Social security is a Ponzi scheme
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 мар 2024
- "The real kicker is that every couple of years the amount of income that is subject to Social Security taxes goes up," says Nick Gillespie.
Watch the full episode: • Biden's Antitrust Case...
---
Subscribe to the Reason Roundtable:
RUclips: • Politics Created the B...
RUclips Music: • The Reason Roundtable ...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/68EwVbY...
Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
I started my SS at 62 1/2, my wife who is 20 months younger than me started at 62. With my pension for working 25+ years we’re doing just fine.That was over 3 years ago & we never looked back. Haven't touched our investments other than to travel. I had two brothers die of cancer 3 years apart. One died at 62 & never drew a dime of his SS. The other died at at 65 & drew 10 months. Let's be honest here, the reason the Government is offering you a bigger payday at 70 is because they're banking on you not making it!
I'm really sorry about the loss of your brothers. You've brought up a valid point about the government's approach to Social Security payouts. It's true, waiting until age 70 for a bigger payout can feel like a gamble. However, working with a financial advisor can help ensure you're making the best decisions for your retirement savings, despite uncertainties. They can offer personalized guidance to optimize your finances and give you peace of mind for the future. Goodluck!
@@jackwpetrov Right on. A financial advisor can be a game-changer. Personally, I've experienced their impact, growing my portfolio to $1 million through stock trading. This was particularly helpful for someone like me-an Irish retired woman unfamiliar with the stock market. But finding the right advisor is key. After years of research, it's clear that choosing the right person is crucial for success.
I'd love to know who your advisor is. You see, I'm a Russian living in America with my family, finding my way around the market can be tough and i know i am not the only one. I have $800k saved up and ready to invest, but I could use some guidance.
She is known as - Chasity George Charles. please do your own research.
I found her contact details through an online search, and I'm pleased to see she is well recognized by AdvisorCheck. I've already sent her an email, hoping she can find some time in her busy schedule to assist me. Thank you for not gatekeeping.
I thought the Ponzi scheme was voluntary and non-compulsory, unlike taxation.
Social Security gives Ponzi a bad name.
It is a mandatory Ponzi scheme.
Yes and normally the people running them once exposed to jail for duping people. I guess arguably no one was duped because no one had a choice so there was no foul other than well intentioned tyranny.
According to the Dems, paying taxes is 'voluntary.'
In reality its more like paying protection to the mob.
Everyone acts like everyone in the ponzi scheme are robbed but those at the top of the pyramid do very well, it's everyone at the base of the pyramid who lose their money to keep paying off the rest of the pyramid.
Calling social security a ponzi scheme is an insult to Charles Ponzi haha
My wife and I were both professionals before we retired. We saved and we paid off all our debt. We have a tidy some to live on but we would have been totally wiped out in the first couple of years after loosing work related health insurance if it were not for Medicare.
So, Social Security is far less of important than Medicare. We benefit from Social Security but nothing like we benefit from Medicare. You could stop Social Security and we’d survive but stop Medicare and we’re on the streets.
Chile did it best. They phased it out so if you were close to retirement, you got it all, if you were 10 years away you might get 80%… etc. This way those who paid in got something still and those with many years to go had the chance to build individual retirement. No idea why we won’t try a phase out. I think Bush tried it but people aren’t even open to any changes in social security.
If there was a group of politicians (I don't care which party) that could show the Millennials and GenZ how much money they could have if they kicked the government out of their retirement, I think it would all be over. They already know they're screwed on housing, jobs, purchasing power, etc. Something like Boomers get everything. Gen X gets 75%, Millennials get 50%, and Gen Z is completely freed from the system.
Yes, Bush suggested something similar and the howls and shrieks from the left got it stopped. How dare you encourage people to be responsible for themselves...
The government can't phase it out because they're bankrupt already.
And now they are on the way back to ponzi. Hahahahaha
Phase out the global military first
Notice the govt never runs out of money when spending it on its global military with bases all over the world, and it's "defence" contracting companies. Never hear the military Is running out of money and we're gonna downsize. Bloody hypocrites (politicians and ascribers to that).
One problem with SS is that politicians keep generously expanding it to benefit more recipients. Nowadays people that never contributed a dime to it, can draw full benefits. You don't even have to be a legal resident of the USA to be a recipient
The ONE, and ONLY problem with funding SS is the HUGE NUMBER of FAKE disabled people STEALING BENEFITS!!!! The “old age” portion is FINE.
@@OOL-UV2 Both sides were buying votes and is why a $20 peen pump obtained through Medicare is now $200 USD. Saw a stairclimbing seated device designed to help aides to wheelchair ridden people get up a set of stairs.. the battery costs $600 and has less capacity than my battery bank I carry for my phone at work at a fraction of the cost.
