•Oh Scam Me: 3 checks for “Social Security = Ponzi scheme”

You know, I’ve always been critical of the government because the theories and notions behind bills and laws are noble, but the executions and results of much legislation are disastrous and often ineffective.  That being said, I was speechless when my friend casually reminded me over a glass of 2005 Cabernet Sauvignon that the government—our government—has been operating the biggest Ponzi scheme in the history of Ponzi schemes!

That’s right.  I said it.  Social Security is a legalized form of a Ponzi scheme.

What irks me is the fact that supporters of Social Security admit the “structure” is set up like a Ponzi scheme, but they claim it isn’t.  Wait… WHAT?!

This is what they argue:

1. The government isn’t lying about the scheme.
   True, but we’re not given a choice to say no, either.  We are forced via law to pay the taxes… so how is that better than being lied to?
2. Social Security will work if the economy continues to grow so that future taxpayers will be able to afford to pay Social Security taxes (i.e. future income must exceed future benefit payments).
   Yet, how can anyone suggest that there could be continued growth?  If anything, a nation’s economy is cyclical.  It’ll boom and bust but never have constant growth.  So, how is this even logical?  Unless we hope that the problems will fall upon the heads of future generations, we will face a very real Social Security deficit in the coming years.
3. The $3+ trillion Social Security shortfall we face is over the next 75 years.  In addition, there is a “surplus” since the taxes collected exceed the benefits spent.
   However, this “surplus” is “borrowed” by the government for other spending.  Think about that for a minute.  We are currently in a debt of $11 trillion.  That includes the Social Security $$$ borrowed by the government.  Essentially, we don’t have any Social Security surplus left.  That giant Social Security deficit is very real, my friends.

So, how is it that we continue to allow for such a scheme to exist—and legally, too?