Donald J. Trump (For everyone else)
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
The new people coming in make payments that go to the people who have been in the system for a while. If new people stop coming in or the existing people start getting paid too much or something happens to the money then the system collapses. It's hard to come up with a more textbook ponzi.
That doesn't imply its a bad system or one design with bad intentions. But its a ponzi.
It's also a Ponzi because the returns being guaranteed are higher than market returns.
Being risk free , short term bond returns should be guaranteed.
When you do the financial math on the implied returns given contributions and benefits, they are significantly higher than risk free returns were during the timeframe -> Ponzi
Jeremy Lewin, one of the DOGE employees tasked with dismantling USAID, who has also played a role in DOGE’s incursions into the National Institutes of Health and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, is listed as making just over $167, 000 annually, WIRED has confirmed. Lewin is assigned to the Office of the Administrator within the General Services Administration.
BUT THE SAVINGS!!!!
The new people coming in make payments that go to the people who have been in the system for a while. If new people stop coming in or the existing people start getting paid too much or something happens to the money then the system collapses. It's hard to come up with a more textbook ponzi.
That doesn't imply its a bad system or one design with bad intentions. But its a ponzi.
Exactly and the problem is you have more folks collecting than coming in . As well the amount they deduct is capped . So as they say its got problems
The new people coming in make payments that go to the people who have been in the system for a while. If new people stop coming in or the existing people start getting paid too much or something happens to the money then the system collapses. It's hard to come up with a more textbook ponzi.
That doesn't imply its a bad system or one design with bad intentions. But its a ponzi.
Is this the current right-wing talking point, to try and undermine and do away w/ social security?
I have a crazy, crazy idea. How about instead of just regurgitating these talking points, you sit back and ask yourself, is this actually true? And then do a little investigation. Otherwise, you're just admitting that you're OK w/ being brainwashed.
Because this is what's happening.
Watch... I'll disprove why it's not a ponzi scheme in 2 secs... name me a ponzi scheme that can be reformed or changed by law... or that is 100% transparent? or one that is backed by law and US bonds?
See how easy that was?
Ponzis are deliberate fraud schemes. What is being talked about is not a deliberate fraud.
Ponzi was used as it's a slur against a functioning government system, to try and undermine it in people's minds.
It's blindingly obvious to anyone not in the cult.
Ponzis are deliberate fraud schemes. What is being talked about is not a deliberate fraud.
Ponzi was used as it's a slur against a functioning government system, to try and undermine it in people's minds.
It's blindingly obvious to anyone not in the cult.
Ok let's call it a pyramid instead of a ponzi if that makes you feel better.
And yes it's a functioning government system now. If you think it's sustainable to always function, yikes
I'm seeing this comment make the rounds on twitter.
Obviously no proof of this, just repeating the sentiment over and over.
Its always interesting watching the machine in action. People like you just taking in the **** like a little baby shitbird and regurgitating it all over everything
No proof of what?? I watched the whole thing. I watched the crowd. Literally the only time Dems clapped in any significant number was for Ukraine. There were maybe 3 or 4 Dem congressmen that did clap for other stuff but 95% of them DID NOT CLAP for victims of cancer, rape, death by his assassination attempt, border firefights, etc...
Even Cenk Uyger criticized them for not clapping.
ya. right now social security pays off the old people with money of the young people. but soon enough there won't be enough money from the young people to cover payments to the old people. that doesn't mean social security will fail. the USG will just have to get money from elsewhere (eg. print it). so social security will continue via a forever tax of extra inflation.
That’s just a function of how a fiat currency system works .
It’s applicable to social security, government budget , the entire capitalist economy we have …..
So just to focus on « social security is a Ponzi scheme » and leaving out the entire system functioning (debt based monetary system) is pretty laughable and dishonest.
No proof of what?? I watched the whole thing. I watched the crowd. Literally the only time Dems clapped in any significant number was for Ukraine. There were maybe 3 or 4 Dem congressmen that did clap for other stuff but 95% of them DID NOT CLAP for victims of cancer, rape, death by his assassination attempt, border firefights, etc...
