The real issue is not whether SS is a Ponzi Scheme. Of course it is - you get out much more than you put in / recipients are growing while contributors are shrinking. As politicians began promoting the idea that one could retire with SS the savings rate plummeted.
.
Now, the basis of our economy is not savings but consumption made possible by massive personal and governmental debt. That's the real sham.
@smb12321 SS is insurance. 77% of 20 years old will make it to 70, 50% to 80, and 15% to 90. SS has never had to pull money from other taxes. In fact it contributed to much of the tax base since 1980. Yes, as I said in another video we should end all debt. I would say go back to a gold standard but that is a waste of resources and you will have to hire government employees to watch the gold. End the fed, allow the government to increase money supply at population growth rate, end the nd.
@pirucreek Then let me rephrase it. If SS is insurance then its premiums are too low for promised payout. I hear all the time, "Well, we got enough until 2035" (I can remember when we had enough until 2100). The problem is two fold. 1) Contributors are rapidly becoming recipients. 2) The idea that no one pays for their own "security" but it is funded collectively.
I agree on the gold standard, ending the fed, money supply, etc.
@smb12321 I say the premiums are high enough. Presently payout is like 15.3 they probably could lower to 10% and uncap it. I can remember when it was suppose to run out in 2000. In many ways a law saying you must use 15% of your income to buy gold, and when you hit 70 you have to buy a reverse mortgage on the gold is the same as SSI. Too any people live in the now they don't plan for the future and think they are going to live forever. SSI is forced insurance to keep people off the streets
@smb12321 You say let the private market run SSI. Did you see what happened to AIG, Moodys, GS ... Private firms are just going to load up on salaries. They have the moral hazard of running it. Most retirees if they invested in the stock market would lose it all or see it stolen. SSI basically forces young people to use 15% of their salary to help the elderly, to help those that helped their elderly. I am a fan of Milton Friedman, Peter Schiff, ... but on this issue imho they are wrong.
@pirucreek Unless you think folks desperately need the State to take their money (vs saving) then I see no need for SS. Salaries rank near the bottom on causes of the recession. The real culprit is the rise of an axis of politicians & "financiers" who make money without producing goods or services.
Saving is devalued since our economy depends on constant spending (and debt). If we stressed saving like drugs, the environment, education or seat belts this would be a different nation.
@smb12321 They do many live in the moment and when they hit 65 let them die? Investing in stocks, if retirees owned 100% of the stock market, it would not be as much as SSI. Why own anyways when you are going to die. Insurance is the best way to fund old age, like a reverse mortgage. I do believe medicare should be ended and added to your SSI check.
There will always be constant spending as long as you need to eat.
S&P 500 earned $545.1 billion in 2009, rising to $791.5 billion in 2010, expected to climb to $907.5 billion in 2011. In 2012 the 500 are collectively expected to earn $1.0308 Trillion. 35% of that will go to taxes and 75% of the stock market will always be owned by the rich. That leaves about $200 billion profit if retirees controlled 25% of the stock market. The payroll tax is about $900 billion. If people put this money in the stock market they will only get about 1/5th the payroll tax
@pirucreek 75% of people in this country are incapable of saving. They act is if they can work forever and live in the moment. When you hit 65 and start getting checks you will see the value of this program everyone should have SS checks coming in, saving millions of elderly peoples lives. Also giving value to them.
In Private Ponzi Scheme an individual can only use his, a groups, or someone elses money pays returns to separate investors. Early investors, those who actually got paid the large returns, commonly reinvest their money. Then promoters try to minimize withdrawals by offering new plans to investors, often where money is frozen for a longer period of time, in exchange for higher returns & contributions. This helps gives the illusion to all other investors that the fund is solvent.
@bl782 In a Government Ponzi Scheme, the government fund can force parcipitation of the enitre population of its country. It can raise the the age or limit you can acess entitled funds. It can raise the contributions from all citezens under its jurisdiction. It also has acess the through printing currency. All these options can keep social security funded with valueless dollars, for ever. or we cut the benefits for the rich, and other affluent so that those dependant get something at least.
Unlike Social Security, Bernie Maddoff could not force parcipitation of every living american. If he could imagine the scope and size of the losses for everyone just like the lives he touched. The moment ritiree to workers ratio is 1:1, it is the equivalent of a ponzi scheme, as there is not enough people to participate making contributions without raising the ammount they contribute, or limit when you can recieve the sum of money entitled, or printing the difference.
My grandmother recieves two pensions one from her work which is private, and is denominated in forien currency, due to its being sold, and packaged. Unlike her government pension or SSI, she stands to risk all of her principal, in a default. However she will never have tow worry like youre Aunt about default in SSI. To put it bluntly that is the problem, that she never has her benefits cut, that she receives nominally every dollar, and is valueless, and fails to keep up with cost of living.