I'm going to need to see some proof of this, because I know several, several people who have either been turned down for Social Security disability because they hadn't earned enough credits over the previous five years, even though for two of those yeasr were after the disabling injury which prevented them from working. The craziest thing is that I live in a state that has it's own rules when it comes to qualifying for EBT (food stamps) where if you are considered an able bodied adult, an ABAWD, and you are between the ages of 18- to somewhere between 55 and 60, then you must either be working, in some kind of drug rehab program, homeless, or your final option which that you must volunteer to "volunteer." The only exemptions to this are homelessness, being a single mother, or being labeled disabled by a doctor. My friend was labeled disabled, and thus received the EBT without having to work, yet SSDI still turned her down. Also, I know people who have gotten SS and only receive around $700 a month. Even with EBT, this is just not enough to survive on.
And as for the forced volunteer work ABAWDs must do to receive their $200-$300 in EBT i.e., is work for the state basically for free, for 80 hours a month in order to receive $3.61 an hour, or less if you are only receiving the $198 or less they can grant you, which should be flat out illegal. Also, if you go into their office to speak to a social worker and ask if they can help you get a job since they can put you in a state job that pays $3.61 an hour, they will direct you to go to the unemployment center.
The unemployment center BTW, is just a building with about three people staffing it who do absolutely nothing to help you find a job. Instead. the building is just a large empty room except for about 12 tables they have set up with out of date PCs on them with internet access which you can use to apply for jobs online. The closest it comes to giving you any help is directing you to a third party, commercial website which helps you construct a resume using a template, and then allows you to post that resume on the site, where you can also to apply to job listings directly which just means sending them the resume you just made. It is basically just some website like monster.com. The workers are only there to assist people who are tech illiterate by explaining to them how to do things like use email, print documents, and create an account. It is a total joke and waste of tax payer money for something anyone can do from home, since literally everyone has at least a smart phone and probably a tablet, thanks to federal programs started under Obama and expanded under Biden which gives anyone on EBT, Medicaid, Medicare, or living in poverty these free devices with free wireless service and data.
The entire system is fucked and favors single mothers and appears to favor immigrants. Every time I've went into the office, there are maybe 1-2 white people, 2-3 black people, and the rest are non-English speakers from God knows where, all receiving not only EBT, but actual money, Section 8 housing which pays basically all of your rent except maybe $8, Medicaid, WIC, and whatever else they can get. The women with kids all claim "Father Unknown" on the birth certificate so they can't go after anyone for child support, which speeds up the process, and all of the fathers pretend to be disabled, while they go around working under the table. And mind you, these are people who have never paid a dime into the system. And know with the magic "I'm on home base, you can't touch me," rule, AKA, you download an app and click, "I claim asylum," and you get to stay here indefinitely receiving all these benefits.
This is precisely one of the largest failing of Libertarians and their open boarders insanity. Maybe if you got rid of the welfare state first, we could bring in more immigrants, but where does it stop? There are like 4 billion people or more who live on less than $2 a day and thus considered to be in extreme poverty. We can not take all of these people in. But we're witnessing it happen in real time. The biggest lie is that they went from calling these people illegal aliens, to asylum seekers, and now economic migrants. The problem with that is, most of the people who come here, especially from other continents, are already wealthier than the average American. It takes them between $15,000-$35,000 to get to the US because of all the travel and paying human traffickers. These people are not the poor, starving, huddled masses. But once they do get here and start leeching off the system, you can be guaranteed that they immediately start sending for their poor relatives to start making the trip over, one by one, if not two by two. The country is going to collapse.
That's not even considering what this is doing to destroy labor value and add to the competency crisis that is causing bridges to collapse and planes to fall apart mid air.
That must be why they call it an "earned benefit" in a rather Orwellian way.
While i agree about non legal citizens being able to get money from it. I 100% disagree with blaming people who can't work. As if their life wasn't hard enough already here comes some greedy, selfish assholes who want to take away their only means of survival. How about the rich who get it despite being rich? How about the politicians that use it as a slush fund?
It’s a tax not a trust fund.
Both
@@SandfordSmythethe trust fund is a myth. It’s just an accounting line at the Treasury Department. There are a bunch of fake IOU’s they call bonds but there is no money.
I would have given up any SS payment if I could have opted out as late as my mid-30s. but I'm in my mid-50s now and will retire in 4- 6 years. At this point, I'd be entirely pissed if they took me "benefit" away. I wish the govt would let young people opt out of SS. I know that puts a strain on the incoming SS funds, but the govt is bailing out idiots who borrowed a mountain of debt to go to college for a useless degree. Just print me some of that fake money until I'm dead please.
