Social Security has the dual difference of being both an abysmal failure and a whopping success, which's not just political double-speak. It all depends on which side of the coin you favor.
As the most-egregious-- and unconstitutional-- Ponzi scheme of all time (today's elderly recipients are moneyed by young employees, not from their own contributions of yore), Social Security is irreversibly insolvent. In 1950, the worker-to-beneficiary ratio was 16.5 to 1. In 2010, that ratio is practically 2 to 1.
Regardless of the political nonsense, Social Security's failure is rooted not in actuarial anomalies, however in the offense of immutable psychology: people succeed only when they are responsible for their own choices and actions. When federal government handles your life, it will fail-- and for that reason, you will fail.
Examples of socialism's failure are plentiful-- from the Weimar Republic to the Soviet Union to Cuba. Even the history of Thanksgiving offers such a lesson. The colonists at Plymouth Plantation were starving because of laziness and dependence on the industrious couple of who produced food. In 1623, Massachusetts Governor Bradford taken care of the issue by abolishing socialism and mandating self-sufficiency. He offered each household a parcel and the right to keep or trade any food produced-- or face starvation. End of starvation.
Flexibility from Federal government
We have actually read and heard ad nauseam that politicians violate trust funds and lockboxes, however any efforts to privatize Social Security-- George W. Bush considers his inability to do so his biggest failure-- constantly result in bitter political wars and greater taxes.......
Read the full and initial article at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2010/12/social_security_successful_fai.html
No comments:
Post a Comment