROIs and there is almost zero risk in social security compared to almost any other investment.....therefore social security, were it an investment (it is not) would have better ROI than any other....

quote:

---

People with a brain understand that there has NEVER been an alternative offered that would accomplish what Social Security has accomplished since its inception and implementation. There is no better alternative in the core mission of social security, period. Mankind had several thousand years to find a way for the elderly, the disabled and the orphaned to survive with a modest amount of dignity and failed to do so until about 80 or so years ago. It is not perfect but it is fay superior to anything that preceded it in the history of the species.

The country would do well to teach everyone about investing and the advantages and pitfalls. I would posit they do this but everyone is inundated with images of wealth and leisure that can be purchased on time without a care in the world and way too many people take that to heart while eschewing the virtues of saving and investment until it is too late or nearly so.

Investment, saving and compound interest have absolutely nothing to do with the core mission of social security, however. We would also be well served if this simple and relatively easy to understand concept was taught to everyone. Social security is not an investment. You can't sell it, you can't, for the most part opt out and the return is limited to a dollar amount per month until you die....you can not will it to a successor other than your spouse should you choose a lower benefit amount to begin with. There is NOTHING about social security which would suggest it is an investment and has anything to do with the miracles of compounding interest. That idea is about 180 degrees out of phase with reality.

It is far better to teach a man to fish than give him a fish IF that man is physically able to catch a fish himself. If he is not teaching him to fish is a nice gesture but he will starve if fish is all that is available because he ain't physically able to catch a fish. This parable, while absolutely accurate, is as far off the mark in regards to social security as it could be. Most social security recipients know how to catch a fish...they have been doing it succesfully since they were 18 or so and now that they are 65 are expert anglers. No one is giving them NOTHING. They are, however, many times no longer physically able to catch a fish or enough fish to sustain themselves....so the younger anglers among us reach in our creel and give them some so they can exist in a moderate level of dignity after having contributed so much to the world in their 65 or more years. Anyone who would begrudge that angler a portion of their catch is just a hard hearted old soul.

There are also some potential anglers who do never possessed the physical ability to catch a fish or through some tragedy or accident lost the ability to catch a fish. Again, the able bodied anglers among us gladly reach in our amply creel and hand that would be angler a fish or two so they may survive with some dignity. Again, only a cold a-hole would begrudge that person a fish now and then.

Finally there are young, would be anglers, too young yet to catch their own fish but in the process of learning how to and gaining the physical ability to do so whose teachers were taken from them by cold fate. Again, the able bodied angler reaches in his creel and hands a fish or two over to these orphans. Only a troglodyte would begrudge an orphan a fish.

Social Security has been, is and will continue to be a smashing success in its core mission if enough of us refuse to lower ourselves to our base nature and get so cold and hard hearted that we would indeed begrudge an old person, a person with limited abilities or an orphan some modest income, out of ours, that allows them to survive with some modest dignity instead of being on the dole or worse, resorting to crime, to survive. If we refuse to allow bankers to con us into thinking this, our money and our promise to one another, is an investment meant to enrich ourselves with no regard to the well being of others, social security will continue to do what it was always intended to do....provide a modest income to those unable to earn said income while doing so with some dignit

---

Please learn to be pithy with your comments or soon people will be ignoring you.

quote:

---

While social security is not now, never has been and never will be an investment lets pretend for a moment it is.....the ROI is better than most investments because there is almost NO risk involved

---

What kind of interest am I getting?

quote:

---

quote:
you can not will it to a successor other than your spouse should you choose a lower benefit amount to begin with.
and even then, if your spouse also has SS, you have to pick the higher of the two. Spouse does not get both.

---

Good point and one more example of how social security is as much a linebacker as it is an investment. Were it an investment a spouse would reap the entirety of their ROI. That is not the case with social security, benefits are limited by law. If you take a lower benefit initially though your spouse will continue to receive benefits after you die even if they never paid a penny in.