Notice the govt never runs out of money when spending it on its global military with bases all over the world, and it's "defence" contracting companies. Never hear the military Is running out of money and we're gonna downsize. Bloody hypocrites (politicians and ascribers to that).
I don’t even what to think about it. We have people that will get maximum social security payout without working a day and paying into the system. There is nothing left.
Nevermind the over 2000 billionaires mooching off the rest of us lmfao
@@3nertia Most billionaires do the exact opposite of mooching so Im not quite sure what you mean.
This is the key issue with all such programs. If payers were receiving benefits--fine. But when people who have never contributed anything get the same benefit it can only bankrupt everyone. We will soon reach a point where more lifetime entitlement recipients will be on SS than payers--if we are not already there--and that is the core of the insolvency issue.
@@3nertia math is not your friend. 🤦🏼♀️
Are we going to ignore the fact that any reasonable "investment" should give you more than put in.
Unfortunately congress and the treasury have tag teamed it for decades and flooded it with treasury bills/notes/bonds. They can always print dollars to make them whole, but the buying power of the dollar is only $0.03 left since Nixon "temporarily" closed the gold window.
The guy in the white shirt sure didn’t seem to get that.
It's not an investment though.
@@alastairthegreat2887 SS funds are meant to be invested and grow over time. The trust has basically ran out of money, so those investment gains are no longer happening.
It is welfare - money taxed from one group and given to another. It is also a redistribution of wealth from working men to non-working women, as women retire earlier and live 7 years longer than men.
🐟 22. ILLEGITIMATE GOVERNANCES:
SOCIALISM/COMMUNISM:
SOCIALISM is a political and economic system of social organization in which natural resources, property, and the means of production are owned in common, controlled by the collective public, but typically by a cooperative, the state, or the government, as opposed to private ownership by individuals and/or business corporations. Socialism is based on the notion that common or public ownership of resources and means of production leads to a more equal society. It is a stage of society in Marxist theory, transitional between capitalism and communism, and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done. Hence, COMMUNISM is an extreme form of socialism that strives for both social and economic equality, something which can never be achieved, since true equality can never ever exist in this world.
Socialism (and communism) is best defined in contrast with capitalism (or to be more accurate, with free-market economies), as socialism has arisen both as a critical challenge to capitalism, and as a proposal for overcoming and replacing it. Cf. “capitalism”, in the Glossary of this book.
Socialism/communism is INTRINSICALLY evil, because it is based on an ideology of both social and economic egalitarianism, which is a practical impossibility, if not a theoretical impossibility. Equality exists solely in abstract concepts such as mathematics, and arguably within the atomic and sub-atomic realms. Many proponents of socialism argue that it is purely an economic system, and therefore, independent of any particular form of governance. However, it is inconceivable that socialism/communism could be implemented on a nationwide scale without any form of government intervention. If a certain number of persons wish to unite, in order to form a commune or a worker-cooperative, that is their prerogative, but it could never work in a country with a large population, because there will always exist entrepreneurs desirous of engaging in wealth-building enterprises. Even a musician who composes and records a hit tune wants his song to succeed and earn him substantial wealth.
As mentioned above, although socialists and communists maintain their ideologies to be purely ECONOMIC systems, it is very difficult, if not outright impossible, to divorce them from the political sphere, because socialism depends on a governing power to organize society in a very meticulous manner. In any case, assuming that socialism is nothing more than a form of economic organization, simply for the fact that it disallows any kind of free-market exchange (the latter of which is objectively moral - or at worst, amoral - see Chapter 12), socialism and communism must not be imposed on any community, society, or nation, according to the principles of sanātana dharma. At worst, socialism or communism is a truly horrific, tyrannical, totalitarian, murderous regime, that leads to untold pain and misery, due to certain dogmas that are intrinsically associated with Marxism, particularly a ferocious hostility towards all things dharmic, especially the freedom of religious practice.
Witless Marxists enjoy using the terms “capitalism” and “imperialism” in rather INACCURATE and emotive ways, in order to emphasize their supposedly-wicked natures. I would wager that the main motivation for Karl Marx’ (as well as the multitude of vassals to his caustic ideology) hatred for free-market economies, is simply out of envy for the business class. There is very little doubt in my mind, that if Herr Marx and his evil acolytes, had somehow found themselves with a healthy bank balance, they would have invested their financial resources in some kind of profitable enterprise, such as establishing a business or investing in company shares or stocks, rather than distributing their wealth among the poor masses, which would be more in keeping with their inane, egalitarian principles. If you think otherwise, then you are truly deluded, and think too highly of that parasite, Marx, who, for his sustenance, solicited funds from his friends, instead of earning an honest living as a writer.
