Social security is ultimately backed by normal tax money, so it is a political decision if its obligations are met or not. Obviously the current systems have an aspect of “ponzi scheme” in them (for historical reasons), but as everyone knows this is impossible to fulfill in the near future and general tax money is already being diverted into it.
Yes I am referring to private investment schemes with tax benefits either directly or as company pension systems. Those are inherently unsustainable as they depend on future young peoples input just as government pension schemes do, but with the difference that the risk of defaulting is squarely on the person putting money into them. It is therefore bordering on the absurd that people consider them to be “safer” then government run schemes that are ultimately backed by general taxes and thus can not default.
I’m still not understanding your position. If you have an investment firm that offers brokerage funds and IRAs, is the IRA any more scheme-y than the brokerage fund? Or do you take issue with the idea of mutual funds as a whole?
The difference is that normal stock market gambling is not sold as a “safe” retirement fund and given tax incentives that should be better put into things that are not so inherently exploitative and insecure.
Social security is ultimately backed by normal tax money, so it is a political decision if its obligations are met or not. Obviously the current systems have an aspect of “ponzi scheme” in them (for historical reasons), but as everyone knows this is impossible to fulfill in the near future and general tax money is already being diverted into it.
Yes I am referring to private investment schemes with tax benefits either directly or as company pension systems. Those are inherently unsustainable as they depend on future young peoples input just as government pension schemes do, but with the difference that the risk of defaulting is squarely on the person putting money into them. It is therefore bordering on the absurd that people consider them to be “safer” then government run schemes that are ultimately backed by general taxes and thus can not default.
I’m still not understanding your position. If you have an investment firm that offers brokerage funds and IRAs, is the IRA any more scheme-y than the brokerage fund? Or do you take issue with the idea of mutual funds as a whole?
The difference is that normal stock market gambling is not sold as a “safe” retirement fund and given tax incentives that should be better put into things that are not so inherently exploitative and insecure.