@bl782 SSI @ pirucreek, when I when to school I was taught the by many teachers on the subject. First, there is no trust fund for each individuals contribution. The contributions are pooled together. Secondly, the money in that pool has been spent so to pay ritirees of the babbyboomers they will have to sell competing with the treasury for buyers of US debt or roll it over and have the treasury pay them directly increasing the deficit. Thirdly, participation is compulsory,
@bl782 Thirdly, participation is compulsory, and currently we can only muster roughly 3 workers per beneficiary. Using govt statistic by 2020 this ratio will be 1:1 for every worker to retiree, and then negative there on out. Unlike Bernie Maddoff, could not force parcipitation of every living american. If he could imagine the scope and size of the losses for everyone just like the lives he touched. The moment ritiree to workers ratio is 1:1, it is a ponzi scheme.
1 . A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors (it only pays money to those that contribute) not from any actual profit (there is profit) earned by the organization (all the money from SSI comes from its users) but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors. (all the money comes from investing their money). You collect shares though your lifetime and receive dividends when you retire.
@pirucreek if you read English properly you will realize that when they say "from their own money" they don't mean that the investors and recipients are different people. You talk about profits, this is a fantasy, SSI has shown long term deficits for decades and almost went broke in the 1980s, and had to be bailed out with taxpayer money outside from SS contributions.
@rojasrod my point being that the definition on Wikipedia is wrongly worded, it should say "from their own invested capital and not from profits accrued by their investments"
@pirucreek you talk about profits from investing and dividends, you make me laugh. They "invest" in treasuries which are redeemed with magically generated money from the federal reserve. Inflation of the money supply is a form of taxation. So both the contributions and your so called "profits" and "dividends" are taxed.
YOU ARE WRONG: A Ponzi scheme is an investment fraud that involves the payment of purported returns to existing investors from funds contributed by new investors.
@rojasrod No it gives returns to anyone of retirement age. My mom and aunts receive social security they receive rather large checks, they were not scammed out of their money. I would be willing to bet over 50% of the stocks on the stock market are 100% ponzi schemes where all the money will go to brokers and ceos via stock options. Gold and silver are more of a ponzi scheme than ssi. First you will lose 9% when you by or sell and virtually all gold stocks are ponzi schemes. Look at t XAU.
@pirucreek I do not doubt that she is getting paid, but she is not getting paid from a return on her investment, she is getting paid from the contributions of younger people not yet retired (new investors), THAT IS THE DEFINITION OF A PONZI SCHEME. The day there isn't enough young people to pay for retired people, like it is happening in countries with ageing populations like Japan, THERE WILL BE NO MONEY TO PAY. Bernie Madoff paid monthly to his older investors, just like your aunt.
@rojasrod Yes there will be money to pay 15.3% tax on all the people working. A definition of a ponzi scheme would be a stock broker that sells you a stock where all the investment money ends in the pockets of the broker or the managers of the stock. The stock goes broke. There was no intention of the stock making you money. There will always be money to pay as there will always be people working. it is one program that has never been nor never will be financially strapped.
@rojasrod the new investors will get theirs when they reach retirement age 100%. So the population of Japan is aging they are lucky their population should drop and it will be a boom to low housing prices and wildlife. There will be people working and it will provide money. There will be PLENTY of money to pay, they will just get less, probably not much less as government will end make work jobs.
@pirucreek NONSENSE, look at Greece whose retirement scheme already went bust. Don't change the subject with other forms of fraud or other ponzi schemes.
First baby! Thanks for the video although you are way off in my opinion. Lower the retirement age to 50! LMFAO! Reduce the premiums to 12% that only 40 basis points. Machine are more efficient, cool.
it is a ponzi scheme.
they have today reduced benefits and raised taxes on people collecting down the line.
this despite the fact that people paying in today are poorer than people collecting on the other end.
orangedac 3 months ago
The real issue is not whether SS is a Ponzi Scheme. Of course it is - you get out much more than you put in / recipients are growing while contributors are shrinking. As politicians began promoting the idea that one could retire with SS the savings rate plummeted.
.
Now, the basis of our economy is not savings but consumption made possible by massive personal and governmental debt. That's the real sham.
smb12321 10 months ago
@smb12321 SS is insurance. 77% of 20 years old will make it to 70, 50% to 80, and 15% to 90. SS has never had to pull money from other taxes. In fact it contributed to much of the tax base since 1980. Yes, as I said in another video we should end all debt. I would say go back to a gold standard but that is a waste of resources and you will have to hire government employees to watch the gold. End the fed, allow the government to increase money supply at population growth rate, end the nd.
pirucreek 10 months ago
@pirucreek Then let me rephrase it. If SS is insurance then its premiums are too low for promised payout. I hear all the time, "Well, we got enough until 2035" (I can remember when we had enough until 2100). The problem is two fold. 1) Contributors are rapidly becoming recipients. 2) The idea that no one pays for their own "security" but it is funded collectively.