Even Cenk Uyger criticized them for not clapping.
watching?
who has time for that bro, it's fake news
Is this the current right-wing talking point, to try and undermine and do away w/ social security?
I have a crazy, crazy idea. How about instead of just regurgitating these talking points, you sit back and ask yourself, is this actually true? And then do a little investigation. Otherwise, you're just admitting that you're OK w/ being brainwashed.
Because this is what's happening.
Watch... I'll disprove why it's not a ponzi scheme in 2 secs... name me a ponzi scheme that can be reformed or changed b
The best comparison we have today to social security is a ponzi scheme.
"name me a ponzi scheme that can be reformed or changed by law" - Just because something is adaptable doesn't make it less of a ponzi.
"or that is 100% transparent" - Just because something is transparent doesn't mean it isn't a ponzi. If I started a club where the stated rules said everyone who joins in the first money has an entry fee of $1, but they will get $0.50 in the 2nd month because people who join the 2nd month have to pay $2 to join, the people who join the 3rd month have to pay $3 but the founding members get a $0.50 from that fee and the 2nd month people get a $0.50 too, and so on. This would be an example of a very transparent ponzi.
"or one that is backed by law and US bonds" - Just because a ponzi is run by someone you think is legit doesn't make it any less of a ponzi. Remember madoff was considered super legit and an elite investor before his ponzi came crashing down.
The social security funding issue has been a thing for 20 years and Elon Musk calls it a ponzi scheme and suddenly you are all experts on why social security is a ponzi.
Its legitimately insufferable
Nothing you guys say is an original though. Its just regurgitating whatever they tell you to say that morning
The best comparison we have today to social security is a ponzi scheme.
"name me a ponzi scheme that can be reformed or changed by law" - Just because something is adaptable doesn't make it less of a ponzi.
"or that is 100% transparent" - Just because something is transparent doesn't mean it isn't a ponzi. If I started a club where the stated rules said everyone who joins in the first money has an entry fee of $1, but they will get $0.50 in the 2nd month because people who join the 2nd month hav
It’s not a ponzi scheme because no one is meant to be making a profit off it/no profit is promised.
The social security funding issue has been a thing for 20 years and Elon Musk calls it a ponzi scheme and suddenly you are all experts on why social security is a ponzi.
Its legitimately insufferable
Nothing you guys say is an original though. Its just regurgitating whatever they tell you to say that morning
Nothing you guys say is an original though. Its just regurgitating whatever they tell you to say that morning
You are not a serious person.
Joy.
Hitler.
Constitutional crisis.
Get outta here with your blue maga talk track.
The social security funding issue has been a thing for 20 years and Elon Musk calls it a ponzi scheme and suddenly you are all experts on why social security is a ponzi.
Its legitimately insufferable
Nothing you guys say is an original though. Its just regurgitating whatever they tell you to say that morning
There are approximately seven people in the United States that come up with all the rhetoric and talking points for each side.
The copy gets handed out to various newsrooms, who in turn distribute it to their networks, both corporate and independent, and then those stories get picked up and tweaked by bloggers and influencers in the same way that you'd copy your 4th grade book report from a friend and change a few of the words to make it yours.
The truly original thoughts you run into online are typically the most insane **** you can imagine, because it gets cooked up by mentally ill people from the depths of depravity. Everyone else just kinda congregates somewhere in the middle and plays it safe.
It's only insufferable because this particular talking point didn't come down through your preferred pipeline of acceptable rhetoric.
I'm sure we can go through your post history and find a bunch of inane lefty-approved soundbites, too.
Also, Elon Musk is hardly the first person to call social security a Ponzi scheme. It took me exactly 4 seconds to find an article from 1999.
Oh, look, 1988 courtesy of the New York Times:
Yeah Ponzi scheem is a pretty standard chriticism. It highlights the way the system may be unstustainable but it's also very different from an 'investors' pov than a real ponzi scheme. Government has many other sources of wealth (including printing) than new contributers to the scheme
The Kremlin said in remarks aired Sunday that the United States' sudden shift in foreign policy "largely aligns" with its own position.
"The new administration is rapidly changing all foreign policy configurations. This largely aligns with our vision," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told a reporter from state television.
