Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "" video.

@Taxationistheft928 If they think they're smart enough to render tens of millions of elderly homeless, and can convince (💰💰💰💰) presidents to listen to them, then . . . Yeah.
7
The Ketamine Kid
5
 @Taxationistheft928 Can you really not understand that post?
5
 @jimrobcoyle He's not an engineer at all. His academic career is murky, and he got a degree in economics and a degree in physics two years after he was supposed to.
5
@jimrobcoyle Also, he made his seed money in financial "engineering" with Peter Thiel, then bought Tesla. He was an "angel investor." 😂
5
@robisverybad75 How is that a certainty?
5
The 401k began in 1978 and gained in popularity with employers throughout the 1980s. That's two generations. Where are all the 401k millionaires? Education has been so undermined, the kids won't think to ask.
4
@krenwregget7667 You have no idea how he got rich, do you? Quite a lot of legal documents from suits against him could enlighten you.
4
The biggest Ponzi scheme is the current stock market.
3
Well, thanks for proving you have exactly the politicians you deserve. Russia, whether Soviet or post-Soviet, is looking better every day, and from the looks of things (BRICS, etc.), most of the world agrees. The 401k has existed since 1978 -- two generations. Did you know that 90%+ of retirees don't have enough money to retire on their 401k alone? How is that a plan?
3
First of all, how many people do you imagine that is? Perhaps 1 or 2% of households headed by a person age 65 or older -- at best. Do you think that would solve an otherwise "insoluable" problem? The 401k has existed for about two generations now, and at best 10% can fund their own retirement with their 401k -- probably an overestimate. How is that a plan? Moreover, markets are volatile. Someone age 80 could make a grave miscalculation and suddenly not have the means to maintain themselves. Universal programs that recognize the facts about the human condition have the most support for a reason.
3
Um, can we go quite that far? Uncertain . . . 😂
2
@jamesgarvey8402 The technical reason Social Security is not a "Ponzi scheme" is that the new dollars coming in are from payroll taxes on salaries that generally keep pace with the overall economy (and when they don't, younger people still in the labor force usually have options), whereas the payouts do not keep pace with real inflation. Social Security benefits are never raised to account for the full impact of inflation. Hence, the benefits depend on the salary you earned pre-inflation, for the rest of your life, and the only sure way to rectify that is to return to work -- which means you contribute to the system again. That's not a Ponzi scheme. What Social Security is dependent on is adequate revenues -- just like police, fire, public education, DOD, DHS, and well-maintained bridges and highways. And what you need to worry about is whether the continued growth of the stock market is dependent on privatizing Social Security and Medicare.
2
@Taxationistheft928 Why do you assume that? No evidence either way.
2
@bobm9509 We have a Constitution in an English-speaking common law country, not a Civil Code like the French or something. The Constitution provides for the power to legislate to promote the General Welfare; no need to have an amendment providing for "a retirement fund." We don't spell out all our laws in advance like that, and then have to scrap the Constitution and start over every 50 years.
2
@DMAN590 Sure. We need funding solutions, just like we do for police, firefighters, national defense, and so forth. You're right, you didn't call it a Ponzi scheme. I was just clarifying why it isn't, since that was what the video was about.
2
Believe it.
1
The technical reason it is not a Ponzi scheme is that the new dollars coming in are taxes from salaries that generally keep pace with the overall economy (and when they don't, people in the labor force have options to rectify that), whereas the payouts do not. Social Security benefits are never raised to account for the full impact of inflation. Hence, the benefits depend on the salary you earned pre-inflation, for the rest of your life, and the only sure way to rectify that is to return to work. That's not a Ponzi scheme. You're welcome. Please clap.
1
@jamesgarvey8402 Oh, look! My explanation of precisely why Musk is wrong is not visible! Huh! Maybe if we sort by Newest and then scroll, they might let us see it? They do that a lot, in solidarity with fellow b_____ .
1
@robisverybad75 So . . . First, Elon has promised to wring all the fraud out of the system, then Elon proceeds to assert that Social Security is one of the biggest frauds. In other words, look up the definition of "Ponzi scheme," then use a logical device known as a syllogism. Appears to support the claim of this video, hm?
1
@robisverybad75 I presented a syllogism. It was immediately shadowed.
1
@bobm9509 The part where Congress is authorized to pass legislation for the General Welfare. Didya look, or would that cut into doom scolling?
1
@bobm9509 Article I, Section 8: Enumerated Powers Clause 1 General Welfare: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; . . . " The rest was modified by the Sixteenth Amendment.
1
@bobm9509 I wonder whether YT will permit me to cite the United States Constitution? They let you do it. Providing funds for the General Welfare is a power delegated by Article I to the U.S. Congress.
1
@mcl6406 I corrected him. Let's see if it says up. 🤣
1
@bobm9509 So . . . You don't understand that the Constitution expressly authorized Congress to pass legislation for the General Welfare? So . . . how do you imagine the Tenth Amendment applies? The power to pass the Social Security Act is a delegated power.
1
@bobm9509 A quote from the very case you cited, verbatim: "The scheme of benefits created by the provisions of Title II is not in contravention of the limitations of the Tenth Amendment. Congress may spend money in aid of the 'general welfare.' Constitution, Art. I, section 8 . . . " Helvering v. Davis, 301 U.S. 619 (1937).
1
@bobm9509 At this point, this is sad. I'm not going to risk embarrassing you further.
1
@bobm9509 Political debates do not state what the law is. The Supreme Court states what the law is.
1
The technical reason it is not a Ponzi scheme is that the new dollars coming in are taxes from salaries that generally keep pace with the overall economy (and when they don't, people in the labor force have options to rectify that), whereas the payouts do not. Social Security benefits are never raised to account for the full impact of inflation. Hence, the benefits depend on the salary you earned pre-inflation, for the rest of your life, and the only sure way to rectify that is to return to work. That's not a Ponzi scheme. You're welcome. Please clap.
1
The technical reason Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme is that the new dollars coming in are taxes from salaries that generally keep pace with the overall economy (and when they don't, people still in the labor force do have options), whereas the payouts do not keep pace with the overall economy. Social Security benefits are never raised to account for the full impact of inflation. Hence, the benefits depend on the salary you earned pre-inflation, for the rest of your life, and the only sure way to rectify that is to return to work. That's not a Ponzi scheme. What it is dependent on is adequate revenues -- just like police, fire, public education, DOD, DHS, and well-maintained highways.
1
@DMAN590 The technical reason Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme is that the new dollars coming in are taxes from salaries that generally keep pace with the overall economy (and when they don't, people still in the labor force do have options), whereas the payouts do not keep pace. Social Security benefits are never raised to account for the full impact of inflation. Hence, the benefits depend on the salary you earned pre-inflation, for the rest of your life, and the only sure way to rectify that is to return to work. That's not a Ponzi scheme. What it is dependent on is adequate revenues -- just like police, fire, public education, DOD, DHS, and well-maintained highways. You're welcome. Please clap.
1
@robisverybad75 Well, considering he said all fraud should be wrung out of the system, sounds like that means . . . You complete the thought. YT gets mad when I do.
1