A question for Stef if you please. You mention that social security is for retirement, but what about people who are too sick to work, or people that genuinely cant find a job, or child benefit for hard-working but minimum-wage families? What positive solutions could we come up with for those guys that would be constant, and not uncertain, like perhaps charity.
SS is not constant, it relies on a consistent workforce and steady population. It's been estimated that when the baby-boomers retire, there will be two workers per SS payout, as opposed to roughly sixteen workers per retiree.
Real U.S. potential constraints: 1) international use of other currencies (less demand for dollars worldwide); 2) not enough REAL, tangible goods available to buy using dollars; 3) inflation (in the loooooong run), caused by international dollar accumulators dumping their dollars into the US. As long as people worldwide accept dollars in exchange for real goods, there is no operational constraint for the U.S. Again, any dollar-denominated debt poses no problem for the dollar monopolist.
There is not such a thing as running out of the money you can create. The U.S. won't ever face any FINANCIAL/OPERATIONAL constraints when honoring debt that is denominated in U.S. dollars. Political constraints - such as "debt ceilings" - are NOT operational/financial constraints. Political constraints are/can be very real, but to say that the U.S. will ever run out of dollars is incorrect. It can, however, run out of political will.
You call a US Govt Bond nothing more than an IOU - well for your info Dude ALL Bonds are IOUs that are backed by some promise to pay, even Corporate Bonds. The more I listen to your video ( I have listened several times to make sure I didnt miss any of your BULLSHIT) the more I understand how Freakin Ignorant you are on this Matter and many your followers must be also.
I first started realizing this is when the baby boomers started retiring, I'm thinking, why have a bunch of people pay into this when they're going to retire and take out of the same pool, baby boomers paid in too much as a whole, now they can't retire, when the baby boomers were paying people who were retiring then were getting more than what they paid in, if the population gets bigger or smaller, one group gets screwed, makes no sense at all.
I tend to strongly disagree that all social security is an awful thing. I think the Nordic Welfare Model works very well in the Nordic countries where there is a general spirit in society that everybody deserves social security. And national debt is relatively low in these countries so their governments aren't really putting the unborn in debt.
That said I do believe it's a patchwork approach. But it's still better than not having any.
Another great video, good job! Pensions aside, a large portion of SS (at least in the UK) goes towards benefits for those that cannot/willnot work. So the reward for working hard is to have half your income taken through force and a significant portion of this money is given to those that will not work! If that ain't killing entrepreneurial spirit then I guess it'll do until the state can find something more effective (like mass psychiatric labelling and drugging).
see heres the thing. had we not have been robbed blind by criminals we would be able to act responsibly & take care of our poor with welfare & healthcare & housing. consider this. consider it. entertain it.... we should be living like kings. a decent welfare system therefore would be a negligible dent in our income & worth having to feed the poor. dont blame those who are struggling blame the tyrants who stole the money!!!
@SuperBillego I would suggest before you criticize the MOST Successful Program in the USA for the Benefits of ALL. Social Security is NOT I REPEAT is NOT in The Red the speaker absolutely does not understand the Program at all. In Fact since the 1980's we Baby Boomers have paid extra money into the system to insure that we would not have a deficit in the program when we hit the pay out phase and that worked extremely well because right now we have a $ 2.7 TRILLION SURPLUS.
@ComicPenius BULL SHIT BUDDY Its us Liberals that you have to thank for every thing in our society that is worth a shit and benefits the common working person. You dont know squat !!
@NoNameC68 People see it as a choice between two evils; the 'necessary' evil of government, or the 'total' evil of life being "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short". They have been raised in a statist culture which has brainwashed them from birth into believing that freedom is the enemy of prosperity. The moral argument to them is simply an exercise in logical extremism with (perceived by them) terrifying consequences should it ever gain sway.
Misses the mark. The compulsory tax shift in america has been from the rich to the poor. This is not the young paying for the old, it is the poor paying for the rich. And the current "financial crisis" is the poor paying for unimaginable losses accumuated by the rich as they speculated in the great casino of derivitives and CDOs. In wild west capitalism unregulated 'investment' banking makes huge profits for Banks; and they keep it all. When the investments fail then the poor bail them out.
@CobinRain There are many problems, and you are correct that government bailouts are a huge part of it. But every video cannot be about all problems.
To your point, I would argue that the fiat money system, inflation as policy, is a more direct subsidy to the rich by the poor than bailouts. Rather than people's money gaining 3-6% in value every year and banks paying market rates for loanable funds, people's money looses 3-6% in value per year and banks pay effectively negative interest rates.
@Panpiper How right you are about inflation as policy! I am heartily sick of listening to Americans going on about the "American Dream" . There is a fabulous video by Elizabeth Warren floating around on YouTube--a lecture she gave at UC Berkeley on the decline of the middle class. This high priestess of statistics lays it all out in black and white: Americans are worse off in almost every way that their parents in 1971. This huge class is being ruined. TO me this rings alarm bells.
Stefan (or anyone else who knows): Is the Canada Pension Plan equally as bad as Social Security? One would presume it is in concept, but maybe the details are different.
@tml4873 So i will put you down as one of the retards that don't know a ponzi scheme when they see it . Do you mix cement or make fries for a living ?
@hanksnow82 He's trying to be ironic by arguing that social security is far worse than a ponzi scheme. That's why people keep telling you to watch the whole video.
Socialist Security is a theft by force, wasteful, redistribution scheme. The government took money by force, blew it like Charlie Sheen on a cocaine binge, then stole from future generations through borrowing, to pay the walking dead now.
DAMASCUS SYRIA–OLDEST CITY,NEVER BEEN DESTROYED(ISAIAH 17:1)ISRAEL DIVIDED(JOEL 4:1-4)JESUS SAID,HIS 2ND COMING,IF U SEE DMASCUS DSTROYED & SRAEL DVIDED.IF U THINK QUAKES R COMMON THN BELIEVE THESE 2 PROPHECIES,THESE R IN THE NEWS NOW.JOHN 12:25-26 ANYONE WHO LOVES THEIR LIFE WILL LOSE IT,WHLE ANYONE WHO HATES THEIR LIFE N THIS WORLD WILL KEEP IT FOR ETRNAL LIFE.26 WHOEVER SERVS ME MUST FOLLOW ME& WHRE I AM,MY SERVANT ALSO WILL BE.MY FATHER WILL HONOR THE ONE WHO SERVES ME.HELL IS REAL.REPENT!
Social security is the issue that basically stopped the people at work from debating politics with me.
I was told that everyone back then wanted a SS program, ya know "the people" got together and started this program. If everyone wanted it why the hell does anyone need forced into it?
The other argument was people are just too stupid to save, comically this came from a guy previously explaining a story he read about how kids now are "saving too much" even with today's low interest rates.
@THEGREGDREW imagine fixing potholes on the streets & fixing the pavements & all the road hazards were not paid by taxes?? who would pay for them, would they ever get fixed??
My father lives on a pretty active road out in the country and man does that road hardly ever get improvements from MOdot. I drove out there two weeks ago and he was filling in potholes with his neighbor themselves, even though they pay for that road with taxes. A few years back that neighbor was mowing the ditches as they were getting very dangerous. I say, why can't they or someone else own that road - they'd be even more likely to fix it if they were making money off it.
@THEGREGDREW imagine fixing potholes on the streets & fixing the pavements & all the road hazards were not paid by taxes?? who would pay for them, would they ever get fixed??
@Whatada thanks for the respond. But lets analyse what you are saying: now its all done by government contractors and employees negotiating low rates and because of taxes gov has money allocated for these costs. In your scenario there is no collective body to decide to be able to negotiate. no one has decision making rights. So if left to voluntary participation the majority will put the decision off causing tension, no business gets done & public has to suffer. Am I mistaking on this??
@Whatada Would they? Lets analyze what u r saying, How many people would claim and agree on really using the roads?? some say I only used it last year?? what is definition of Use? who sets that guideline?? what would you do if the majority didnt participate like you expected?? all the meanwhile you have a deteriorating roads. Cmon my friend lets be real here, at that point some one would create some kinda committee, legislation or something that would force action just like the Gov now
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION You're missing the point here: Regardless of how road services might be provided in the marketplace, it is nonetheless immoral to FORCE people to pay for road services, even if they plan on using them.