Socialism reduces individual citizens to utilities, who, in practice, are used to support the ruling elite, who are invariably despotic scoundrels, and very far from ideal leaders (i.e. compassionate and righteous monarchs). Those citizens who display talent in business or the arts are either oppressed, or their gifts are coercively utilized by the corrupt state. Despite purporting to be a fair and equitable system of wealth distribution, those in leadership positions seem to live a far more luxurious lifestyle than the mass of menial workers. Wealth is effectively stolen from the rich. Most destructively, virtuous and holy teachings (“dharma”, in Sanskrit) are repressed by the irreligious and ILLEGITIMATE “government”.
The argument that some form of government WELFARE programme is essential to aid those who are unable to financially-support themselves for reasons beyond their control, is fallacious. A righteous ruler (i.e. a saintly monarch) will ensure the welfare of each and every citizen by encouraging private welfare. There is no need for a king to extort resources from his subjects, in order to feed and clothe the impoverished. Of course, in the highly-unlikely event that civilians are unwilling to help a human in dire straits, the king would step-in to assist that person, as one would expect from a patriarch (father of his people). The head of any nation ought to be the penultimate patriarch, not a selfish buffoon.
DEMOCRACY:
DEMOCRACY is almost as evil as socialism, because, just as the rabble favoured the murderous Barabbas over the good King Jesus, the ignorant masses will vote, overwhelmingly, for the candidate who promises to fulfil their petty desires, rather than one who will enforce the law, and promote a wholesome and just society. Read Chapter 12 for the most authoritative and concise exegesis of law and ethics, currently available.
Unlike socialism, in which wealth is stolen from the rich and distributed to the poor (with a “little” bit extra for the ruling elite), democratic governments frequently steal money from the working-class via the taxation system, and distribute it to the already affluent, often indirectly.
Even in the miraculous scenario where the vast majority of the population are holy and righteous citizens, it is still immoral for them to vote for a seemingly-righteous leader. This is because that leader will not be, by definition, a king. As clearly and logically explicated in the previous chapter of this Holy Scripture, MONARCHY is the only lawful form of governance. If an elected ruler is truly righteous, he will not be able to condone the fact that the citizens are paying him to perform a job (which is a working-class role), and that an inordinate amount of time, money and resources are being wasted on political campaigning. Furthermore, an actual ruler does not wimpishly pander to voters - he takes power by (divinely-mandated) force, as one would expect from the penultimate alpha-male in society (the ultimate alpha-male being a priest).
The thought of children voting for who will be their parents or teachers, would seem utterly RIDICULOUS to the average person, yet most believe that they are qualified to choose their own ruler - they are most assuredly not! Just as a typical child fails to understand that a piece of sweet, juicy, nutritious, delicious fruit is more beneficial for them than a cone of pus-infested, fattening, diabetes-inducing ice-cream, so too can the uneducated proletariat not understand that they are unqualified to choose their own leader, even after it is logically explained to them (as it is in this chapter, as well as in the previous chapter). And by “uneducated”, it is simply meant that they are misguided in the realities of life and in “dharma” (righteous living), not in facts and figures, nor in technical training. Wisdom doesn’t necessarily correlate with intelligence!
No democratic (or socialist) government will educate its citizens sufficiently well, that those citizens will acquire knowledge of how to usurp their regime. To put it frankly, democracy is rule by the “lowest common denominator”. One who requires the services of a brain surgeon NATURALLY seeks the most qualified physician to perform the operation, so logically, we ought accept the sovereignty of the most qualified man to rule over an entire nation (a genuine king). Furthermore, true democracy is impossible in practice - see the entry “democracy” in the Glossary of what is, by far, the most important work of literature ever composed, this Holy Scripture, “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”.
ANARCHY:
Cont...
@@ReverendDr.Thomas Where did you copypasta that drivel from? ROFLMEYERWIENER!
@@3nertia, kindly repeat that in ENGLISH, Miss.☝️
Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱
It's not welfare, it's compulsory as a tax and is promised to be given back to you.
@@brandonkenney6310 If 100% is given back, then why is it taken away in the first place?
They stole it from us!
It occurs to me that if Social Security was going to become need based judging need would require knowing both the recipient's income AND everything they own of significant value. I remember MTV showing a rapper go to pick up his welfare check in a stretch limo because he, legally, had no income but he had LOTS of money still.
Government calls it an "earned benefit".
Don't believe anything the government says.
If you let people convince you that Social Security wont' be there for you, that will make it easier for them to eliminate it.
I am willing to walk away from Social Security but only if it is completely stopped. I've been a max contributor my entire career and between my wife and I we are due a substantial monthly pay out and I'm still willing to walk away if this farce is stopped and my kids won't be forced to pay into this. But that means no money for anybody, no welfare system for "poor" people, everyone gets out of the system, full stop.
Agreed. I'd take nothing from SS if it meant my children were freed from the burden.