I agree on the gold standard, ending the fed, money supply, etc.
smb12321 10 months ago
@smb12321 I say the premiums are high enough. Presently payout is like 15.3 they probably could lower to 10% and uncap it. I can remember when it was suppose to run out in 2000. In many ways a law saying you must use 15% of your income to buy gold, and when you hit 70 you have to buy a reverse mortgage on the gold is the same as SSI. Too any people live in the now they don't plan for the future and think they are going to live forever. SSI is forced insurance to keep people off the streets
pirucreek 10 months ago
@smb12321 You say let the private market run SSI. Did you see what happened to AIG, Moodys, GS ... Private firms are just going to load up on salaries. They have the moral hazard of running it. Most retirees if they invested in the stock market would lose it all or see it stolen. SSI basically forces young people to use 15% of their salary to help the elderly, to help those that helped their elderly. I am a fan of Milton Friedman, Peter Schiff, ... but on this issue imho they are wrong.
pirucreek 10 months ago
@pirucreek Unless you think folks desperately need the State to take their money (vs saving) then I see no need for SS. Salaries rank near the bottom on causes of the recession. The real culprit is the rise of an axis of politicians & "financiers" who make money without producing goods or services.
Saving is devalued since our economy depends on constant spending (and debt). If we stressed saving like drugs, the environment, education or seat belts this would be a different nation.
smb12321 10 months ago
@smb12321 They do many live in the moment and when they hit 65 let them die? Investing in stocks, if retirees owned 100% of the stock market, it would not be as much as SSI. Why own anyways when you are going to die. Insurance is the best way to fund old age, like a reverse mortgage. I do believe medicare should be ended and added to your SSI check.
There will always be constant spending as long as you need to eat.
pirucreek 10 months ago
S&P 500 earned $545.1 billion in 2009, rising to $791.5 billion in 2010, expected to climb to $907.5 billion in 2011. In 2012 the 500 are collectively expected to earn $1.0308 Trillion. 35% of that will go to taxes and 75% of the stock market will always be owned by the rich. That leaves about $200 billion profit if retirees controlled 25% of the stock market. The payroll tax is about $900 billion. If people put this money in the stock market they will only get about 1/5th the payroll tax
pirucreek 11 months ago
@pirucreek 75% of people in this country are incapable of saving. They act is if they can work forever and live in the moment. When you hit 65 and start getting checks you will see the value of this program everyone should have SS checks coming in, saving millions of elderly peoples lives. Also giving value to them.
pirucreek 11 months ago
In Private Ponzi Scheme an individual can only use his, a groups, or someone elses money pays returns to separate investors. Early investors, those who actually got paid the large returns, commonly reinvest their money. Then promoters try to minimize withdrawals by offering new plans to investors, often where money is frozen for a longer period of time, in exchange for higher returns & contributions. This helps gives the illusion to all other investors that the fund is solvent.
bl782 1 year ago
@bl782 In a Government Ponzi Scheme, the government fund can force parcipitation of the enitre population of its country. It can raise the the age or limit you can acess entitled funds. It can raise the contributions from all citezens under its jurisdiction. It also has acess the through printing currency. All these options can keep social security funded with valueless dollars, for ever. or we cut the benefits for the rich, and other affluent so that those dependant get something at least.
bl782 1 year ago
@bl782 While phasing it out for once and for all.
bl782 1 year ago
@bl782 thank you for contributing
rojasrod 1 year ago
Unlike Social Security, Bernie Maddoff could not force parcipitation of every living american. If he could imagine the scope and size of the losses for everyone just like the lives he touched. The moment ritiree to workers ratio is 1:1, it is the equivalent of a ponzi scheme, as there is not enough people to participate making contributions without raising the ammount they contribute, or limit when you can recieve the sum of money entitled, or printing the difference.
bl782 1 year ago
My grandmother recieves two pensions one from her work which is private, and is denominated in forien currency, due to its being sold, and packaged. Unlike her government pension or SSI, she stands to risk all of her principal, in a default. However she will never have tow worry like youre Aunt about default in SSI. To put it bluntly that is the problem, that she never has her benefits cut, that she receives nominally every dollar, and is valueless, and fails to keep up with cost of living.
bl782 1 year ago
@bl782 SSI @ pirucreek, when I when to school I was taught the by many teachers on the subject. First, there is no trust fund for each individuals contribution. The contributions are pooled together. Secondly, the money in that pool has been spent so to pay ritirees of the babbyboomers they will have to sell competing with the treasury for buyers of US debt or roll it over and have the treasury pay them directly increasing the deficit. Thirdly, participation is compulsory,
bl782 1 year ago
@bl782 Thirdly, participation is compulsory, and currently we can only muster roughly 3 workers per beneficiary. Using govt statistic by 2020 this ratio will be 1:1 for every worker to retiree, and then negative there on out. Unlike Bernie Maddoff, could not force parcipitation of every living american. If he could imagine the scope and size of the losses for everyone just like the lives he touched. The moment ritiree to workers ratio is 1:1, it is a ponzi scheme.
bl782 1 year ago
Barney Frank, is that you? LOL
... Oh, my mistake Mr. Bernanke. I didn't see your helicopter.