And I'd like to draw attention to the end of the article and the plea to readers:
A Message from The Moscow Times:
Dear readers,
We are facing unprecedented challenges. Russia's Prosecutor General's Office has designated The Moscow Times as an "undesirable" organization, criminalizing our work and putting our staff at risk of prosecution. This follows our earlier unjust labeling as a "foreign agent."
These actions are direct attempts to silence independent journalism in Russia. The authorities claim our work "discredits the decisions of the Russian leadership." We see things differently: we strive to provide accurate, unbiased reporting on Russia.
One other note about the Moscow times: The Moscow Times, originally established in Moscow in 1992, relocated its headquarters to Amsterdam, Netherlands, in 2022. This move was prompted by restrictive media laws enacted in Russia following the invasion of Ukraine. Subsequently, in April 2022, the Russian-language website of The Moscow Times was blocked within Russia.
This is the world that Trump is aligning with. And if you want to deny it, you should understand very clearly... you've been brainwashed, and you're in a cult.
You are not a serious person.
Joy.
Hitler.
Constitutional crisis.
Get outta here with your blue maga talk track.
My brother in christ, the US Supreme Court just squeaked through 5-4 that the US Government is in fact on the hook to fulfill its contractual obligations.
Objectively, that is the most slam dunk 9-0 ruling that could ever exist.
"If the US Government signs its name on the dotted line should it be required to fulfill whatever it signed against"
Yes. Resounding yes. Zero scenarios where the answer to that is a no. Literally unquestionable.
We were literally one vote away from ruling that the US's word and reputation means jack ****ing ****
The fact that you are some Canadian bumpkin who was radicalized by crypto twitter and thinks that makes him an expert on American politics actually makes you the definition of an unserious person. Lolz and crypto my ass.
Oh, look, 1988 courtesy of the New York Times:
It doesn't matter how many times you say it, it's not a ponzi scheme.
They are just constantly grooming and brainwashing you guys. I've watched this movie play out so many times now, and it always has the same ending. People on the left, trying to warn people on the right about the outcomes of their economic policies. People on the right, plug their ears. Economic outcomes happen, then liberals come in and clean it up, only to have people on the right forgetting (or never really understanding), why those calamities happened to begin with.
Rinse. Repeat.
Look... if the right-wing in America has good ideas, and deregulation, tax cuts for the billionaire class, and privatization works for great... then you should be able to find models of where this has worked.
But there are none. I'd point you to study Kansas, where Brownback recently attempted this, and what the outcome was.
I can point you to MANY models, where left-wing ideas have worked for BOTH industry AND the working class... not just one or the other. I know... it's crazy, but I read stuffs. You guys should too.
Because it's shouldn't be about right vs left... it should be about good ideas vs bad ideas.
My brother in christ, the US Supreme Court just squeaked through 5-4 that the US Government is in fact on the hook to fulfill its contractual obligations.
Objectively, that is the most slam dunk 9-0 ruling that could ever exist.
"If the US Government signs its name on the dotted line should it be required to fulfill whatever it signed against"
Yes. Resounding yes. Zero scenarios where the answer to that is a no. Literally unquestionable.
We were literally one vote away from ruling that the US's
yes, which of those was an original thought by you?
"constitutional crisis" is the latest dem talking point.
just curious what you're adding.
yes, which of those was an original thought by you?
"constitutional crisis" is the latest dem talking point.
just curious what you're adding.
I'm sure this is mind blowing to someone who only regurgitates their spoon fed talking points, but most of the lefties who are coming to the same conclusion just have a solid logical process for ingesting information and ask the appropriate questions that lead to the correct answers.
Did you ever consider people are calling it a constitutional crisis because thats just literally what it is?
Mind blown
I'm sure this is mind blowing to someone who only regurgitates their spoon fed talking points, but most of the lefties who are coming to the same conclusion just have a solid logical process for ingesting information and ask the appropriate questions that lead to the correct answers.
Did you ever consider people are calling it a constitutional crisis because thats just literally what it is?
Mind blown
curious how this venn diagram looks
- same conclusion
- correct answer
- original thought