@Whatada you cant disregard the way your alternative will turn out. At the end of the day if i give you the keys to take the country your direction you would have to be able to envision & imagine how and where Ur alternative would pan out and will take us. "Regardless" dont cut it my friend. Ur way wil make all roads private by the private entity managing it & guess what if you dont pay you cant use so segregation & all kinds of problems could arise. How will they even collect w/o police force??
@Whatada you cant disregard the way your alternative will turn out. At the end of the day if i give you the keys to take the country your direction you would have to be able to envision & imagine how and where Ur alternative would pan out and will take us. "Regardless" dont cut it my friend. Ur way wil make all roads private by the private entity managing it & guess what if you dont pay you cant use so segregation & all kinds of problems could arise. How will they even collect w/o police force??
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION The point is that in a free society, roads would be built by private enterprise who would then 'own' those roads, who would then charge a toll for the use of them. They might also be built by land developers wanting to increase the value of their land. It could be a coop of businesses that build a free road to facilitate access to their businesses. Etc., etc.. In all those cases, maintaining them well is a 'profitable' thing to do.
@Panpiper thank U for the response. What U are advocating is privatization. lets analyze that; who would be able to participate in winning the bid for these contracts? Old money & Rich. So your ideology seems to favor the rich winning contracts over the current system that is owned by the government leaving any surplus not as a profit to the rich but in the system for more svcs. Difference is your way makes use of roads & svcs a private privilege DENYING many its use & it would cost even more
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION You do not make money by 'denying' service to people. You make the most money by serving as many people as possible. There would be no 'bidding' for a 'contract' from government in a free society. Roads would simply be built as a need developed for roads. Yes, rich people would gain from this, but the poor would gain even more as vastly greater opportunities would exist for them to actually go out and engage in their own entrepreneurial activities.
@Panpiper one user pointed out that peter has stated that ss is worse than ponzi scheme, so on that point i would just like to say you're a genius. either way, he was forced to use the lighter and more commonly known term 'ponzi scheme' given american's lack of financial literacy, but it's not the fault of people who can't even accept the lighter term 'ponzi scheme' without going emotional overboard, no, instead it's peter's fault for not trying to sound crazy in one breath. nice logic.
@Panpiper I am trying to make sense of what you libs are advocating. so you oppose taxes of all kinds and think SS is a ponzi and gov needs to take a hike?? how and who then is going to pay and carry out the missions of attending to the public amenities and needs??
@Panpiper I am trying to make sense of what you libs are advocating. so you oppose taxes of all kinds and think SS is a ponzi and gov needs to take a hike?? how and who then is going to pay and carry out the missions of attending to the public amenities and needs??
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION Every need is an opportunity for an entrepreneur. While the government occupies a monopoly niche, providing for that need (however inefficiently), there is no profit to be made, even if competing with the government were legal, which it usually is not. ALL 'public' needs and amenities CAN be provided for privately and voluntarily, if it were allowed to do so. Check out Stefan's book, available online, titled 'Practical Anarchy' for examples.
Another way it's not a Ponzi scheme is that there is nobody at the top getting rich and will flee once he or she can retire. The people at the bottom simply get screwed. SS is for the general welfare, a Ponzi scheme is welfare for the top few.
Screw the welfare forced ponzi scheme, the Temple Cults are the biggest schemers on Earth!
The print the money out of thin air. They convince the rest of the planet they need their tokens for purposes of exchange. And; everyone believes it. hahahahahahaha, excuse me while i piss myself laughing at the utter stupidity of human beings who are not being at all.
@thmsmhgn It's the same politicians who have been lying to us for the last 40 years (and beyond), and they don't have it either. It got spent so they could be politically popular. 'Going after them' would fix nothing, even assuming 'someone' could go after the whole lot of everyone who has ever served in the US Congress and White House. There is no money, just a promise to tax people.
WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP!!! Social security saves the lives of the old which live in poverty. WHEN HAS A PONZI SCHEME EVER SAVED A LIFE?
You corporate-extremists need to get one FACT around your head. In the US today more wealth is not an indicator of more work. A large part of the wealthy population is wealthy through inheritance.
So that work ethic of the wealthy you people are delusional about is the work ethic of the Paris Hiltons.
1. Old people living in poverty: Did those old people have families? If yes, why aren't their families taking care of them? Did those old people have time to save up for retirement? Yes. Now why are they in poverty? Either they didn't save up for old age, their families decided not to take care of them ( if they had any), or something random happened to wipe out their savings (it could happen). Or a combination.
@poyani "A large part of the wealthy population is wealthy through inheritance."
And so we should steal the wealth from all the wealthy? Whether they inherited it or not, it would still be theft.
In truth the vast majority of the super wealthy that you disdain have gotten that way due to the government's fiat money system and effectively negative interest rates. Fixing that would eliminate much of the undeserving from the ranks of the wealthy.
@poyani i also have my cause of just on my agenda different from everybody else's.. that's your priority in how to allocate limited resources of MINE.. leave it and spend yours on what you think is right. i am watching out for somebody else's just cause, who's watching out for mine? i want to help my grandparents out living in a foreign country not having ss and i don't want ss down the road, why am i paying ss tax and have less to help my own when i don't even care about you or your old
but ss has a more than a trillion $ surplus...so I don't understand how you can say the $ has evaporated when theres a big heaping stash of it. Is your argument that it was spent on these wars and tax cuts for the rich? Seriously I'm asking cause some of your points confuse me.
And on a different note yeah the baby boomers may be the wealthiest generation but look at them now...the majority of them will never be able to retire. And you can't expect them to work forever so SS is important.
@domino18717 If you have $100. in your piggy bank, it would be safe to say that you have $100. saved up for a rainy day. But if you take that money out and spend it, and write an IOU to yourself for $100. and put that in the piggy bank, can you still say that you have money saved? That is what the government did. It spent the money in the SS fund and wrote government IOUs (treasury bonds) to replace it with.
Letting old ppl starve? No u let the ppl who earn and save there money to keep there money. If a old person spends all there money on what ever. Vacations around the world and half a mil homes just to get a check from the same goverment they keeped in office spending all those ssi payments u put in. why should anyone pay for ur there blunder? So in hopes ppl will pay for us? Fat chance
@scramblethink A free world would be a wealthy world. Wealthy people can afford a lot of charity. Meanwhile the world of obeisant tax cattle that we live in is fiscally doomed and promises like SS are empty for most of us. The simple reality is that it will not be there for most of us and the sooner we realize that and take action to see to the future for ourselves and out loved ones, the better.
Unfortunately people (even rich ones) are preoccupied with their own lives, Voluntary charity does´nt generate enough to help all the misfortunate and needing. If you don´t have any children you starve when you get old, without "the system" Then people would have more children to secure their own retirement (like still in poor countries). The woman has to stay at home and your parents move in. Most people have to carry more than their own weight anyhow. (And this box is to small,hehehe)
(part 2) My point is that there is personal freedoms in the system. Logistical economies of scale in schools and nursing homes. And it´s a natural development. I bet even back in the caves, we took care of each others children, sick and old! Even some animals have this instinct.
@aminizle Do not be too hasty to judge. 'Stefbot' actually has put vastly more thought into what he is saying than the vast majority of people have put into anything.
SS is violent because you are 'forced' to participate, you cannot voluntarily excuse yourself from it and for paying for it. If you try, men with guns will have words with you. If you continue to fail to obey, they will forcibly take you away. If you resist them effectively, they will kill you. SS is therefor violence.
@jeffbriggs1987 No, but we also should not lie to them and tell them that everything is taken care of. It is not. A person counting on SS for their future is making a catastrophic error. It is simply not possible for the government to pay it. All the wishing it otherwise will not change the reality. Within the next ten years, possibly soon, reality is going to cause the fiscal situation to utterly collapse. People need to learn to rely on themselves, friends and family, and soon.
@BornWhiteSupremacy1 I've listened to the whole video and don't see where he supports Bernie Madoff. He says the Madoff is better than the government because at least his scheme was voluntary, whereas the government's is not. If you didn't understand this, I guess the whole video just went over your head *WHOOOSH*
"If we could only get the government to be as ethical, as responsible as Bernie Madoff . . . " and it's true. My god, you've got to laugh - what a world we inhabit.
and big corporate foreign business's and start supporting what ever small mom and pop shops we have left. There is so much that needs to be done but not enough of us that are really awake to whats going on. I just hope that will change soon. We need to get our selves out of personal debt...then not fall into it again via banks/credit cards ect. we need to push them out of business. Their products only benifit them not the middle/lower class. Bless you and good luck all!
@grayandgray we really do not look much better than the US. we are a welfare country just like the US. CPP will not be there for us and if it is, with the dollar going down we will get very little and it deffinately will not be there for our children. Harper is growing the government, meaning more money taken from our cpp, we need to stand up and say we want to opt out of these bogus entitlements and take care of ourselves and our loved ones. Stop supporting these big corrupt war mongers..cont.
One thing I'd like to add about the SS "bonds" however... you forgot to mention that they are classified as non-marketable securities.
As worthless as US bonds are, these are further restricted so as to avoid them being passed like a hot potato to any sucker you can find. The SSA is stuck with an IOU instead of a potential asset they can sell.
This was one of the changes made to the program to "save" it in the past. Real bonds were initially held to "invest" the "surplus."
How do we look in Canada on the CPP? Pretty good? Didn't they adjust the contribution rates years ago to get off the wealth transfer system you speak of for the US?
@wyknot100 Id say this, If you want to see why the economy sucks, consider this. If you borrow money. The last thing you want is a high interest rate because then you have to pay back more later. Interest rates are set by the federal government. Interest rates have been low for a while. I think government is borrowing a lot of money and repaying it slowly with a low interest rate.
@sundancekid122 Except they are not repaying it. They are borrowing more to pay the interest. You heard no doubt, Obama say that if they US didn't raise the debt limit, that they 'would' default. I was surprised by how honest he was. *snik* And the world 'still' remains largely clueless. The US, and most of the rest of the world's nations, can 'never' pay back their debts. Ever. Anyone giving them their money (buying treasuries) is giving it away, quite likely completely and permanently.
Stef are you suggesting government is the creator of these financial debacles? I believe private corporations or certain individuals that pull the strings of the politicians are the problem makers behind the curtain. So if this is the case, we are dealing with "private crimes". They are just being funneled through the government channels/puppets. Taking advantage of an already established fully "functioning" aggressive implementation/enforcement system.
@wyknot100 It's not a private crime if it uses the power of the state to execute its will. That's why anti-statists champion idea that corporations pull the strings of the state. Because we came up with that criticism over a century ago! Also the very concept of SS is what implodes on itself. What exactly are corporations doing to fuck over SS? You have a choice: Either SS is perfectly fine as the left wants to imply, OR it's being fucked over by some magical private force.
@wyknot100 do you know the history of SS. now they use it as a crutch, they have to pay at the cost of the unborn or people will freak out. but it was CREATED with the spirit that you will pay into SS but NEVER LIVE TO COLLECT IT. when SS was introduced in canada the retirement age was 65 n 1966. the life expectancy at this period in canada was barely 67 for men and 73 for women who wouldnt have worked much to contribute enough for good payments. always was a scam, its only gotten worse
@wyknot100 So if someone paid a politician a million to kill someone, and they did, it would be the fault of the person who paid them and the politician would be innocent? Good job, buddy . . . .
@regresseur Why do people (you) love mixing apples with oranges? Hiring someone to kill is a tad bit different than a ponzi scheme. But to answer your question. No, both the person who hired the politician as well as the politician would be guilty. The question I addressed was where the crime originated, not whom guilt rests on. My point is government may be the muscle, but the brains of Social Security and many other ills we are facing now, come from the "private sector". Peace, "buddy".
I'd like to see some sources that clarify the Social Security system is bankrupt and is at that so called "red line." You used to cite sources in your earlier videos, but I don't see any in the newer ones. Just trying to come to terms with this Social Security dilemma and whether it's healthy or unhealthy, as I know of a family member who has paid into Social Security all his life, and when he retires, he'll collect, as well as his daughter and his wife, about $1500 a piece per month.
@TheSentienthuman How about the Social Security Administration? Go to the site & look at "Trust Fund Data" Look at the chart on the left. That chart is as of 2010 year end. It shows it isn't totally bankrupt yet, but with the 80 million baby boomers all retiring now it will be by the year 2017 (Google cnbc.com "will baby boomers bankrupt Social Security")
While I agree with the premise of this video, one could make the argument that when you presented Albania as an example, their primitive communist nation was actually totally destroyed within a few years after becoming a "free market". I think you should put together a report on this, because that was a pretty dark time in Albania's history, and Albania is no stranger to dark times.
it cannot be said enough, the distinction in government schemes and other private schemes: notably, the government is coercive, demanding participation or payment...or else!
the or else is when the "terror" ensues; so begs the question (as an extension), who are the real terrorists in one's life?
@stefbot - I agree that there is no gun pointed at the Ponzi scheme investor, but disagree with calling it voluntary. To voluntarily invest into a Ponzi scheme you have to know it's a Ponzi scheme ahead of time, and no sane person does that. The word voluntary doesn't just mean no coercion. We're talking fraud here.
@furyofbongos I agree, they are being lied to and the people that enter in these schemes tipically dont know about it in advance, excepte the founders of such an organization. I think that they mean voluntary, because they enter by they own choice and they have a multitude of other choices to pick from. In the case of the state, either is SS or the gun, those are your options.
Peter Schiff was the 1st to compare S.S to a Ponzi Scheme, he actually said it was worst than a Ponzi as Ponzi's are voluntary to join. Just saying..Righful Credit.8)
Do note that Stefan also says that Ron Paul should not shut down the IRS or the USPS because they would cause chaos, and that this would also happen if social security were closed down. The problem here is politicians are arguing that this system should be closed down, but have made the people dependent on it. If not for the changes to the education system to remove all information about personal finance, people have come to rely on social security. The seniors paid in you can't yank it out yet.
Having it run the way it is, being funded through a tax that is flat up to a certain point and then caps out, is less progressive than funding government pensions through income taxes and business taxes and value-added taxes like other countries do.
3) Then it follows that Ponzi Schemes are unvoluntary
#1) Consent was not given by the defrauded for their money to be used in a Ponzi scheme, thus it wasn't voluntary. If you give me $5 to buy you a candy bar, and I take the money, buy a soda, and drink it, that's theft
#2) The Schemer intended to deceive his victims for personal gain which resulted in financial damages to many of the deceived; and this is what fraud is
@AnarchistPhilosopher you are entirely forgetting the fact that generations of nonexistent (unborn) humans are already signed up for this hellish system. THAT is the root of it being involuntary.
@AnarchistPhilosopher The word is involuntary, and you're misusing the word. It's voluntary in the sense that you willingly handed the money over in a Ponzi scheme. You had the free choice to do it or not; if you took the time to research the proposal, you had the complete freedom to not take part. The fact that you got tricked doesn't make the whole process involuntary.
@tml4873 Right, the whole process is not involuntary, but the fact your money was used in a Ponzi scheme without your consent is. AnachistPhilosopher is basically right, minus the spelling error.
I'm not sure if I agree with STEF on this topic. I started paying SS when I was 16 and am almost 58 now. That's ONE HELL OF A LOT OF MONEY that I have paid into this system.
Now he is saying that I am "stealing" from the unborn to get that money back now that I am getting to SS age?
I don't buy your logic here STEF, sorry. It's not an 'entitlement' is something I hve paid into, now I expect it back!
@PortlandsTransport There you my friend. I agree with you a 100% and am in the same boat as you. The Neocon fear mongering is trying to diminish the very basics of our societies back bone: Social Security, Unions, health care, Post office. These are the very pillars that made us once great. They want to privatize them and make real slaves of us. Down with anarchy, Stef is only tooting the horn for privatization for the dominance of capital & old money. they are trying to kill the middle class.
@PortlandsTransport You were lied to. It was a tax. The money is gone. The people who lied to you spent it. You were wronged.
However that does not then give you the right to take from the unborn, which is what would be necessary for SS to actually pay you. I am 52 myself, and have no idea how much I have paid into this fraudulent scheme over the years. However I have always been well aware that it is simply a tax, called by another name. I have never expected to collect 'benefits'.