If businesses had defined benefit pensions
Government employees get to opt out of Social Security Ponzi scheme. Local teachers in Texas pay into their own solvent retirement system. Awfully convenient to force private citizens into a failing system while government employees receive windfalls. The fix seems to be to monkey with the retirement formula. If you receive SS at 62 there is a lower amount. If you wait until 70 receive a higher monthly payment. By fiddling with the formula Uncle Sam could effectively raise the retirement age on the sly.
I want the same option as the federal employees. If we could've opted out and invested the contributions for ourselves, our retirement account would be over $200,000 bigger. And my calculation was made at a very conservative estimate of 5% per year return. Let's not even talk about the interest that $200,000 generates in a very good market.
" Local teachers in Texas pay into their own solvent retirement system." It's the same thing with same "benefits"- just a ponzi scheme run by the state.
@@wwilliams4743Federal employees are in SS.
Railroad employees also. Funny how the State looks after its own but not you.
@@wwilliams4743 New federal employees have been in SS since 1985.
"just print more!"
what could possibly go wrong
Works for the military.
Notice the govt never runs out of money when spending it on its global military with bases all over the world, and it's "defence" contracting companies. Never hear the military Is running out of money and we're gonna downsize. Bloody hypocrites (politicians and ascribers to that).
the pay-off is a government pension at a retired age. It's an enforced social security. You can avoid paying and then kick yourself when you retired and find yourself poorer than expected
Social Security is a form of insurance. You are only "entitled" to the contractual amount the law allows. But just like insurance, you can pay in and never receive a payout.
The point of Social Security was to pay for the impoverished elderly, not to give all old people a retirement package. So it should be adjusted for the average natural life expectancy and means tested for wealth. It should also be separated from the general funds of the budget and treated like a normal insurance policy.
So glad you mentioned the 1960 case! Most people are completely unaware that they have ZERO legal right to the money they contributed. We need to give people a way to opt out and invest that money for themselves, where there is an actual possibility that you make a return on your investment. Rather than take the monthly pittance that is SS after 65. I want my children free from the SS shackles. We can either choose to change course or be forced into it because we simply CANNOT afford the status quo.
Congress can change any law it made.
Opt out of paying for military too.
Notice the govt never runs out of money when spending it on its global military with bases all over the world, and it's "defence" contracting companies. Never hear the military Is running out of money and we're gonna downsize. Bloody hypocrites (politicians and ascribers to that).
Amish don't pay in or expect to receive S.S. How did they do it?
i think it was actually written in to the law
I think I just became Amish
I'm pretty sure there's a way to opt out in certain cases - you basically fill out a form and send it in, but you can never rescind your choice
No taxable income = no ssi tax.
Just like with the gold standard, they'll only abandon it just before it collapses.
The gold standard never collapsed.
I am 34. I would sign right now to do 50/50. Keep my half and employer half keeps going to ss but I can never claim it. I would take that deal right now.
Just some quick math, 6.2% paid by employee, 6.2% paid by employer. This is 12.4% of your income for 45 years give or take. Even at very conservative rates of return this is way more money than SS would pay out in the last 20 or so years of life.
And then think about how much money that 12.4% could benefit the actual economy once it's invested in businesses, capital projects, etc. The shot in the arm to the real economy would be enormous.
There is no rate of return on social security. People flip out at the idea of making it an investment instead of indebting future generations.
@@wwilliams4743
They tried that. 1929 happened. People jumped out of buildings.
When there is even a mere hint of making minor changes to Social Security, people lose their ever loving minds, even if it wouldn't impact them. The whole thing needs to go!
Capitalism needs to go!
@@3nertia it's been gone for a while
@@3nertia You can fly to North Korea. No one is going to stop you.
If Social Security isn't a right that corresponds to the enforced obligation to pay on my part, it is theft. That simple.
I am not wealthy enough to pay for catastrophic illness or accidents because of the vagaries of life. I am one of the "poor" in some people's appreciation. In my life, I never made $1900 a month. I am not asking anyone to give up a cent for me, even out of charity.
I have made certain choices, some good, some not as good, because I knew that at some point the SS funds were going to run out. I have received two notices from SS telling me not to worry, it won't happen before 2042, the next one, not before 2032. Next?
I started drawing early and praying that I will get what I paid into it, not to mention what has been taken through inflation and interest.
And I just love the idea of a "libertarian" saying he wouldn't mind my money going to the poor. Right. You are only "speaking for yourself." Except that the majority has always been happy to give away other people's money, especially if they stand to get a cut. F*©× the next generation, so what? It's immoral, that's what. And without morality societies cannot stand. They disintegrate. Just like any social relationship.
It's easy to say not a right even though one has a corresponding obligation when you have a magnate's ear and boots to lick. Disgusting.
