Andrew Napolitano - Wealth, Taxes and Ponzi Schemes

[flyinbry]

MEGA BOSS.

[1czelaya]

When people argue that Social Security isn't a Ponzi Scheme, the normal rebuttal is that it's not and it's fallacious argument. However there never is a sound argument to prove that it isn't a Ponzi Scheme.

[ManInAHighCastle]

Boss. 

[homoguy563]

I like that bit of music at the start of the video.Where did you get it?

[freesk8]

The gang and the government are no different.

Protection racket.

[SuperSneakySteve]

Perry doesn't believe what he's saying, RON PAUL does.

[justicetrooper]

I really wish you could opt out of services by the government, and in-effect opt out of the various corresponding taxes.

[be4unvme]

@justicetrooper i wish the country divided into two. the right side would be a Republic and the left side would be a Democracy

[justicetrooper]

@be4unvme So one side would have a constitution and the other would be Athens?

[be4unvme]

@justicetrooper lets just say, one side would be Cuba, the other side would be Switzerland.

[justicetrooper]

@be4unvme Somehow I don't envision Cuba as a prime example of the failings of democracy. It seems for all intensive purposes just to be a dictatorship out-muscled by the drug cartels. What does cuba have that shows the flaws of democracy?

[be4unvme]

@be4unvme ok, so Venezuela.

[LogicalThinker667]

Rick perry's only small government for economic issues, he's Big government on social issues.

[disturbed119]

HOW DARE THEY TAKE MY MONEY TO HELP LESS FORTUNATE...wait a sec that makes me not a dushebag. LOL Judge is retarded we work for the government so they can work for us

[regelemihai]

I still don't get it. If there were no income tax, where would the Feds get their money from? Taxs have to be collected for the government to have a budget. Since any form of taxation is in one way or another "theft," what would that mean? That the government shouldn't get any money at all? I can't reconcile this with reality.

[chorizo1337]

@regelemihai the feds can sell buildings, weapons, and land, and they can start putting tariffs on imports

[MaurDL]

@regelemihai I think it's mostly the income tax that people have an objection towards. Other taxes should be enough to sustain a limited government.

[9971explorer]

I would opt out of SS in a hearbeat but statist control freak nannies will not let me.

[MagnusIan]

To think Social Security is not a scam is to think the world is flat.

[bluetunder40]

Nice job

[BlueSkies360]

thanks for posting

[ostralopithicus]

Social Security is WORSE than a ponzi scheme - no one uses a gun to make you join a ponzi scheme.

[timDOGcrane555]

Check out the U.S. SEC's definition of a ponzi scheme:

Social Security is a ponzi scheme.

[furyofbongos]

Love Napolitano! He's a stealth voluntarist. He won't come right out and admit it so he can keep his TV show, but he didn't deny it when someone at a Mises lecture came right out and asked him.

[zalida100]

@furyofbongos I think you're right. I think I remember the lecture you mentioned. - cheers

[natritious1]

at least ponzi schemes are voluntary

[scepticsteve]

@natritious1 Right on the mark. Ponzi schemes are fraudulent. But even if you expose the government's programs as frauds you still have to participate. It's a kafkaesque situation in which you are helpless even if you understand the absurdity of what is going on. I guess it's better compared to an extortion scheme now that most people see what's up.

[richardcadbury]

@natritious1 no they aren't

[MrChrisMcPhail2]

The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks. - Lord Acton

[dmg46664]

@MrChrisMcPhail2 One of Lord Acton's poorer quotes. It's that kind of ignorance and fear that ends up causing human poverty & anti-semitism. Farmers in India cant hedge the price of their crop bcause it is outlawed bcaus of irrational fear of banks&speculators. Those institutions are no better or worse than any other institution, and like any agent offer value for their customers, the savers, most of the time. When they screw up we should let them fail... & if we don't it's the people's fault.

[natritious1]

@dmg46664 totally, banks definitely have their place in a free society

[MrChrisMcPhail2]

@dmg46664 It is called "Fractional Reserve Banking." And it is a scam! Banks do not loan "money." Banks loan "credit." Money is tangible and credit is conceptual. Money is "real" and credit is "not real." That means that banks are running 2 sets of books because figures that are real and figures that are not real cannot reconcile together. Banking has always been a fraud. The money in the banks belongs to you and me - not the bank. So they cannot loan money! Instead they loan "credit." FRAUD!

[dmg46664]

@MrChrisMcPhail2 What utter nonsense! Fractional reserve banking is as old as the first gold smiths. It was a way of utilizing the IDLE gold deposits that most people never came to collect in order to leverage a higher return on that idle capital. PROVIDED that the bank acknowledges that it is doing this, then it is a fair agreement. You don't have to put your money in a bank if u don't want to, but expect a lower return. Of course this higher return comes with the risk of bank runs. NOT FRAUD!!

[MrChrisMcPhail2]

@dmg46664 That isn't true. Fractional Reserve is the law which governs banks and allows them to "loan" money that they do not have. Anytime anyone claims to loan money that they do not have they are committing fraud. You cannot loan money that you do not have. But banks are allowed to loan money they do not have. That is referred to as "fractional reserve banking." Any good resource material will reveal this.

[dmg46664]

@MrChrisMcPhail2 Incorrect! tinyurl(.)com/67rrv9g . If Im a bank and you lend me $100, and I know the average person only accesses 10% of his money, then I lend out $90 to Tod. But since after the loan is made, Tod is only likely to withdraw 10% of it, I loan another 90% out of Tods deposit. 90% of $90 = $81. Given many customers that works out to 1/reserve requirements. Reserve requirements r a Gov max mandate of the 10% rate which they shouldnt force! Only if banks hide this info is it bad

[MrChrisMcPhail2]

@dmg46664 That was correct until the repeal of The Glass–Seagall Act of 1933.

[dmg46664]

@MrChrisMcPhail2 You are incorrect again! Although the enactment in 1933 gave the fed the right to set interest rates in saving accounts, established the FDIC etc. The repeal only blurred the distinction between investment banks and deposit banks. It really doesn't have ANYTHING to do with reserve requirements, which is what effects the multiple in fractional reserve banking.

[Killedkennyagain]

@MrChrisMcPhail2 At least when Lord Acton wrote that the banks were issuing real money (i.e. items of value) such as gold and silver and not just valueless paper and not even in the case of loans (just entrants on the books).