@PortlandsTransport your guilt of ignorance is collective in a generation of voters not telling politicians to check the wallet.. but you're going to dissent so i'm not going to bother.. all i am going to say is this to make my point--if i and all other peers of mine of younger generations quit the system today and rescind our future benefits and stop paying taxes in return, your account goes bust. all i have to say.
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION It IS insolvent, or Sanders would not have a bill to 'save' it, which he does by raising taxes of course. Of course there are a lot of other fiscal issues which need addressing, like the deficit, paying down the debt, Obama care, Medicare, etc., all of which need a lot more money. Sanders of course would raise takes for all of it. But note; even a 100% tax on all the wealthiest would not solve even half the total problem, but it would destroy private enterprise.
@Panpiper The bill is put out to make it solvent passed the 26th year mark for the next 75 years. The fact of the matter is if we didnt have the bailouts (which Sanders has consistently been opposed to), and the nonsense preemptive wars no one would be questioning the entitlements because it would be 26 years away. Now the GOP is hijacking us to privatize (steal) the very backbones of our society (Social Sec. & Post Office) and hand them over to the elitist 1% enslaving us all
Hmmm... Bob Murphy wrote an article for Mises Daily today (09/19/11) on the exact same topic and made the exact same claims you did, Stef. Interesting....
@IvanTheHeathen Yeah. You'd think a guy with a PhD wouldn't have to resort to plagiarism like that. No wonder he's against intellectual property. Snoogins. =P
Stef, show me your source for saying the social security is evaporated?? ss today has 2.5 trillion surplus paying for the next 25 years from the congressional budget & it has not contributed one nickle to national debt it is funded by the payroll tax not treasury. Lifting the cap from people making over 250k year solves the problem for ever.
@HandyMan101 As a Handyman ( self Employed) you control the amount you report, pay & contribute. Taking advantage of your exemptions also helps you contribute as little or even none towards your own future. Consult your tax adviser but If you have one then you must be a novice Anarchist anyways. You might just be too young & healthy to understand how social security is needed in ones life, ask the dying old around you
A question for Stef if you please. You mention that social security is for retirement, but what about people who are too sick to work, or people that genuinely cant find a job, or child benefit for hard-working but minimum-wage families? What positive solutions could we come up with for those guys that would be constant, and not uncertain, like perhaps charity.
Ometechutli 6 days ago
@Ometechutli
SS is not constant, it relies on a consistent workforce and steady population. It's been estimated that when the baby-boomers retire, there will be two workers per SS payout, as opposed to roughly sixteen workers per retiree.
fountainherz 2 days ago
i was listning and came up with a few arguments then the ending and then iam thinking why even bother writing them
hubbitut 1 week ago
Real U.S. potential constraints: 1) international use of other currencies (less demand for dollars worldwide); 2) not enough REAL, tangible goods available to buy using dollars; 3) inflation (in the loooooong run), caused by international dollar accumulators dumping their dollars into the US. As long as people worldwide accept dollars in exchange for real goods, there is no operational constraint for the U.S. Again, any dollar-denominated debt poses no problem for the dollar monopolist.
advogadohistoriador 1 week ago
There is not such a thing as running out of the money you can create. The U.S. won't ever face any FINANCIAL/OPERATIONAL constraints when honoring debt that is denominated in U.S. dollars. Political constraints - such as "debt ceilings" - are NOT operational/financial constraints. Political constraints are/can be very real, but to say that the U.S. will ever run out of dollars is incorrect. It can, however, run out of political will.
advogadohistoriador 1 week ago
You call a US Govt Bond nothing more than an IOU - well for your info Dude ALL Bonds are IOUs that are backed by some promise to pay, even Corporate Bonds. The more I listen to your video ( I have listened several times to make sure I didnt miss any of your BULLSHIT) the more I understand how Freakin Ignorant you are on this Matter and many your followers must be also.
1234uz 1 week ago
BUDDY your are so full of SHIT it isnt even funny. YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT OUR SYSTEM
1234uz 1 week ago
I first started realizing this is when the baby boomers started retiring, I'm thinking, why have a bunch of people pay into this when they're going to retire and take out of the same pool, baby boomers paid in too much as a whole, now they can't retire, when the baby boomers were paying people who were retiring then were getting more than what they paid in, if the population gets bigger or smaller, one group gets screwed, makes no sense at all.
xXxDANMANxXx 1 week ago
I tend to strongly disagree that all social security is an awful thing. I think the Nordic Welfare Model works very well in the Nordic countries where there is a general spirit in society that everybody deserves social security. And national debt is relatively low in these countries so their governments aren't really putting the unborn in debt.
That said I do believe it's a patchwork approach. But it's still better than not having any.
frederikhoejgaard 1 month ago
Another great video, good job! Pensions aside, a large portion of SS (at least in the UK) goes towards benefits for those that cannot/willnot work. So the reward for working hard is to have half your income taken through force and a significant portion of this money is given to those that will not work! If that ain't killing entrepreneurial spirit then I guess it'll do until the state can find something more effective (like mass psychiatric labelling and drugging).
markeagles8008 1 month ago
I try to be smart by watching these videos, when in reality Its all jargon to me :P
hndro2 1 month ago
see heres the thing. had we not have been robbed blind by criminals we would be able to act responsibly & take care of our poor with welfare & healthcare & housing. consider this. consider it. entertain it.... we should be living like kings. a decent welfare system therefore would be a negligible dent in our income & worth having to feed the poor. dont blame those who are struggling blame the tyrants who stole the money!!!
pauloscum 3 months ago
keep up the good work @stefbot ! Love the uploads, the info, the discussion, and the frequency of new vids!!!
BigDaddyDJD 4 months ago in playlist More videos from stefbot 2
You know absolutely nothing about how Social Security Really works here in America!
1234uz 4 months ago
@1234uz So how does it work then?
SuperBillego 1 week ago
@SuperBillego I would suggest before you criticize the MOST Successful Program in the USA for the Benefits of ALL. Social Security is NOT I REPEAT is NOT in The Red the speaker absolutely does not understand the Program at all. In Fact since the 1980's we Baby Boomers have paid extra money into the system to insure that we would not have a deficit in the program when we hit the pay out phase and that worked extremely well because right now we have a $ 2.7 TRILLION SURPLUS.
1234uz 1 week ago
@sephethus Thank you... My apologies to Stefan :)
theonlykatii 4 months ago
Why do you change accents as you talk??? It's weird.
mckenn25 4 months ago
the "SOCIAL SECURITY SCHEME" LOL
shadowromeo22 4 months ago
yes it is!!!
shadowromeo22 4 months ago
lmao! so damn true
SleepDirtyJazzySet 5 months ago
Social inSecurity, will be as all the rest of failed government experiments.
KevZen2000 5 months ago
Happy Birthday Stef!
mikedurland 5 months ago
Social Security is called Superannuation in my country. It's still a fraud but at least the name doesn't con well-meaning liberal idiots.
ComicPenius 5 months ago
So, a Ponzi Scheme ISN'T a conspiracy to get Potsie and the Fonz to mate? :P
Ovalshine 5 months ago
25 unthinking liberals clicked on this video.
ComicPenius 5 months ago 30
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul's plan will balance the budget in 3 years without raising taxes!
Social programs remain untouched as the BIG problems are resolved.
Government employees will be phased out as they quit/retire or moved to other jobs. Learn more at /watch?v=IQAHziV3HoM
vechorik 4 months ago
@ComicPenius BULL SHIT BUDDY Its us Liberals that you have to thank for every thing in our society that is worth a shit and benefits the common working person. You dont know squat !!
1234uz 1 week ago
People often say that the "Government is a necessary evil".
Necessary evil is an oxymoron.
NoNameC68 5 months ago
@NoNameC68 People see it as a choice between two evils; the 'necessary' evil of government, or the 'total' evil of life being "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short". They have been raised in a statist culture which has brainwashed them from birth into believing that freedom is the enemy of prosperity. The moral argument to them is simply an exercise in logical extremism with (perceived by them) terrifying consequences should it ever gain sway.
Panpiper 5 months ago
Look at
Faceoff at 55 Wall St.
on YouTube. You look too, Max. It is the reality and it is the future.
