6 ms·
That article doesn't actually counter what the OP says. In fact it ends by stating that SS is being more strained and giving diminishing returns as time passes
by _broody 11y ago
That article doesn't actually counter what the OP says. In fact it ends by stating that SS is being more strained and giving diminishing returns as time passes by, which sounds disturbingly like a ponzi scheme. It's unsustainable by design even without free-riders, much less with min-maxers gaming the system to not put anything in.
- chadzawistowski 11y agoI don't know why you think social security is necessarily unsustainable. It's been running a massive surplus since the 80s. Unfortunately it was borrowed from to finance wars in the middle east, but that's not a problem with social security. http://www.accuracy.org/release/social-security-has-a-large-and-growing-surplus/ http://www.accuracy.org/release/social-security-has-a-large-...
- hnnewguy 11y ago>It's been running a massive surplus since the 80s. When the boomers were in their prime earning years, supporting a smaller, aged cohort.
- pessimizer 11y ago>SS is being more strained What article did you read this in? >giving diminishing returns as time passes by You mean that we're choosing to pay less to SS beneficiaries? SS is not an investment vehicle. >It's unsustainable It's entirely sustainable. What article are you referring to here?