Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

BakedBeansBazar t1_iuosrak wrote

Reply to comment by Wear_Overall in This guy is sure gonna be mad next week if Bolduc wins (Bolduc is now ahead in the polls) by Burger-King-Covid

If we cancel social security, just think of how many more tax breaks R's can give to massive corporations!

16

Wear_Overall t1_iuoyco4 wrote

That's the plan. The republicans don't take corporate America's cock out of their mouths for a second.

11

mod-corruption t1_iup0t22 wrote

I’m 29 and I’d be pretty happy to stop paying into a Ponzi scheme that I’ll never benefit from

−12

BakedBeansBazar t1_iup2jhz wrote

Tell me you don't know what a Ponzi scheme is without telling me you don't know what a Ponzi scheme is.

11

wegandi t1_iurq9th wrote

SS is a pseudo ponzi scheme. They use the SS tax to pay recipients. Theres no SS fund. The best you can say is SS is mostly held (and props up) treasury bonds, that which isnt siphoned as general fund fungible money (which is vast majority). In that vein its pretty identical to a pyramid/ponzi scheme, however those schemes also require intent to defraud. I dont think SS intent is to defraud folks. Half and half.

The main problem with SS is of course its abyssmal failure. Rate of return over its lifespan is 1.5-1.9%, teetering on being under inflation over that timespan. Theres also fact SS is taxed as income, has onerous requirements (you cant work more than iirc 10-15 hours / make more than 15,000$/year and collect SS), isnt inheritable beyond your spouse, etc. Compared to Roth IRA / 401k, or traditional 401k that SS withholding is losing you vast sums of money.

Of course, because some people would not use that SS withholding to build their retirement, everyone is punished to SS misery and thats an inherent failure of socialism. Equal misery. SS is barely livable if that. An abject failure on all accounts. If you put that money into a Roth youll get 6-7% yearly return over its lifespan, tax benefits, if you die your family inherits, and so much more. Of course, the sensible option of letting people opt out, they cant do because SS requires workers paying tax to fund it. That SS that was withheld 12 years ago, 6 years ago, 3 years ago, is gone. Its a scam and I'd do anything to not have my money thrown away "for my own good".

−2

mod-corruption t1_iupd54z wrote

Tell me you believe in failed government programs without telling me. Oh wait, you’re already crying about the idea of ending Social Security.

−8

BakedBeansBazar t1_iuphryb wrote

I actually agree it's a failed system, I think there's just a way to go about it and not. We grew up knowing we would never see a cent of it, the older generation did not and is currently relying on it in many circumstances. However many of them are not at all, and are way better off than we are. It should be a circumstantial cut off, need based. Not just cutting the program all together. I know a lot of boomers that don't need it at all, I know a lot of boomers who do.

2

mod-corruption t1_iuxs5oa wrote

Okay, needs-based social security for the old people already relying on it. And then stop taxing people for it.

1