Political Crossfire Forums

[Atlas Bergeron]

if by "privatize" you mean "end it", then yes, we should "privatize" it

[Howe]

No way.

Last time people banked entirely on the private sector for retirement, they stood in cheese lines when the market crashed.

History will repeat itself.

If you privatize SS, where then will be the safety net if there is another Great Depression?

So, in that case, it would be back to the cheese lines because (1) everyone would be broke and hungry, and (2) the government would not have been collecting the money to build up a decent cache so that people could do a little better than just cheese.

Bad move.

[gavnook]

Why do people with no apparent interest in economics visit this forum?

[bob.appleyard]

gavnook wrote: Why do people with no apparent interest in economics visit this forum?

At whom was this directed?

[LeopardPM]

Howe wrote: No way.

Last time people banked entirely on the private sector for retirement, they stood in cheese lines when the market crashed.

History will repeat itself.

If you privatize SS, where then will be the safety net if there is another Great Depression?

So, in that case, it would be back to the cheese lines because (1) everyone would be broke and hungry, and (2) the government would not have been collecting the money to build up a decent cache so that people could do a little better than just cheese.

Bad move.
sorry, if you are refferring to the 'Great Depression' then you are sadly misinformed - the responsibility for the crash rests entirely in the lap of government and those who thought they could control the market.

[Anarko-Kapitalizt]

LeopardPM wrote: Howe wrote: No way.

Last time people banked entirely on the private sector for retirement, they stood in cheese lines when the market crashed.

History will repeat itself.

If you privatize SS, where then will be the safety net if there is another Great Depression?

So, in that case, it would be back to the cheese lines because (1) everyone would be broke and hungry, and (2) the government would not have been collecting the money to build up a decent cache so that people could do a little better than just cheese.

Bad move.
sorry, if you are refferring to the 'Great Depression' then you are sadly misinformed - the responsibility for the crash rests entirely in the lap of government and those who thought they could control the market.

Thats not what our publik edukation teachers told us!

[Atlas Bergeron]

Howe wrote: No way.

Last time people banked entirely on the private sector for retirement, they stood in cheese lines when the market crashed.

History will repeat itself.

If you privatize SS, where then will be the safety net if there is another Great Depression?

So, in that case, it would be back to the cheese lines because (1) everyone would be broke and hungry, and (2) the government would not have been collecting the money to build up a decent cache so that people could do a little better than just cheese.

Bad move. did it occur to you that the Great Depression could have been caused by government interference into such fields as, oh, I don't know, retirement.

[RueTheDay]

gavnook wrote: Why do people with no apparent interest in economics visit this forum?

Are you talking about all of the people who have never actually formally studied economics and harbor the ludicrous belief that economics as a discipline started with Ludwig von Mises and ended with Murray Rothbard and is kept alive solely through the efforts of a handful of cranks working out of a think tank in backwater Alabama? That seems to be the predominant opinion on this site, unfortunately.

[Revenant]

RueTheDay wrote: gavnook wrote: Why do people with no apparent interest in economics visit this forum?

Are you talking about all of the people who have never actually formally studied economics and harbor the ludicrous belief that economics as a discipline started with Ludwig von Mises and ended with Murray Rothbard and is kept alive solely through the efforts of a handful of cranks working out of a think tank in backwater Alabama? That seems to be the predominant opinion on this site, unfortunately.

But economics did start with Ludwig von Mises and eneded with Murry Rothbard. You are mistaken.

[RueTheDay]

Atlas Bergeron wrote: Howe wrote: No way.

Last time people banked entirely on the private sector for retirement, they stood in cheese lines when the market crashed.

History will repeat itself.

If you privatize SS, where then will be the safety net if there is another Great Depression?

So, in that case, it would be back to the cheese lines because (1) everyone would be broke and hungry, and (2) the government would not have been collecting the money to build up a decent cache so that people could do a little better than just cheese.

Bad move. did it occur to you that the Great Depression could have been caused by government interference into such fields as, oh, I don't know, retirement.

Huh? The Social Security Act was signed in 1935 and didn't take effect until 1937. The Great Depression started in late 1929.

