Researcher calls SS a "pyramid scheme".
- Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 17:31:28 -0400 (EDT)
- From: ridgeway <riridgew@nyx.net>
- Subject: Researcher calls SS a "pyramid scheme".
>From the URL below I found the source of the article where William T.
Harris, Economics Professor at the University of Delaware calls Social
Security "the ultimate pyramid scheme" --- now if you want to quibble
that he didn't use the world "Ponzi", fine go ahead and quibble, the
fact remains that here is given a reference from a published researcher
that clearly gives hard objective evidence that supports the assertion
that Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme! Please be sure to note that
in the summary of this debate that it was so documented!!!!!!!!!!!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://dogbert.kepler-solutions.com/newswise/articles/1998/6/PONZI.UDE.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
University of Delaware
17-Jun-98
Social Security News: Privatization Can't Cure $6.6 Trillion 'Ponzi Scheme'.
Library: BIZ
Keywords: SOCIAL SECURITY RETIREMENT PRIVATIZATION
ECONOMICS INVESTMENTS DELAWARE UD
Description: Nothing can save 40-something Baby Boomers from getting
a raw deal at retirement because they're mired at the
bottom of a massive pyramid or Ponzi scheme, according
to a University of Delaware economist whose analysis of
the Social Security system appears in the new issue of
Humanomics, an international social science journal
[ Vol.14, No. 1, January 1998].
Social Security News: Privatization can't cure $6.6 trillion
'Ponzi scheme,' UD economist reports
Contact: Ginger Pinholster, (302) 831-6408, gingpin@udel.edu
Nothing can save 40-something Baby Boomers from getting a raw deal at
retirement because they're mired at the bottom of a massive pyramid or
Ponzi scheme, according to a University of Delaware economist whose
analysis of the Social Security system appears in the new issue of
Humanomics, an international social science journal.
Since 1940, U.S. retirees have received an estimated $6.6 trillion
dollars more in benefits than they've paid in taxes: an amount only
slightly higher than the current national debt, UD faculty member
William T. Harris reports. This amount will rise and peak at more
than $9 trillion around 2015, he says.
Privatizing the nation's "pay-as-you-go" Social Security system-or
funneling a certain percentage of taxes into individual retirement
accounts-might help offset the staggering imbalance between benefits
paid versus contributions made to the plan, says Harris, winner of
four UD teaching excellence awards. Given the system's huge payoffs
to date, however, "privatization simply wouldn't be a panacea," he adds.
"We're talking about the ultimate pyramid scheme," says Harris,
whose latest study tracks Social Security benefits over a 65-year
period, beginning in 1955 and projected to 2020. "Those who got
in early received the biggest benefits for the smallest contributions.
The rest of us will experience a very poor rate of return on our
investment for the next 22 years, and those retiring after about
2015 will get back less than they paid into the system."
Until recently, Americans have reaped remarkably large rewards from
the Social Security system because tax rates remained low during
their working years, and benefits were based on the higher rates
in effect at the time of their retirement, Harris explains.
When former U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt launched the Social
Security system 61 years ago, Harris notes, Social Security taxes
claimed only 1 percent of the average worker's paycheck.
By 1950, the rate rose to 3 percent-compared to a current rate of
more than 15 percent. Such low tax rates during the first half of
this century explain why the earliest retirees "received the highest
rates of return," Harris says.
The late Ida M. Fuller of Vermont, for example, the nation's first
Social Security recipient, paid only $44 in taxes for three years
before she retired in 1940. Yet, she collected $20,884.52 in
benefits over the next 35 years, according to Harris. Subsequent
Social Security recipients enjoyed comparable windfalls.
In 1955, those who retired at median-income levels drew nearly
$15,000 more in benefits than they paid in taxes, according to
research by Harris. And, workers who retired between 1970 and 1980
received the largest payoff, compared to their investment, he says.
The trend toward soaring benefits peaked in 1980, when the average
worker drew $145,400 in benefits, "over and above their contributions,"
Harris reports. By comparison, today's 40-something employees,
who entered the workforce in 1980 when the Social Security tax
rate was comparable to current levels, "will pay large amounts
into the system for 40 years and then get 15 years' worth of benefits,"
according to Harris.
"The large benefits that our parents and grandparents and great-
grandparents have enjoyed for so many years are going to come
home to roost," he says.
Currently, U.S. workers may receive partial Social Security
benefits at age 62, with full benefits payable at age 65.
By the year 2022, however, the minimum age for full retirement
will rise to 67, thereby further reducing the lifetime benefits
paid to most workers, Harris notes.
Policymakers are evaluating various options for Social Security
reform. The bipartisan National Commission on Retirement Policy (NCRP),
for instance, has recommended investing 2 percentage points of each
individual's Social Security tax into mutual funds. Under the NCRP
recommendations, taxpayers could decide how to invest their money,
but full retirement benefits would be withheld until age 70,
beginning in 2029. Competing reform proposals call for differing
degrees of privatization, all of which would divert some percentage
of Social Security taxes into high-yield investments, coupled in
some cases with higher tax rates and/or reduced benefits.
To analyze Social Security benefits paid to date, Harris compiled
data from the monthly Social Security Bulletin and the annual
Current Population Survey. He also took into account average
annual mortality and birth rates to tally the number of employees
who retired each year, as well as the Social Security benefits paid
to them, starting in 1955. His analysis assumes that each retiree
reached the average life expectancy and worked continuously from
age 20 to age 65, earning a median income, as defined by the Bureau
of Labor Statistics. By projecting earnings, tax rates, benefits
and longevity statistics, Harris also predicted future Social
Security benefits, through the year 2020.
------------------------------------------------------------------
There are other experts I could quote that also support the
assertions that SS is like a Ponzi scheme (aka pyramid schemes,
chain letters, etc...). For example I (along with many others
in this debate) could give some quotes from Nobel economist
Milton Friedman if anyone doubts us (see Professor Friedman's
book _Free to Choose_, first published way back in 1979,
see pages 103-104).
These facts should have been clearly established before any
debate on reform, values, etc..., was started on Social Security.
That is to say, before a solution to a problem can be
discussed, there has to be an admission, clear and full
admission, of the problem along with the roots of the problem.
I can't help but be suspect of those that would use
Mr. Myers --- given his record in the 1983 SS Big "fix", and
then to have him start NOT with a discussion of the actual
economic basis (his area of expertise) of the problems but
starting instead with "values", smacks of manipulation by the
organizers of this debate to frame the debate in order to move
it toward a conclusion that is left of center or at least of
keeping the SS system more or less as it currently is configured
as a New Deal income redistribution program than helps the
liberals keep a grip on political power. Hummmm???.......
could the Clinton/Gore bunch really be that devious...?????
==================================================================