CobinRain 5 months ago
Misses the mark. The compulsory tax shift in america has been from the rich to the poor. This is not the young paying for the old, it is the poor paying for the rich. And the current "financial crisis" is the poor paying for unimaginable losses accumuated by the rich as they speculated in the great casino of derivitives and CDOs. In wild west capitalism unregulated 'investment' banking makes huge profits for Banks; and they keep it all. When the investments fail then the poor bail them out.
CobinRain 5 months ago
@CobinRain There are many problems, and you are correct that government bailouts are a huge part of it. But every video cannot be about all problems.
To your point, I would argue that the fiat money system, inflation as policy, is a more direct subsidy to the rich by the poor than bailouts. Rather than people's money gaining 3-6% in value every year and banks paying market rates for loanable funds, people's money looses 3-6% in value per year and banks pay effectively negative interest rates.
Panpiper 5 months ago
@Panpiper How right you are about inflation as policy! I am heartily sick of listening to Americans going on about the "American Dream" . There is a fabulous video by Elizabeth Warren floating around on YouTube--a lecture she gave at UC Berkeley on the decline of the middle class. This high priestess of statistics lays it all out in black and white: Americans are worse off in almost every way that their parents in 1971. This huge class is being ruined. TO me this rings alarm bells.
CobinRain 5 months ago
I read this video's title and got worried! but then I read "that would be an insult to ponzi schemes" and couldn't help laughing in agreement.
jeremy3590 5 months ago
Pyramid scheme..Ponzi was just a guy that used it.
JoeyPencils 5 months ago
Stefan (or anyone else who knows): Is the Canada Pension Plan equally as bad as Social Security? One would presume it is in concept, but maybe the details are different.
tml4873 5 months ago
If you don't reconize that social security is a ponzi schene you're an idiot .
hanksnow82 5 months ago
@hanksnow82 It's probably a good idea to watch a video before you comment on it.
tml4873 5 months ago 15
@tml4873 So i will put you down as one of the retards that don't know a ponzi scheme when they see it . Do you mix cement or make fries for a living ?
hanksnow82 5 months ago
@hanksnow82 He's trying to be ironic by arguing that social security is far worse than a ponzi scheme. That's why people keep telling you to watch the whole video.
StatelessLiberty 5 months ago
@hanksnow82 Sure. So, you going to watch the video now?
tml4873 5 months ago
@hanksnow82 You're an idiot for not watching the actual video
bwood21390 5 months ago
Hmm! Reminds me of Spooner on government and the highwayman.
MickeyHobart 5 months ago
Socialist Security is a theft by force, wasteful, redistribution scheme. The government took money by force, blew it like Charlie Sheen on a cocaine binge, then stole from future generations through borrowing, to pay the walking dead now.
Evil.
RodCornholio 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAMASCUS SYRIA–OLDEST CITY,NEVER BEEN DESTROYED(ISAIAH 17:1)ISRAEL DIVIDED(JOEL 4:1-4)JESUS SAID,HIS 2ND COMING,IF U SEE DMASCUS DSTROYED & SRAEL DVIDED.IF U THINK QUAKES R COMMON THN BELIEVE THESE 2 PROPHECIES,THESE R IN THE NEWS NOW.JOHN 12:25-26 ANYONE WHO LOVES THEIR LIFE WILL LOSE IT,WHLE ANYONE WHO HATES THEIR LIFE N THIS WORLD WILL KEEP IT FOR ETRNAL LIFE.26 WHOEVER SERVS ME MUST FOLLOW ME& WHRE I AM,MY SERVANT ALSO WILL BE.MY FATHER WILL HONOR THE ONE WHO SERVES ME.HELL IS REAL.REPENT!
TheENTERRAPTURE17 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Next HUGE moneybomb for Ron Paul will be on OCT 19th
BLACKTHISOUT . COM
qwerty94376 5 months ago
Social security is the issue that basically stopped the people at work from debating politics with me.
I was told that everyone back then wanted a SS program, ya know "the people" got together and started this program. If everyone wanted it why the hell does anyone need forced into it?
The other argument was people are just too stupid to save, comically this came from a guy previously explaining a story he read about how kids now are "saving too much" even with today's low interest rates.
THEGREGDREW 5 months ago
@THEGREGDREW imagine fixing potholes on the streets & fixing the pavements & all the road hazards were not paid by taxes?? who would pay for them, would they ever get fixed??
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 5 months ago
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION
My father lives on a pretty active road out in the country and man does that road hardly ever get improvements from MOdot. I drove out there two weeks ago and he was filling in potholes with his neighbor themselves, even though they pay for that road with taxes. A few years back that neighbor was mowing the ditches as they were getting very dangerous. I say, why can't they or someone else own that road - they'd be even more likely to fix it if they were making money off it.
THEGREGDREW 5 months ago
@THEGREGDREW nice example. Although I doubt MAZDAKPRODUCTION will look at the evidence, I appreciate it. thanks.
gradiu3rox 5 months ago
Comment removed
THEGREGDREW 5 months ago
@THEGREGDREW imagine fixing potholes on the streets & fixing the pavements & all the road hazards were not paid by taxes?? who would pay for them, would they ever get fixed??
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 5 months ago
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION People that wanted to use them would pay for them as a service. The people that pave the roads (a business) might fix them.
Whatada 5 months ago
@Whatada thanks for the respond. But lets analyse what you are saying: now its all done by government contractors and employees negotiating low rates and because of taxes gov has money allocated for these costs. In your scenario there is no collective body to decide to be able to negotiate. no one has decision making rights. So if left to voluntary participation the majority will put the decision off causing tension, no business gets done & public has to suffer. Am I mistaking on this??
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 5 months ago
@Whatada Would they? Lets analyze what u r saying, How many people would claim and agree on really using the roads?? some say I only used it last year?? what is definition of Use? who sets that guideline?? what would you do if the majority didnt participate like you expected?? all the meanwhile you have a deteriorating roads. Cmon my friend lets be real here, at that point some one would create some kinda committee, legislation or something that would force action just like the Gov now
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 5 months ago
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION You're missing the point here: Regardless of how road services might be provided in the marketplace, it is nonetheless immoral to FORCE people to pay for road services, even if they plan on using them.
Whatada 5 months ago
@Whatada you cant disregard the way your alternative will turn out. At the end of the day if i give you the keys to take the country your direction you would have to be able to envision & imagine how and where Ur alternative would pan out and will take us. "Regardless" dont cut it my friend. Ur way wil make all roads private by the private entity managing it & guess what if you dont pay you cant use so segregation & all kinds of problems could arise. How will they even collect w/o police force??
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 5 months ago
@Whatada you cant disregard the way your alternative will turn out. At the end of the day if i give you the keys to take the country your direction you would have to be able to envision & imagine how and where Ur alternative would pan out and will take us. "Regardless" dont cut it my friend. Ur way wil make all roads private by the private entity managing it & guess what if you dont pay you cant use so segregation & all kinds of problems could arise. How will they even collect w/o police force??
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 5 months ago
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION The point is that in a free society, roads would be built by private enterprise who would then 'own' those roads, who would then charge a toll for the use of them. They might also be built by land developers wanting to increase the value of their land. It could be a coop of businesses that build a free road to facilitate access to their businesses. Etc., etc.. In all those cases, maintaining them well is a 'profitable' thing to do.
Panpiper 5 months ago
@Panpiper thank U for the response. What U are advocating is privatization. lets analyze that; who would be able to participate in winning the bid for these contracts? Old money & Rich. So your ideology seems to favor the rich winning contracts over the current system that is owned by the government leaving any surplus not as a profit to the rich but in the system for more svcs. Difference is your way makes use of roads & svcs a private privilege DENYING many its use & it would cost even more
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 5 months ago
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION You do not make money by 'denying' service to people. You make the most money by serving as many people as possible. There would be no 'bidding' for a 'contract' from government in a free society. Roads would simply be built as a need developed for roads. Yes, rich people would gain from this, but the poor would gain even more as vastly greater opportunities would exist for them to actually go out and engage in their own entrepreneurial activities.
Panpiper 5 months ago
Excellent Stefan. :-)
Now if we could get Peter Schiff to listen to this video...
