Published: Friday, May 30 2014 2:05 p.m. MDT
For 75 years social security has taken in more than it's spent. Is there
another government program that has been in the black for that long?If it wasn't for the recession it would still be in the black. Get
Americans back to work, and the economy humming again, and it will be a non
"Starting in 2010 … taxes collected weren't sufficient to fund
that year's benefit payments,"So raise taxes back to where
they should be for high earners.We have to remember that Reaganomics
tampered with a system that worked, and left us with a MESS that does not
work.If we can get rid of the ridiculous "Conservatives" in
Congress and implement workable solutions, then yes, we can save Social
Social Security has been in the black because there were lots of workers to
support each retiree. That demographic is changing with the retirement of the
baby boomers and the reduction in workers due to dropping birth rates. It will
take more than a booming economy to fix Social Security.
FICA increase in the 80's was passed to build a reserve for the baby
boomers. The birth rates have been steady above the replacement level until the
recession. It drops during hard times, always has, always will. In
the 20's we hit one hundred million people, by the 70's we hit two
million people, by 2010 we hit 300 million people. We are more than replacing
The only reason Social Security is in trouble is due to politicians raiding the
trust fund for 50 years to shore up other areas of government spending.
Wow, they sure don't teach much about economics or government any more, or
some people were not paying attention.Social Security is a Ponzi
scheme, and where once six workers paid in for each person drawing out, that is
now down to almost one for one.Much of Social Security spending is not
traditional payments to wage earners, but straight handouts for life to
"disabled" people who have gamed the system.Class warfare to
seize the earning of the rich only serves to stifle earnings and also taxes
which are a percentage of earnings. Take it all if you like, and you will get
almost nothing.We have delayed fixing Social Security for so long
(for partisan political reasons) that the essential changes will be even more
painful than if we had made modest changes during the Bush Administration.Anyone under 30 who thinks they will ever collect a dime of Social
Security for themselves will be terribly disappointed. Bet on it!
The Social Security (SS) scheme, like all other Ponzi schemes, is destined to
eventual collapse and for all the same reasons. In the case of SS, one has at
least the advantage of having the statistical precision of death probabilities
to help chart the eventual time of the collapse. However, even that has been
compromised by the typical corruption of the government's financial
data.It is amazing to me that so few people are aware of the fact
that the so-called "lock box" into which the SS tax revenues have been
supposedly safeguarded for future use by the contributors has been raided to pay
other government functions for **decades**!! All that is left in the "lock
box" of a SS account are a bunch of IOUs.So, in yet another
aspect characteristic of a Ponzi scheme, where the scammers use current
"investments" to fund fictitious juicy returns AND pay for their own
lavish life styles, the government hands out SS funds for people lucky enough to
get something while there's still something to get, AND pay for (some of)
the wasteful, bloated governmental operations.It's a big SCAM!
Number of Americans working 144 millionNumber of Americans drawing
social security 56 million. (includes non working children and spouses of ex
workers)If it is a ponzi scheme, so is the insurance industry.
Don't people support themselves when they pay into it for 40-45 years?
I believe if we could get the Democrats and Republicans to work together there
are solutions to be found for Social Security. One component might be a need
for higher taxes on high earners? Lets elect people who are able to implement
compromise and outcome driven strategies to solve problems. Term limits would
probably help too.
One may argue to the end of time if Social Security is a ponzu scheme, or a
fraud on working Americans, or whatever the latest right wing talking point may
be.However, it will never go away. We just have to figure out how
to fund future obligations, or cut benefits, or raise the retirement age, or
whatever solutions our Congress allows to pass. The problem most
people have with Social Security though, is their failure to save for their old
age. You can not live on Social Security alone.
@ prelax...So is the insurance company.Right on! Absolutely
Social Security could remain in the black if the freeloaders who didn't pay
their FICA taxes are excluded from the system.
If we could avoid future costly and unnecessary wars, we would have enough money
for things that actually benefitted us such as Social Security. The American
people are being taken for a ride. It would be nice if they would wake up.
Doing the math. Figure the different interest rates through the years the baby
boomers worked till retirement. Every one who reached retirement would of had
millions. Let government control it you'll get nothing. Sacrifice liberty
for security you'll get neither.
I wish more people would oppose SS on principle. Can anyone make the case that
it is justifiable in any situation use force to take someone's legitimately
earned money? Regardless of the noble intentions, regardless of the results--how
can anyone get around the fact that SS is effectively theft? If you don't
believe it is theft, then I'd love to hear your reasoning. When someone
uses the threat of violence to take my money, which I don't want to give to
them, I can't see how it can be called anything else.
Joshua,Do you feel the same way about the state of Utah taking my
income tax money to pay for the education of other peoples children regardless
of the noble intentions of educating children?
@Fred44Does the extreme left want us to spend more on education or
not?I think the State of Utah has shown you can do more with less,
by exercising responsibility.And people exercising personal
responsibility with their own money, rather than allowing the government to take
it away from them out of their control, can do more with it than big federal
The math is simple. The number of retirees is going up and the number of
workers paying FICA is going down. The impact of this has been known for
decades. Politicians can do math (well, some their assistants can). The
problem is that their math only looks 2, 4, or 6 years ahead only. The idea of
high income workers paying more is the head-in-the-sand "there will be no
unforeseen consequences" school of thought. High income earners (not the
very highest - of which there are few - but the several million that really pay
almost 50% of the taxes) are already scaling back in their work due to
regulations and taxes. I was taught in school that "a taxable dollar is
better than no dollar at all" -- but that depends on how much extra work you
have to do to get that extra dollar and how much of it you get to keep. I
actually heard someone suggest that we require the "rich" to keep
working in their professions and not downsize or scale back their small
businesses . . . but I seem to recall a constitutional amendment that outlawed
Yeah, I'm not planning on getting a dime of SS. Which makes me even more
resentful of paying into the system. I can take care of myself, thank you very
And yes, Joshua, all taxation by definition is theft. It is using coercion to
force people to give some up some of their property. Some of it is necessary in
order for government to carry out its constitutionally mandated
responsibilities. A lot of it, like social security, is not.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments