Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JBTFD who wrote (395031)	4/19/2003 2:30:21 PM
From: CYBERKEN	Respond to of 769667

<<I thought that benefits were based on the amount put in.>> You're kidding, aren't you? Even Patsy McKee isn't dumb enough to suggest a silly-assed thing like that. You had better log off for a few years and take a close look at the Greatest Fraud in Human History before you make a fool of yourself again. It's true, kid, that the managers of the Great Fraud put out propaganda that would lead the galactiacally STUPID to think that they will get more "return" if they "invest" more. But you may be the ONLY American they have fooled. Even the left-wing parrots here must be laughing at you-and THEY are hardly the brightest bulbs in the chandelier themselves...

To: JBTFD who wrote (395031)	4/19/2003 6:31:14 PM
From: Peter O'Brien	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Social Security is a "Ponzi scheme" fraud. The defining characteristics of a Ponzi scheme are the following: 1) current benefits are paid solely from cash flow from current contributors, and NOT from any true investment returns. 2) a "promise" is made that the situation is sustainable for all future beneficiaries. This defines Social Security perfectly. There is no "investment trust". The so-called "investment trust" consists entirely of non-marketable IOUs. The situation is not sustainable. In fact, the "promise" of Social Security has already been broken multiple times by raising Social Security taxes and reducing the promised benefits for future recipients (e.g., taxing of benefits, and raising of the retirement age). It is "Enron-style" accounting, and the whole thing is going to eventually "blow up". No amount of tinkering is going to save it. The longer it goes on (i.e., the more "good money is thrown after bad money"), the worse the final "blow up" is going to be.