Panpiper 5 months ago
Comment removed
spyletu 5 months ago
Comment removed
spyletu 5 months ago
@Panpiper one user pointed out that peter has stated that ss is worse than ponzi scheme, so on that point i would just like to say you're a genius. either way, he was forced to use the lighter and more commonly known term 'ponzi scheme' given american's lack of financial literacy, but it's not the fault of people who can't even accept the lighter term 'ponzi scheme' without going emotional overboard, no, instead it's peter's fault for not trying to sound crazy in one breath. nice logic.
spyletu 5 months ago
@Panpiper I am trying to make sense of what you libs are advocating. so you oppose taxes of all kinds and think SS is a ponzi and gov needs to take a hike?? how and who then is going to pay and carry out the missions of attending to the public amenities and needs??
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 5 months ago
@Panpiper I am trying to make sense of what you libs are advocating. so you oppose taxes of all kinds and think SS is a ponzi and gov needs to take a hike?? how and who then is going to pay and carry out the missions of attending to the public amenities and needs??
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 5 months ago
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION Every need is an opportunity for an entrepreneur. While the government occupies a monopoly niche, providing for that need (however inefficiently), there is no profit to be made, even if competing with the government were legal, which it usually is not. ALL 'public' needs and amenities CAN be provided for privately and voluntarily, if it were allowed to do so. Check out Stefan's book, available online, titled 'Practical Anarchy' for examples.
Panpiper 5 months ago
check your local politicians retirement cheque.
Darkinist 5 months ago
Another way it's not a Ponzi scheme is that there is nobody at the top getting rich and will flee once he or she can retire. The people at the bottom simply get screwed. SS is for the general welfare, a Ponzi scheme is welfare for the top few.
AnnRKey 5 months ago
Screw the welfare forced ponzi scheme, the Temple Cults are the biggest schemers on Earth!
The print the money out of thin air. They convince the rest of the planet they need their tokens for purposes of exchange. And; everyone believes it. hahahahahahaha, excuse me while i piss myself laughing at the utter stupidity of human beings who are not being at all.
jamerfunk 5 months ago
basically, we're fucked.
worriedbanana 5 months ago
There is a 2.5 trillion dollar surplus in Social Security.If there is no money there then go after the ones who stole it.
thmsmhgn 5 months ago
@thmsmhgn It's the same politicians who have been lying to us for the last 40 years (and beyond), and they don't have it either. It got spent so they could be politically popular. 'Going after them' would fix nothing, even assuming 'someone' could go after the whole lot of everyone who has ever served in the US Congress and White House. There is no money, just a promise to tax people.
Panpiper 5 months ago
WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP!!! Social security saves the lives of the old which live in poverty. WHEN HAS A PONZI SCHEME EVER SAVED A LIFE?
You corporate-extremists need to get one FACT around your head. In the US today more wealth is not an indicator of more work. A large part of the wealthy population is wealthy through inheritance.
So that work ethic of the wealthy you people are delusional about is the work ethic of the Paris Hiltons.
poyani 5 months ago
@poyani
1. Old people living in poverty: Did those old people have families? If yes, why aren't their families taking care of them? Did those old people have time to save up for retirement? Yes. Now why are they in poverty? Either they didn't save up for old age, their families decided not to take care of them ( if they had any), or something random happened to wipe out their savings (it could happen). Or a combination.
MutantBamHammer 5 months ago
@MutantBamHammer There are lots of reasons people end up in poverty. A large percentage of people in poverty are actually soldiers.
poyani 5 months ago
@poyani
2. Wrk ethic of wealthy people is the work ethic of Paris Hiltons: I have one name should remember: Bill. Fucking. Gates.
MutantBamHammer 5 months ago
@MutantBamHammer Bill Gates is IN THE MINORITY. 80% of the ultra rich are rich because of inheritance.
poyani 5 months ago
@poyani "A large part of the wealthy population is wealthy through inheritance."
And so we should steal the wealth from all the wealthy? Whether they inherited it or not, it would still be theft.
In truth the vast majority of the super wealthy that you disdain have gotten that way due to the government's fiat money system and effectively negative interest rates. Fixing that would eliminate much of the undeserving from the ranks of the wealthy.
Panpiper 5 months ago
@poyani i also have my cause of just on my agenda different from everybody else's.. that's your priority in how to allocate limited resources of MINE.. leave it and spend yours on what you think is right. i am watching out for somebody else's just cause, who's watching out for mine? i want to help my grandparents out living in a foreign country not having ss and i don't want ss down the road, why am i paying ss tax and have less to help my own when i don't even care about you or your old
spyletu 5 months ago
I just had to sub after this one....
manoman0 5 months ago
lol...good post...
manoman0 5 months ago
Great post, stef.
bweazel 5 months ago
epic thumbnail, I HAD to check this one out
ShadowCrowX 5 months ago
but ss has a more than a trillion $ surplus...so I don't understand how you can say the $ has evaporated when theres a big heaping stash of it. Is your argument that it was spent on these wars and tax cuts for the rich? Seriously I'm asking cause some of your points confuse me.
And on a different note yeah the baby boomers may be the wealthiest generation but look at them now...the majority of them will never be able to retire. And you can't expect them to work forever so SS is important.
domino18717 5 months ago
@domino18717 If you have $100. in your piggy bank, it would be safe to say that you have $100. saved up for a rainy day. But if you take that money out and spend it, and write an IOU to yourself for $100. and put that in the piggy bank, can you still say that you have money saved? That is what the government did. It spent the money in the SS fund and wrote government IOUs (treasury bonds) to replace it with.
Panpiper 5 months ago
SS returns less than 1%.
Al Gore told all of us it was in a "Lock Box".
That guy can't be happy unless he's lying to someone about the climate, Love canal, "Love Story", the internet and Carbon Dioxide.
This is what he tells us, just think of all the shit he told his ex, Tipper.
No wonder she left his cheating, bloated ass.
The Liberals LOVE to tax tax tax, yet they also LOVE to abort babies, these people are killing their tax base.
They, clearly, have not thought this out.
americanbandwidth 5 months ago
@americanbandwidth but he was right on climate change :\ and what does aborting babies have to do with SS?
domino18717 5 months ago
Letting old ppl starve? No u let the ppl who earn and save there money to keep there money. If a old person spends all there money on what ever. Vacations around the world and half a mil homes just to get a check from the same goverment they keeped in office spending all those ssi payments u put in. why should anyone pay for ur there blunder? So in hopes ppl will pay for us? Fat chance
darkisato 5 months ago
That would be an insult to Ponzi schemes
yep.................love it
AntixSchiTTxreport 5 months ago
-Fuck the poor, old and sick???
The mentally retarded just have to get their act together in your wonderful world...
...you sound a bit like someone promoting eugenics in this one.
PEACE AND UNDERSTANDING!
scramblethink 5 months ago
@scramblethink A free world would be a wealthy world. Wealthy people can afford a lot of charity. Meanwhile the world of obeisant tax cattle that we live in is fiscally doomed and promises like SS are empty for most of us. The simple reality is that it will not be there for most of us and the sooner we realize that and take action to see to the future for ourselves and out loved ones, the better.
Panpiper 5 months ago
Unfortunately people (even rich ones) are preoccupied with their own lives, Voluntary charity does´nt generate enough to help all the misfortunate and needing. If you don´t have any children you starve when you get old, without "the system" Then people would have more children to secure their own retirement (like still in poor countries). The woman has to stay at home and your parents move in. Most people have to carry more than their own weight anyhow. (And this box is to small,hehehe)
scramblethink 5 months ago
(part 2) My point is that there is personal freedoms in the system. Logistical economies of scale in schools and nursing homes. And it´s a natural development. I bet even back in the caves, we took care of each others children, sick and old! Even some animals have this instinct.
TAKE CARE NOW!
scramblethink 5 months ago
lol "social security is violent" my God this guy has NO idea what he is talking about have a nice day stefbot.
aminizle 5 months ago
@aminizle Do not be too hasty to judge. 'Stefbot' actually has put vastly more thought into what he is saying than the vast majority of people have put into anything.
