Saturday, September 10, 2011

ONLY A LIBERAL COULD HAVE WRITTEN THIS ONE!

Glenn Kessler posted a blog on The Washington Post blog site on 9/8 called ‘A Primer on Social Security’.  The blog begins with Gov. Rick Perry’s assertion that SS is a Ponzi scheme.  Then he proceeds to ask and answer questions about SS.  As you read down you come to the question:  Why wasn’t the surplus cash generated by Social Security placed in stocks or something else? And his answer, which is how a liberal thinks:
That has been an option discussed from time to time, though people were concerned about government control of corporate assets and having retirement funds subjects to market swings.  But it’s important to remember that if the $2.6 trillion now in the Social Security trust funds had been invested in some other security, not only would the value of the trust funds be subject to more volatility, but all things being equal, the publicly held debt of the United States would be $2.6 trillion higher today. That’s because for years the Social Security surpluses were used to help fund government operations, thus reducing the overall budget deficit….
In answering his own question, the author is saying ‘Gee – if we hadn’t taken the SS trust assets and dumped them into the general pot, look how much HIGHER our national debt would be‼!’

And Mr. Kessler tacitly blames current retirees for the mess that is now SS. 
The baby boom generation has begun to retire, reducing the number of workers per retiree.  Meanwhile, people are living longer and thus would collect benefits longer, while parents are not having as many children, which limits the pool of new workers.
SHAME!  SHAME!  SHAME!  On all you baby boomers for not having flocks of kids to keep the pool of workers paying in to this ‘Ponzi scheme’. 

What’s a Ponzi scheme, you ask?  A fraudulent investing scam that promises high rates of return at little risk to investors.  The scheme generates returns for older investors by acquiring new investors.  This scam actually yields the promised returns to earlier investors, as long as there are more new investors.  Hmmmmm… the defenders of SS say it is NOT a Ponzi scheme because it’s not ‘fraudulent’.  That’s bullshit – semantics.  Just because it’s government sanctioned does not mean it’s not fraudulent.

And it is NOT the boomers’ fault SS is going broke – this can be laid at the doorstep of the federal Government (are you surprised?)

Back in the day….. the family WAS most of the private sector.  Families were necessarily large because there was farming to be done, smaller children to be cared for, crops to be harvested, trees to be cut and lumber to be made, and old folks to be cared for.  ‘Currency’ was gotten by selling what the family generated – or people traded for the things they needed.  Then along comes Uncle Sam and Social Security – a government with its heart in the right place and little else.  With the end of the Great Depression and the onset of WWll, more people entered the labor force and the older generation had the ‘security’ of being able to take care of themselves (with a little help from their kids).  The need for large families decreased.  It wasn’t a conscious decision by parents not to have large families so SS would go belly-up.  It was just the way of life in the middle of the last century.  Families just got smaller.

I submit that Social Security IS fraudulent because…. the money was taken for a specific purpose and then diverted to another.  This is a crime against everyone who has contributed to the system.  SS IS a Ponzi scheme because eventually there is not enough money to go around and the ‘pyramid’ collapses.  That collapse is not far away.

Read Kessler’s complete blog:

2 comments:

  1. After reading your post, I'm not sure how you feel about SS. I know it was never meant to be the total $ for retirement, but for a lot of people that is all they have. What would do for them? We are fortunate in that we've saved money for retirement, but we are drawing SS. I know a lot of people also believe Medicare is an entitlement program. I know, that the day I turned 65, I started on MC, and in the years since, I'm had NO ONE come to my door to tell me about another health plan. We have no choice. I think a lot of the problems would be solved if everyone had to take the same benefits.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for visiting my post and commenting. I have another one I wish you would read. Here's the link...

    http://reidsright.blogspot.com/2010/11/kill-social-security-while-we-can.html

    There is also a book called 'Wealth of Nations' you might find very informative, as would your children.

    My folks are retired and the day they turned 65 they went on Medicare - they had wonderful health insurance prior to that but they were FORCED BY LAW to make Medicare their primary provider. Obamacare will be Medicare on steroids. Medicare is wrought with fraud and abuse... there is no way Obamacare can be anything other than the same for millions more.. care will be less efficient and effective because the government will choose the cheaper therapy - it's the only way they can hope to sustain this huge entitlement.

    As for SS... please read the post I linked above... it's sad the return you are getting for a lifetime of 'investing'. There has to be a plan to wean the youth away from SS and into private retirement while not abandoning those on or approaching SS.... I've blogged on this too... it's time our government too a responsible stance on this rather than kicking the can down the road for others to deal with.

    Thanks again for your comment. God bless you and your family....

    ReplyDelete