McDowell's
Rookie
- Jul 27, 2010
- 883
- 239
- 0
- Banned
- #121
So, is bank robbery equally "not a problem", as long as you can get away with?...Are you serious?
Different crime, so the analogy doesn't work. If you're thinking of Social Security as a Ponzi Scheme, the thing to consider is that no one calls the cops on Ponzi Schemes until they stop getting a return. With reform, the Social Security system can provide you similar benefits, adjusted for inflation, to that provided to current recipients.
Now, you come to the real problem of dismantling it. Simply closing the program means everyone loses out. Those currently benefiting are benefiting because they paid in. As such, they have a reasonable expectation to continue to get benefits. Those paying in will want their benefits too. Closing the program down will have an enormous, and avoidable, cost. So why not simply reform it and keep going.
At what point are people "allowed" to take responsibility for their own lives?
People take responsibility every day with every action and every decision. Having a safety net doesn't undercut responsbility, especially when the safety net only "guarantees" a subsistance living at best. All you're doing is preventing someone from dying on the streets due to factors that may very well be outside their own control.
Your approach prevents the thrifty and industrious from becoming literal millionaires, in the name of a "safety net" for those who aren't....It codifies general mediocrity of the many, in the name of ameliorating the incompetence, sloth and shortsightedness of a relative few.
The thrifty are still doing pretty well. I know quite a few folks on the lower end of the middle class spending range that are still saving and living comfortably post retirement.
Like any safety net, there will be some that end up in it due to their own laziness or sloth. And if such, they're welcome to the life that Social Security provides. In case you missed it, it's not exactly a huge income or a comfortable social scale. And if you're on Social Security because you made bad economic decisions or were lazy, chances are good the life you're looking at won't exactly be a good one.
Safety nets are there to help those that through no fault of their own end up out of luck, which does happen. A random home fire, a diagnosis of cancer, or one of any number of events could leave even the most thrifty of us bankrupt in short order through no fault of our own. That's who the net is for.
Ponzi schemes are illegal regardless of whether the cops are called or authorities are aware of their existence. No analogy is required. You admitted social security is a ponzi scheme. As such, the system needs to be reformed to something sustainable. Saying the status quo works and at the same time admitting it's an inherently flawed system is completely contradictory. Just because the failure point is somewhere in the distant future doesn't mean the underlying issues shouldn't be addressed. The sooner they are addressed the less damage that will occur in the long run.
Why wouldn't people want their money placed into a system of wealth creation rather than a shuffle game of transfer payments? This isn't an all or nothing discussion. Allowing a certain level of private investment with social security funds in a restricted group of funds would create a more effective system.
To a certain exent, you're right. Once the government acquires this money through taxation, it is no longer mine or yours. It then becomes our money collectively, and the government putting it under its proverbial mattress is screwing us all.