[RueTheDay]

Revenant wrote: RueTheDay wrote: gavnook wrote: Why do people with no apparent interest in economics visit this forum?

Are you talking about all of the people who have never actually formally studied economics and harbor the ludicrous belief that economics as a discipline started with Ludwig von Mises and ended with Murray Rothbard and is kept alive solely through the efforts of a handful of cranks working out of a think tank in backwater Alabama? That seems to be the predominant opinion on this site, unfortunately.

But economics did start with Ludwig von Mises and eneded with Murry Rothbard. You are mistaken.

See what I mean. :lol:

[Revenant]

RueTheDay wrote: Revenant wrote: RueTheDay wrote: gavnook wrote: Why do people with no apparent interest in economics visit this forum?

Are you talking about all of the people who have never actually formally studied economics and harbor the ludicrous belief that economics as a discipline started with Ludwig von Mises and ended with Murray Rothbard and is kept alive solely through the efforts of a handful of cranks working out of a think tank in backwater Alabama? That seems to be the predominant opinion on this site, unfortunately.

But economics did start with Ludwig von Mises and eneded with Murry Rothbard. You are mistaken.

See what I mean. :lol:

Just being a dick :lol:


Up up and away!

[RueTheDay]

Revenant wrote: RueTheDay wrote: Revenant wrote: RueTheDay wrote: gavnook wrote: Why do people with no apparent interest in economics visit this forum?

Are you talking about all of the people who have never actually formally studied economics and harbor the ludicrous belief that economics as a discipline started with Ludwig von Mises and ended with Murray Rothbard and is kept alive solely through the efforts of a handful of cranks working out of a think tank in backwater Alabama? That seems to be the predominant opinion on this site, unfortunately.

But economics did start with Ludwig von Mises and eneded with Murry Rothbard. You are mistaken.

See what I mean. :lol:

Just being a dick :lol:


Up up and away!

That's why I added the smiley, I figured you were joking.

[Atlas Bergeron]

RueTheDay wrote: Atlas Bergeron wrote: Howe wrote: No way.

Last time people banked entirely on the private sector for retirement, they stood in cheese lines when the market crashed.

History will repeat itself.

If you privatize SS, where then will be the safety net if there is another Great Depression?

So, in that case, it would be back to the cheese lines because (1) everyone would be broke and hungry, and (2) the government would not have been collecting the money to build up a decent cache so that people could do a little better than just cheese.

Bad move. did it occur to you that the Great Depression could have been caused by government interference into such fields as, oh, I don't know, retirement.

Huh? The Social Security Act was signed in 1935 and didn't take effect until 1937. The Great Depression started in late 1929. you misunderstood. I did not mean that social security was the cause, I said that government intereference was the cause.

Here, I'll try and make it failry simple. I think we can all agree that our social security system is crap, and we are going to soon be experiencing serious problems with it. When the problems get to severe, politicians will be forced to abolish it. But they will only do so at the last second, they can not afford to loose the vote of senior citizens who have decided not to save for retirement becuase 'the government will take care of them'

Social security created a dependence that did not exist before, and it did so by force, as all things in the government do when they 'redistrubte' wealth. What is welfare but the politicans bribing people for votes? When the government finally does fail and can not make due on its promised payments, the entire system will collapse, bringing the ecconomy with it. In my terms, that is called a "depression"

a small note: the great depression was not caused in this fassion--this is simply my personal projections for the future depression.

[RueTheDay]

Atlas Bergeron wrote: RueTheDay wrote: Atlas Bergeron wrote: Howe wrote: No way.

Last time people banked entirely on the private sector for retirement, they stood in cheese lines when the market crashed.

History will repeat itself.

If you privatize SS, where then will be the safety net if there is another Great Depression?

So, in that case, it would be back to the cheese lines because (1) everyone would be broke and hungry, and (2) the government would not have been collecting the money to build up a decent cache so that people could do a little better than just cheese.

Bad move. did it occur to you that the Great Depression could have been caused by government interference into such fields as, oh, I don't know, retirement.

Huh? The Social Security Act was signed in 1935 and didn't take effect until 1937. The Great Depression started in late 1929. you misunderstood. I did not mean that social security was the cause, I said that government intereference was the cause.