Thagemini2 1 year ago
"why will you get more than you paid in?"
"because the factories and machines will be more efficient"
Shame there all in China.....
erushbass 1 year ago
This is incorrect. Don't watch.
marcpentacoff 1 year ago
you are confusing all types of different frauds with ponzi schemes. Just read the definition and understand it.
rojasrod 1 year ago 2
@rojasrod From wikipedia
1 . A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors (it only pays money to those that contribute) not from any actual profit (there is profit) earned by the organization (all the money from SSI comes from its users) but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors. (all the money comes from investing their money). You collect shares though your lifetime and receive dividends when you retire.
pirucreek 1 year ago
@pirucreek if you read English properly you will realize that when they say "from their own money" they don't mean that the investors and recipients are different people. You talk about profits, this is a fantasy, SSI has shown long term deficits for decades and almost went broke in the 1980s, and had to be bailed out with taxpayer money outside from SS contributions.
rojasrod 1 year ago
@rojasrod my point being that the definition on Wikipedia is wrongly worded, it should say "from their own invested capital and not from profits accrued by their investments"
rojasrod 1 year ago
@pirucreek you talk about profits from investing and dividends, you make me laugh. They "invest" in treasuries which are redeemed with magically generated money from the federal reserve. Inflation of the money supply is a form of taxation. So both the contributions and your so called "profits" and "dividends" are taxed.
rojasrod 1 year ago
@pirucreek "social security payments have always been openly underwritten by tax revenue" from Wickipedia as well
rojasrod 1 year ago
My next video will discuss the dangers of gold and silver investing.
pirucreek 1 year ago
@pirucreek
Yeah like, if you invest in gold or silver, the risk is that you'll definitely make money 2-3 years down the road.
Scary.
audiohi 1 year ago
Social Security is INDEED a Ponzi scheme.
theunsilentgrave1488 1 year ago
This one demonstrates a real lack of understanding.
wdisme 1 year ago 7
This video is incorrect.
pr0digy11 1 year ago 2
YOU ARE WRONG: A Ponzi scheme is an investment fraud that involves the payment of purported returns to existing investors from funds contributed by new investors.
This is what social security does.
rojasrod 1 year ago 10
@rojasrod No it gives returns to anyone of retirement age. My mom and aunts receive social security they receive rather large checks, they were not scammed out of their money. I would be willing to bet over 50% of the stocks on the stock market are 100% ponzi schemes where all the money will go to brokers and ceos via stock options. Gold and silver are more of a ponzi scheme than ssi. First you will lose 9% when you by or sell and virtually all gold stocks are ponzi schemes. Look at t XAU.
pirucreek 1 year ago
@pirucreek I do not doubt that she is getting paid, but she is not getting paid from a return on her investment, she is getting paid from the contributions of younger people not yet retired (new investors), THAT IS THE DEFINITION OF A PONZI SCHEME. The day there isn't enough young people to pay for retired people, like it is happening in countries with ageing populations like Japan, THERE WILL BE NO MONEY TO PAY. Bernie Madoff paid monthly to his older investors, just like your aunt.
rojasrod 1 year ago
@rojasrod Yes there will be money to pay 15.3% tax on all the people working. A definition of a ponzi scheme would be a stock broker that sells you a stock where all the investment money ends in the pockets of the broker or the managers of the stock. The stock goes broke. There was no intention of the stock making you money. There will always be money to pay as there will always be people working. it is one program that has never been nor never will be financially strapped.
pirucreek 1 year ago
@rojasrod the new investors will get theirs when they reach retirement age 100%. So the population of Japan is aging they are lucky their population should drop and it will be a boom to low housing prices and wildlife. There will be people working and it will provide money. There will be PLENTY of money to pay, they will just get less, probably not much less as government will end make work jobs.
pirucreek 1 year ago
@pirucreek NONSENSE, look at Greece whose retirement scheme already went bust. Don't change the subject with other forms of fraud or other ponzi schemes.
rojasrod 1 year ago
First baby! Thanks for the video although you are way off in my opinion. Lower the retirement age to 50! LMFAO! Reduce the premiums to 12% that only 40 basis points. Machine are more efficient, cool.
lovethepirk 1 year ago