SS is violent because you are 'forced' to participate, you cannot voluntarily excuse yourself from it and for paying for it. If you try, men with guns will have words with you. If you continue to fail to obey, they will forcibly take you away. If you resist them effectively, they will kill you. SS is therefor violence.
Panpiper 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
say Steff folks, has anyone seen the docs psywar and human resources by scott noble? wonder what folk think abou them?
ehpl 5 months ago
say Steff, folks, has anyone seen the docs psywar and human resources by scott noble? wonder what folk think abou them?
ehpl 5 months ago
is he saying we should just let the old people starve
jeffbriggs1987 5 months ago
@jeffbriggs1987 No, but we also should not lie to them and tell them that everything is taken care of. It is not. A person counting on SS for their future is making a catastrophic error. It is simply not possible for the government to pay it. All the wishing it otherwise will not change the reality. Within the next ten years, possibly soon, reality is going to cause the fiscal situation to utterly collapse. People need to learn to rely on themselves, friends and family, and soon.
Panpiper 5 months ago
isn't fiat a poncy scheme and coercive?
trilobit00 5 months ago
LOL. So this Godless atheist thinks Bernie Madoff is God, no wonder you atheists are stupid.
BornWhiteSupremacy1 5 months ago
@BornWhiteSupremacy1 Hello Stereotype, Nice to meet you!
jerahmia 5 months ago
@BornWhiteSupremacy1 I've listened to the whole video and don't see where he supports Bernie Madoff. He says the Madoff is better than the government because at least his scheme was voluntary, whereas the government's is not. If you didn't understand this, I guess the whole video just went over your head *WHOOOSH*
zdrux 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BornWhiteSupremacy1 Hello Stereotype, Nice to meet you!
jerahmia 5 months ago
@BornWhiteSupremacy1 lolwut
pSychOAtDawn 5 months ago
@BornWhiteSupremacy1 wow you realy live in your own little world dont you,,maybe you need to watch it again and this time pay attention.
stop the voices in your head from babbeling for 6 minutes and 34 seconds and listen to what he sais and not what you think he is saying.
ace1sod 5 months ago
The definitions of "voluntary" going around here remind me of "rape by deception" laws.
tifforo1 5 months ago
"If we could only get the government to be as ethical, as responsible as Bernie Madoff . . . " and it's true. My god, you've got to laugh - what a world we inhabit.
not2tees 5 months ago
and big corporate foreign business's and start supporting what ever small mom and pop shops we have left. There is so much that needs to be done but not enough of us that are really awake to whats going on. I just hope that will change soon. We need to get our selves out of personal debt...then not fall into it again via banks/credit cards ect. we need to push them out of business. Their products only benifit them not the middle/lower class. Bless you and good luck all!
2012weareone 5 months ago
@grayandgray we really do not look much better than the US. we are a welfare country just like the US. CPP will not be there for us and if it is, with the dollar going down we will get very little and it deffinately will not be there for our children. Harper is growing the government, meaning more money taken from our cpp, we need to stand up and say we want to opt out of these bogus entitlements and take care of ourselves and our loved ones. Stop supporting these big corrupt war mongers..cont.
2012weareone 5 months ago
Good video!
One thing I'd like to add about the SS "bonds" however... you forgot to mention that they are classified as non-marketable securities.
As worthless as US bonds are, these are further restricted so as to avoid them being passed like a hot potato to any sucker you can find. The SSA is stuck with an IOU instead of a potential asset they can sell.
This was one of the changes made to the program to "save" it in the past. Real bonds were initially held to "invest" the "surplus."
jokertim777 5 months ago
How do we look in Canada on the CPP? Pretty good? Didn't they adjust the contribution rates years ago to get off the wealth transfer system you speak of for the US?
grayandgray 5 months ago
@wyknot100 Id say this, If you want to see why the economy sucks, consider this. If you borrow money. The last thing you want is a high interest rate because then you have to pay back more later. Interest rates are set by the federal government. Interest rates have been low for a while. I think government is borrowing a lot of money and repaying it slowly with a low interest rate.
sundancekid122 5 months ago
@sundancekid122 Except they are not repaying it. They are borrowing more to pay the interest. You heard no doubt, Obama say that if they US didn't raise the debt limit, that they 'would' default. I was surprised by how honest he was. *snik* And the world 'still' remains largely clueless. The US, and most of the rest of the world's nations, can 'never' pay back their debts. Ever. Anyone giving them their money (buying treasuries) is giving it away, quite likely completely and permanently.
Panpiper 5 months ago
You are slowly making me change my mind on social security.
nem700 5 months ago
Robert Murphy wrote about this at Mises.org. Clever way to differentiate the ponzi scheme and social security.
lettherebedots 5 months ago
Yep, I used to think civilization itself was a ponzi scheme, but sometimes even it isn't voluntary.
Donatellangelo 5 months ago
Stef are you suggesting government is the creator of these financial debacles? I believe private corporations or certain individuals that pull the strings of the politicians are the problem makers behind the curtain. So if this is the case, we are dealing with "private crimes". They are just being funneled through the government channels/puppets. Taking advantage of an already established fully "functioning" aggressive implementation/enforcement system.
wyknot100 5 months ago
@wyknot100 It's not a private crime if it uses the power of the state to execute its will. That's why anti-statists champion idea that corporations pull the strings of the state. Because we came up with that criticism over a century ago! Also the very concept of SS is what implodes on itself. What exactly are corporations doing to fuck over SS? You have a choice: Either SS is perfectly fine as the left wants to imply, OR it's being fucked over by some magical private force.
CosmicThinking 5 months ago
@wyknot100 do you know the history of SS. now they use it as a crutch, they have to pay at the cost of the unborn or people will freak out. but it was CREATED with the spirit that you will pay into SS but NEVER LIVE TO COLLECT IT. when SS was introduced in canada the retirement age was 65 n 1966. the life expectancy at this period in canada was barely 67 for men and 73 for women who wouldnt have worked much to contribute enough for good payments. always was a scam, its only gotten worse
hez1919 5 months ago
@wyknot100 So if someone paid a politician a million to kill someone, and they did, it would be the fault of the person who paid them and the politician would be innocent? Good job, buddy . . . .
regresseur 5 months ago
@regresseur Why do people (you) love mixing apples with oranges? Hiring someone to kill is a tad bit different than a ponzi scheme. But to answer your question. No, both the person who hired the politician as well as the politician would be guilty. The question I addressed was where the crime originated, not whom guilt rests on. My point is government may be the muscle, but the brains of Social Security and many other ills we are facing now, come from the "private sector". Peace, "buddy".
wyknot100 5 months ago
I'd like to see some sources that clarify the Social Security system is bankrupt and is at that so called "red line." You used to cite sources in your earlier videos, but I don't see any in the newer ones. Just trying to come to terms with this Social Security dilemma and whether it's healthy or unhealthy, as I know of a family member who has paid into Social Security all his life, and when he retires, he'll collect, as well as his daughter and his wife, about $1500 a piece per month.
TheSentienthuman 5 months ago
@TheSentienthuman How about the Social Security Administration? Go to the site & look at "Trust Fund Data" Look at the chart on the left. That chart is as of 2010 year end. It shows it isn't totally bankrupt yet, but with the 80 million baby boomers all retiring now it will be by the year 2017 (Google cnbc.com "will baby boomers bankrupt Social Security")
ImDianaRae 5 months ago
While I agree with the premise of this video, one could make the argument that when you presented Albania as an example, their primitive communist nation was actually totally destroyed within a few years after becoming a "free market". I think you should put together a report on this, because that was a pretty dark time in Albania's history, and Albania is no stranger to dark times.
abortabraham 5 months ago
This country is screwed, just like every other country! GOVERNMENT is the problem, it always gets too big and tries to do too much!
vambo13257 5 months ago
great video! awesome!
it cannot be said enough, the distinction in government schemes and other private schemes: notably, the government is coercive, demanding participation or payment...or else!
the or else is when the "terror" ensues; so begs the question (as an extension), who are the real terrorists in one's life?
qncsc 5 months ago
@stefbot - I agree that there is no gun pointed at the Ponzi scheme investor, but disagree with calling it voluntary. To voluntarily invest into a Ponzi scheme you have to know it's a Ponzi scheme ahead of time, and no sane person does that. The word voluntary doesn't just mean no coercion. We're talking fraud here.
furyofbongos 5 months ago
@furyofbongos I agree, they are being lied to and the people that enter in these schemes tipically dont know about it in advance, excepte the founders of such an organization. I think that they mean voluntary, because they enter by they own choice and they have a multitude of other choices to pick from. In the case of the state, either is SS or the gun, those are your options.
megatherium100 5 months ago
I call Social Security UnConstitutional........That really should be all that matters.