Thanks for an interesting discussion
I can't find the source but I remember hearing that if my parents had put their money into a zero risk whole life policy, they would be making at least 50% more than they are now via social security.
An index fund yielded 300% more.
Again, sorry, don't recall the source.
That's very likely true, the benefit adjusted for inflation is often less than what was paid in unless you are a fairly low earner if you live a long time you might get more out but just barely
I don't expect a dime from social security.
I didn't think so either. Then I got disabled after paying into it for only 35 years. Now the question is how much longer will it keep coming?
The Supreme Court says you are not entitled to it
You ARE entitled to it, DIRECTLY corresponding to WHAT YOU PUT IN!!!
@@traybern If you put money in a Ponzi scheme, you are not going to get your money back. It's a crime unless the government does it.
When I first saw the wire hanging from Nick Gillespie’s left ear I tried to blow it off. I thought it was a hair on my phone screen.
Every year congress should agree on a subsidy amount for each person over age 65 and pay for it with an offsetting tax on every person age 18-64. Let the politicians earn their pay by haggling out in the open about how much money to take from the young to give to the old.
But if I was able to invest this money in a retirement or even taxable account that received 6% or greater in annual growth, would it not be greater?
Yes it would be great. I doubt if most of us could or would have saved anything. Come to think of it, government didn't save anything or invest it wisely either.
The only way you could be assured of getting a 6% annual growth, given the current level of regulation and government meddling, is for the fiat currency to be inflated on a continual basis. Given our level of "real" innovation, as opposed to speculation, you'd be lucky to get a 2% return.
Absolutely it would but then they wouldn't be able to buy votes with your retirement.
@@richdobbs6595 2% is still better than the negative rate of return from SS.
It would be taxed to make up what the government thinks is their money.
We were forced to pay this and many are forced to live on this
nobody is forced to live on social security
No one is forced to live on SS! It was always intended to be a retirement supplement. The fact that some chose to live beyond their means, having children they couldn’t support at their incomes, wasteful spending habits rather than saving for retirement. Life has responsibilities!
You can save for your own retirement. You are not forced to live on social security. People that only have social security for retirement did so by their own choice. They worked for 40 years and chose to not save a dime.
@@crissd8283devil’s advocate: what about people who saved/owned a home, but medical conditions in their old age stripped them of everything they had?
Also, if public school can force students to pass a constitution test, why not have a mandatory test for financial literacy? I’m from the south side of Chicago, and i’ve met many adults who cash their check at their local bar; they’ve have never had a bank account, no one has ever taught them how to save or invest
I am retired I paid into this and should not be taken away from me. If I were younger you can tell people what to do but not after retirement that money was stolen from me and don’t be so glib about telling me what I can live on.
Ponzi is the best character from Happy Days.
I want to opt out and I want all the money I've paid refunded at interest.
Your money is gone. The only way to pay you what you've paid is to tax others. And then those people will want their money back. And it will just spiral from there. Whenever we end a welfare program, whether voluntarily or because the government goes broke, the taxpayers at that time are going to get screwed. The hope is that the economic growth after cutting the program helps mitigate the screwing we receive.
@@j4s0n39 It's sickening.
Shoot, I'd just take the cash we've put in without any interest. I've still got over 20 years until retirement, and I can manage that money way better than the government ever could.
@@j4s0n39 ok, give me a tax credit then for everything paid in plus interest.
Katherine, no crayons unless you have USMC service 😂
YOU DON'T PAY TAXES .
THEY TAKE YOUR MONEY 💰
"Taxation is theft." Anti-Proudhon
If they’re getting rid of it at least wave what’s not been paid out to the person through property taxes, student loans etc.
If the Amish can opt-out I want to as well.
I can’t remember who it was but I heard an economist say that calling Social Security a Ponzi scheme is an insult to Ponzi schemes.
I mean, to-date I’ve probably got something like $10k in SS. I’m 34 and would really like an option to pull it out like a savings account. Considering my job’s retirement scheme is “nothing until you’re 67”, I’m never going to see a world without a desk. Just let me pull the money that I could use right now rather than when I’m still in the same chair at the same desk and dying of a heart attack.
One, it isn't the governments role Constitutionally to mandate and control a retirement savings system. That being said, the Constitution is generally ignored anyway so let's make a reasonable system that mandates a retirement savings plan but it is under the sole control of the contributor, much like a 401k. It's your money to invest, not the governments to dole out and change the rules on a whim.
For working and middle class Americans, there is never enough left over to fully fund 401(k) and plans most companies no longer provide for retirement. SS has become a de facto retirement as bad as an investment it is. But until I hear you call for cutting lifetime, welfare/SNAP/Medicaid recipient benefits, stopping ridiculous pork earmarks, stop funding foreign wars, and cut non-emergency foreign aid, I really don't want to hear others kick one of the legs of my retirement stool out from under me. It's bad enough we have to pay into Medicare...but still have to buy health insurance plans in retirement.