Here, I'll try and make it failry simple. I think we can all agree that our social security system is crap, and we are going to soon be experiencing serious problems with it. When the problems get to severe, politicians will be forced to abolish it. But they will only do so at the last second, they can not afford to loose the vote of senior citizens who have decided not to save for retirement becuase 'the government will take care of them'

Social security created a dependence that did not exist before, and it did so by force, as all things in the government do when they 'redistrubte' wealth. What is welfare but the politicans bribing people for votes? When the government finally does fail and can not make due on its promised payments, the entire system will collapse, bringing the ecconomy with it. In my terms, that is called a "depression"

a small note: the great depression was not caused in this fassion--this is simply my personal projections for the future depression.

What the hell does any of that have to do with your statement:

did it occur to you that the Great Depression could have been caused by government interference into such fields as, oh, I don't know, retirement. ?

[Howe]

I'm still right!

[Atlas Bergeron]

RueTheDay wrote: Atlas Bergeron wrote: RueTheDay wrote: Atlas Bergeron wrote: Howe wrote: No way.

Last time people banked entirely on the private sector for retirement, they stood in cheese lines when the market crashed.

History will repeat itself.

If you privatize SS, where then will be the safety net if there is another Great Depression?

So, in that case, it would be back to the cheese lines because (1) everyone would be broke and hungry, and (2) the government would not have been collecting the money to build up a decent cache so that people could do a little better than just cheese.

Bad move. did it occur to you that the Great Depression could have been caused by government interference into such fields as, oh, I don't know, retirement.

Huh? The Social Security Act was signed in 1935 and didn't take effect until 1937. The Great Depression started in late 1929. you misunderstood. I did not mean that social security was the cause, I said that government intereference was the cause.

Here, I'll try and make it failry simple. I think we can all agree that our social security system is crap, and we are going to soon be experiencing serious problems with it. When the problems get to severe, politicians will be forced to abolish it. But they will only do so at the last second, they can not afford to loose the vote of senior citizens who have decided not to save for retirement becuase 'the government will take care of them'

Social security created a dependence that did not exist before, and it did so by force, as all things in the government do when they 'redistrubte' wealth. What is welfare but the politicans bribing people for votes? When the government finally does fail and can not make due on its promised payments, the entire system will collapse, bringing the ecconomy with it. In my terms, that is called a "depression"

a small note: the great depression was not caused in this fassion--this is simply my personal projections for the future depression.

What the hell does any of that have to do with your statement:

did it occur to you that the Great Depression could have been caused by government interference into such fields as, oh, I don't know, retirement. ? social security is government intereference. The depression was primarily cuased by government interference.
that is the connection between the two.

[Howe]

Okay, this has gone on too long. There was not Social Security before the Great Depression. The Great Depression began in 1929, and Social Security was instituted well AFTER that. It was put into place to insure a collapse in the private market would not result in all of lining up in cheese lines again.

..... but as Social Security is now funded (i.e. with IOU's), would SS really stop us from standing in cheese lines? How would the gov't dig up the money and pay it all back? According to rational economic principles, turning on the printing press will not work.

[Atlas Bergeron]

Howe wrote: Okay, this has gone on too long. There was not Social Security before the Great Depression. The Great Depression began in 1929, and Social Security was instituted well AFTER that. It was put into place to insure a collapse in the private market would not result in all of lining up in cheese lines again. yes, i know this already

Quote: ..... but as Social Security is now funded (i.e. with IOU's), would SS really stop us from standing in cheese lines? How would the gov't dig up the money and pay it all back? According to rational economic principles, turning on the printing press will not work. exactly. Which is why this particular form of government interference will lead to another depression. I apologize for making it seem as if I thought it already had.

[Brooklyn]

Social Security is nothing but a pyramid scheme. There is a reason it is illegal to attempt to run your own pyramid scheme.

Anyway, changing social security to a privatized savings plan may solve some problems for future generations, but it would leave many retired Americans, who played by the rules they were given, without the safety net they were promised.

Whatever happens, the pyramid will be upside down pretty soon and benefits will have to be cut or taxes raised or both.