Is US social security not the definition of a ponzi scheme, where new money pays for old money, as they obfuscate the fact its totally unfunded outside of current year debt accumulation?
Can somebody correct me where I’m wrong here, and why it is sustainable in a rising interest rate environment and aging demographics where debt is more expensive to roll over. It seems to me if you even made it optional and allowed people to opt in the entire system would collapse, as it is entirely unfunded if not for the new entrants into the system, which again appears to be a ponzi scheme.
Is US social security not the definition of a ponzi scheme, where new money pays for old money, as they obfuscate the fact its totally unfunded outside of current year debt accumulation?
Can somebody correct me where I’m wrong here, and why it is sustainable in a rising interest rate environment and aging demographics where debt is more expensive to roll over. It seems to me if you even made it optional and allowed people to opt in the entire system would collapse, as it is entirely unfunded if not for the new entrants into the system, which again appears to be a ponzi scheme.