(02-06-2021, 07:19 AM)The Real Marty Wrote:

(02-06-2021, 07:07 AM)jagibelieve Wrote: If I recall correctly, there was a proposal in the George W. Bush administration to do away with SS and instead put those funds confiscated earnings from tax payers into an interest bearing account that could be invested.  The account would also have the ability to be passed down to heirs of an estate.  It was shot down because it would "benefit the rich".

I think it was shot down because if you let people stop paying in, you accelerate the date when the fund is out of money and cannot pay out any more.  We have to have young people paying in so we can pay out to the old people.  Yes, it looks like (is?) a Ponzi scheme.  That's why you can't let people stop paying in.

---

(02-05-2021, 09:55 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: You guys are great, acting like anyone will have social security when these 25 year olds reach that age.

They will never do away with Social Security, because seniors vote in greater numbers than any other group, and there are more and more seniors every year.

In 10 years that won't be the case Grandpa. The Boomers are in decline and the next oldest generation is going to be overshadowed because he Millennials and Gen Z are both individually larger than Gen X. We're effectively skipping a generation in the power structure and that has serious complications for the existingg social structure. And oh by the way, they hate your generation with a fiery passion for all the damage you've done to the world, just as their teachers and heroes are telling them to.

---

To get back to SLF, I guess that 27 trillion is a number that won't collapse the economy, but 28 trillion is just too much, especially if it means 40 million people have more money in their pockets to put back into the economy. 

---

---