JebBlack2010 5 months ago
Peter Schiff was the 1st to compare S.S to a Ponzi Scheme, he actually said it was worst than a Ponzi as Ponzi's are voluntary to join. Just saying..Righful Credit.8)
whereispg 5 months ago
Do note that Stefan also says that Ron Paul should not shut down the IRS or the USPS because they would cause chaos, and that this would also happen if social security were closed down. The problem here is politicians are arguing that this system should be closed down, but have made the people dependent on it. If not for the changes to the education system to remove all information about personal finance, people have come to rely on social security. The seniors paid in you can't yank it out yet.
theredscourge 5 months ago
Having it run the way it is, being funded through a tax that is flat up to a certain point and then caps out, is less progressive than funding government pensions through income taxes and business taxes and value-added taxes like other countries do.
tifforo1 5 months ago
1) If all fraud is unvoluntary
2) If Ponzi Schemes are a type of Fraud
3) Then it follows that Ponzi Schemes are unvoluntary
#1) Consent was not given by the defrauded for their money to be used in a Ponzi scheme, thus it wasn't voluntary. If you give me $5 to buy you a candy bar, and I take the money, buy a soda, and drink it, that's theft
#2) The Schemer intended to deceive his victims for personal gain which resulted in financial damages to many of the deceived; and this is what fraud is
AnarchistPhilosopher 5 months ago 3
@AnarchistPhilosopher you are entirely forgetting the fact that generations of nonexistent (unborn) humans are already signed up for this hellish system. THAT is the root of it being involuntary.
WorthlessCurrency 5 months ago
@WorthlessCurrency
What does that have to do with anything I just said?
AnarchistPhilosopher 5 months ago
@AnarchistPhilosopher The word is involuntary, and you're misusing the word. It's voluntary in the sense that you willingly handed the money over in a Ponzi scheme. You had the free choice to do it or not; if you took the time to research the proposal, you had the complete freedom to not take part. The fact that you got tricked doesn't make the whole process involuntary.
tml4873 5 months ago
@tml4873 Right, the whole process is not involuntary, but the fact your money was used in a Ponzi scheme without your consent is. AnachistPhilosopher is basically right, minus the spelling error.
UnhealthySalad 5 months ago
I'm not sure if I agree with STEF on this topic. I started paying SS when I was 16 and am almost 58 now. That's ONE HELL OF A LOT OF MONEY that I have paid into this system.
Now he is saying that I am "stealing" from the unborn to get that money back now that I am getting to SS age?
I don't buy your logic here STEF, sorry. It's not an 'entitlement' is something I hve paid into, now I expect it back!
PortlandsTransport 5 months ago
@PortlandsTransport There you my friend. I agree with you a 100% and am in the same boat as you. The Neocon fear mongering is trying to diminish the very basics of our societies back bone: Social Security, Unions, health care, Post office. These are the very pillars that made us once great. They want to privatize them and make real slaves of us. Down with anarchy, Stef is only tooting the horn for privatization for the dominance of capital & old money. they are trying to kill the middle class.
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 5 months ago
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION Ah yes, Stefan is really just a diabolically evil person, conniving to destroy the middle class, just because maybe he can...
Panpiper 5 months ago
@PortlandsTransport You were lied to. It was a tax. The money is gone. The people who lied to you spent it. You were wronged.
However that does not then give you the right to take from the unborn, which is what would be necessary for SS to actually pay you. I am 52 myself, and have no idea how much I have paid into this fraudulent scheme over the years. However I have always been well aware that it is simply a tax, called by another name. I have never expected to collect 'benefits'.
Panpiper 5 months ago
@PortlandsTransport your guilt of ignorance is collective in a generation of voters not telling politicians to check the wallet.. but you're going to dissent so i'm not going to bother.. all i am going to say is this to make my point--if i and all other peers of mine of younger generations quit the system today and rescind our future benefits and stop paying taxes in return, your account goes bust. all i have to say.
spyletu 5 months ago
agreed...ssi is much worse than a ponzi scheme!!!
PatricksTime 5 months ago
wearers = [wearere] {class-lst4_red} // GMC-god1-chkchk.2.
fuckoverload 5 months ago
Governments, huh. Presently existing governments. What is there good to say about them?
Oh, I know. They will become redundant.
Soon.
Chin up, Botty. I tip my virtual hat to you for how you are raising your daughter.
fuckoverload 5 months ago
Social Security is not insolvant. Bernie Sanders for president 2012. Look him up and take a listen. Stef is plain wrong on this one
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 5 months ago
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION It really doesn't matter, as long as Stef is holding true to the majority of the content of this video.
According to inmendham, the US government has been giving your SS (ahem) money to the rich. Can this be verified?
La la la la /// RED.
fuckoverload 5 months ago
Welcome to real democracy, humans. Ignore the gunslingers. Kill them if you have to.
Yes. You did read that right.
Expect them to kill you soon afterwards though unless you have a BulletProof Exit Strategy.
Nuclear. Electrical signal detector. MUST receive signals from wearere or BOOM.
They're in the US.
hahahaha.
We like to play human chess.
fuckoverload 5 months ago
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION It IS insolvent, or Sanders would not have a bill to 'save' it, which he does by raising taxes of course. Of course there are a lot of other fiscal issues which need addressing, like the deficit, paying down the debt, Obama care, Medicare, etc., all of which need a lot more money. Sanders of course would raise takes for all of it. But note; even a 100% tax on all the wealthiest would not solve even half the total problem, but it would destroy private enterprise.
Panpiper 5 months ago
@Panpiper The bill is put out to make it solvent passed the 26th year mark for the next 75 years. The fact of the matter is if we didnt have the bailouts (which Sanders has consistently been opposed to), and the nonsense preemptive wars no one would be questioning the entitlements because it would be 26 years away. Now the GOP is hijacking us to privatize (steal) the very backbones of our society (Social Sec. & Post Office) and hand them over to the elitist 1% enslaving us all
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 5 months ago
Very good.
rctube1958 5 months ago
When I saw the title I was like: wtf, it so IS a ponzi scheme! but now I realize it is actually much worse. Thanks Stefan.
titan13131 5 months ago 2
Duh many have been yelling about this for years. Should of mentioned how it started with free payments to those that never paid in to social security
skatesurfsmoke 5 months ago
Hmmm... Bob Murphy wrote an article for Mises Daily today (09/19/11) on the exact same topic and made the exact same claims you did, Stef. Interesting....
IvanTheHeathen 5 months ago
@IvanTheHeathen Yeah. You'd think a guy with a PhD wouldn't have to resort to plagiarism like that. No wonder he's against intellectual property. Snoogins. =P
fleetcenturion 5 months ago
@fleetcenturion
anti-ip stance has nothing to do with plagiarism.
zbigniewzapora 5 months ago
A quick scan of this comments sections makes me realize that a lot of people are going to end up learning this reality the hard way....
TheCapitalistdog 5 months ago 7
So says someone from Socialistic Canada... :o/
PiPhD 5 months ago
Stef, show me your source for saying the social security is evaporated?? ss today has 2.5 trillion surplus paying for the next 25 years from the congressional budget & it has not contributed one nickle to national debt it is funded by the payroll tax not treasury. Lifting the cap from people making over 250k year solves the problem for ever.
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 5 months ago
@MAZDAKPRODUCTION Here's an idea.. Show me how its ethical for the government to force upon me a so called "retirement" plan that I don't want ?
HandyMan101 5 months ago
@HandyMan101 As a Handyman ( self Employed) you control the amount you report, pay & contribute. Taking advantage of your exemptions also helps you contribute as little or even none towards your own future. Consult your tax adviser but If you have one then you must be a novice Anarchist anyways. You might just be too young & healthy to understand how social security is needed in ones life, ask the dying old around you
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 5 months ago