And don't forget, even in retirement you must pay involuntary Medicare monthly premiums plus supplemental insurance premiums
Well, getting a check for what YOU paid to the Social Security may be smaller than what you are getting from the program, sure. However, the fair comparison would be a check for what you AND your employer paid (that is, underpaid you) to the system with lost interest (say invested into the US Total Market or into S&P500 which has about the same return) for ALL years that you worked (not just the 35 highest earning years) free of any taxes VS current Social Security benefits.
I would take the former in a heartbeat.
One of the many things that get to me is that I was taxed on my salary when I earned it, it was taken away from me, and I'm taxed on it again when I get it back.
No, the FICA tax is the contribution into the social security system, and that is taken out before income taxes are deducted from your pay.
I want a lump sum check of the amount I contributed AND the compounding 10% interest I would have earned in a S&P 500 index fund- which would be approximately 1.9 million dollars (I did the actual math)...
The just way to handle social security recipients is to treat the program like a bankrupt corporation. The program's assets (bonds) should be paid out based on who has paid the most in and has received the least. It should not be based on need at all.
The goal should be an equal, percentage wise, restoration of these creditors.
If welfare is going to be a thing it should help everyone, not just old people. I'd rather have my money go to helping the homeless, veterans, people in poverty, etc. not to a group of people who don't work at all and aren't poor.
The Social Security Administration combined with the IRS are a combined group of agencies created sometime by other agency partners!! Billions of dollars unaccounted for
🚨In Detroit my accrued pension benefits have been cut 20% since 2013😢
I have been saying this ever since I knew what the two meant.
We didn't live to 80 when SS was created. There's not enough to go around indefinitely. Just let it run dry and leave it.
The government will probably notionaly pay social security
allbeit in devalued dollars
So true
"Anyone with half a brain"
Dude, thats like 15% of the population
I'd hope it's 100% of the population, with the vast majority also having a second half of a brain.
it is worse that a ponzi scheme
Might as well call it a Roosevelt scheme.
The fact that you are not owed money that was taken from you, your entire working life, to help when you are past working age, is exactly why “Taxation is Theft”!
Fine, cancel it. Just give me a tax credit now for all the money I've paid in plus interest.
To all those that still want SS.
Why should I be taxed into poverty to pay for you?
Because shut up and gimmie!
Phase it out or at least make it optional. Me planning for my future is my problem, not yours or the government’s.
We know...
I've also heard something interesting about all social security numbers are also linked to bank accounts on speculation of what this person is worth in their life or something like that so people can be profitable potentially?
Pyramid scheme, not ponzi scheme. Though birthing and raising your offspring in a particularly rewarding way of "attracting new investors".
In other news, the sky is blue.
Democracy will do whatever democracy will do. Most of folks that don't depend on Social Security have wealth that was created primarily through fiat currency inflation for both real estate and the stock market. Those folks have paid an amount of tax to run the Ponzi scheme, but on the other hand their unearned wealth from asset inflation has let them undercut the labor of younger folks without assets. Almost no one with assets strongly argues for abolition of zoning or hard money. OTOH, no one young advocates for getting rid of secondary or tertiary government supplied education and licensing requirements. Given the current system we are all both victims and aggressors.
You can “walk away”
You have to send a letter to the IRS using certified mail. You lose your social security number and you can’t do anything that requires a ssn I.e. a bank loan etc. but if you do it right you no longer have to pay in
Doesn't having an income require a SSN though? Most people kind of need money coming in to pay bills and you know, eat....
That’s seems like bullshit.
@@minnion2871having an income doesn't require a SSI number. Plenty of other ways.
Several organizations, like the Amish for example, DO NOT pay into Socialist Security.
@@minnion2871 No SSN is needed, you get a tax id number the same as they give corporations.
But keep in mind that the change in SS withholding may change your taxable gross income. (Do your own math, it has been a few years since I made enough to pay attention to those sort of details.)
I call it an entitlement because it’s different from income taxes that go into a general fund and don’t know what else to call it and be accurate and factual.
And yet no one predicts that the Pentagon is going to run out of money.
The theory is that the Pentagon provides somethin of value. I have doubts that that's true.
@@neilreynolds3858So seniors' lives lack value to libertarians?
The Pentagon is funded on general revenues. SS is not.
Mike Joshnson is a clown. I don't take anyone seriously about fiscal responsibility unless they openly say they will phase out medicare and SS over decadesm
Are you just figuring this out? I was alive when the cash was cleaned out of the SS account and left with IOUs.
