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 : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (54303)	7/28/2011 9:55:45 PM
From: joefromspringfield	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 103300

"As far as Social Security I'm not sure what your exact point is. It is not, and never has been, an "investment program"." I agree it is not an investment program. It is a Ponzi scheme. The largest one in history and probably the only one that doesn't collapse. It is a Ponzi scheme where participation is required by law. Since there is always money coming in, it can always payout benefits due at some percentage on the dollar.

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (54303)	7/28/2011 11:16:01 PM
From: Wayners	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 103300

I think you are right on the last point about SS being an investment. It's actually a fake investment and when they say the program is backed by bonds stored in WV, well the Govt issued the "bonds" and is also the owner of the "bonds" Actually, they aren't bonds at all because a bond requires two parties, a bond issuer and a bond owner. The Feds are both, so they aren't even bonds, so SS clearly isn't an investment either. Heck we'd all be better off if we had all been required to just buy Govt bonds and put them into a private account right? Why wasn't that proposed? Well duh, greedy Govt. They wanted the best of both worlds, the surplus money paid in and then never having to pay that surplus back!!! Ingenious!