My big issue is that you guys are trying to blame the parties for why there hasn’t been reform when you should blame the electorate. Because if fixing social security was popular the Democrats and Republicans would be scrambling over each other to do it.
Why aren't "antiwar" libertarians mentioning that the social security fund is heavily borrowed against to find various wars to avoid raising taxes?
👍
Behaviors of a cartel
Since political parties are organized crime, the resemblance is entirely accurate.
Best middle ground solution: make S.S voluntary.
What if we merge them? Use all the funds in Medicare to support Soc Sec?
Medicare is in worst shape
Exactly. Scrap it. Move everyone on Medicare or Medicaid to Obamacare until we can fix that. I don't see a reason for three separate plans.
@@axepagode4321 Administrative night-mare
Well if we did have any money that might work but we're bankrupt.
Folks are concerned about SS after coerced medical procedures? Wow!
I'm concerned about everything the government does but as long as their being stupid enough to give me money, I'll take it.
Bruh, what ISNT a Ponzi scheme? Literally living is a ponzi scheme
So it's just theft?
Yeah technically it's a ponzi scheme at face value, but if they bought national debt at a decent interest rate it would technically self fund
Interest rates can be whatever the Fed wants it to be. Inflation is the means to reduce debt.
Savings is borrowed from the private sector.
Yes, I still want my money back, because I could privately invest it and make more than the SS payment scheme. The way you phrased it doesn't tell the truth.
.. GOP pay back what they gave to the rich we wouldn't have a problem
Thank Uncle Ronnie for this crap
Except that the people who now get this benefit had their money taken by force for decades with the promise that they would be able to collect some benefit in the future.
Are they now wrong to expect that promise to be kept because the federal government stole the funds that were intended to fund the benefit?
What part of "There was never any promise." don't you understand?
ANYONE who collects SS benefits for more than 8 years and 9 months gets ALL “their” contributions BACK, INCLUDING INTEREST.
Without social security, old people wouldnt be able to be independent from their family members. People don’t save unless forced to. Either younger people will be burdened by their elder family members or older people will die in the streets. 40% of social security recipients only form of income is social security. Also I would expect to take more out than what i put in over a 40 year career, due to the interest gained over that time period. Just like my 401K.
Ben Shapiro got flak for saying the same thing
Gimmie ponzi schemes over NICK sayings that you're a fool if you don't get the CLOT SHOT.
Apparently you don't know what a Ponzi scheme is.
If you are young opt-out. IRS form 4029
Is it only for religious groups? How can you keep social security number and opt out as an individual?
@@user-qy6cq7tp9bIt's for members of certain religious groups. You don't keep your SS number.
@@user-qy6cq7tp9b You'll have to find a public sector job that has it's own retirement system. For example, most teachers in Texas are covered by Teachers Retirement System of Texas (TRC) and their income is not subject to Social Security taxes.
@@user-qy6cq7tp9b The older SS cards explicitly said "only for SS use" and the number was never supposed to be a general id nor tax id number. But that asside, the IRS does assign tax id numbers for those without a SSN, like corporate entities, foreign workers on a visa, trusts, etc
NONE of these LIARS EVER addresses HOW much they would spend to have disability coverage for their ENTIRE FAMILY. For ALL THOSE 45 YEARS!!!!
I want every part of a cent they owe me. Don't forget the interest they owe me. They've been taking it for my retirement. Old people ain't rich.
It is, but a necessary one.
If the government forcefully took money out of my paycheck, I will demand every penny be paid out to me that I have earned.
Good luck. If they pay it back it will be with worthless dollars.
And taxation is theft. What else is new?
Except you pay INTO SS, so you're entitled.
SS invests money, so it's not a Ponzi scheme.
SS has no guaranteed rate of return, so it's not a Ponzi scheme.
SS makes enough money to make it's payouts, so it's not a Ponzi scheme.
When you pay into SS, it gets spent on recipients right away. None of it is invested to gain interest. The only reason it's been able to keep going is because it forces the younger generations to keep paying into it. So, there's no day of reckoning like a normal Ponzi scheme.
Unless, of course, there's nobody who can afford to pay into it. It's called demographic collapse which is what we'll get after the financial collapse from borrowing more money than we can ever pay back.
@@neilreynolds3858 you Repub goofers have been singing this toon for 50 years. It's BS. Reagan was a fool. Figure that out.
Well you two are obviously well-to-do, so move if you want. But millions who can barely make ends meet depend on social security, and of course they get it. You don't even mention how long your immigrant paid in. The real reason Social Security is struggling is the law the allows people to STOP paying in after they've earned $168K - which is like on January 1 for billionaires. Raise the cap. THEY don't need it, for sure. (Plus what do they plan to do with what WE'VE paid in? Pocket it, as usual?)