Originally published on HumbleDollar take a look at all the comments there.
Richard Quinn | Apr 5, 2024
HAVE YOU HEARD THIS nonsense about Social Security? It’s nothing but a Ponzi scheme. The trust fund is just IOUs. My favorite: I’d rather invest the money I pay in Social Security taxes because I’d get better investment returns.
All three claims reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of Social Security and how it works. Social Security is insurance—a form of annuity, a type of pension, a social safety net. It isn’t an investment and shouldn’t be viewed that way.
If, by Ponzi scheme, we mean that this year’s taxes are used to pay current beneficiaries, I guess it is. The same can be said of most government programs. That’s the way government works—or should, except we also pay for government programs by running deficits.
The trust is nothing but IOUs, or so it’s said. If you mean the trust purchased special interest-paying Treasury bonds as an investment, with the government promising to redeem those bonds, then—yes—the trust fund holds IOUs. But that’s virtually the same promise made to American investors and foreign governments when they buy U.S. government bonds.

Now we have my favorite: Give me the taxes I pay and let me invest them, and I’ll get better returns and accumulate significant assets. This is simplistic. Can you imagine that strategy working out for the vast majority of Americans, with their low level of financial literacy, poor savings record and scant stock market experience?
This approach also ignores a key fact: Social Security is much more than an inflation-adjusted retirement-income program. Benefits are also available to disabled individuals, to surviving spouses and children, to ex-spouses—even multiple ex-spouses. Some of these folks never paid a penny in payroll taxes. Want to take a chance at investing your Social Security taxes? You better hope your life goes exactly according to plan.
It seems to me Social Security is a very good investment—too good, actually, as evidenced by its chronic underfunding. During my working life, beginning in 1959 while still in high school, I paid $132,743 in Social Security payroll taxes and my employers paid an additional $133,423. In return, I received in benefits all I contributed within four years of starting Social Security—and that doesn’t include my wife’s benefits based on my earnings record. Since that breakeven, I’ve collected 11 additional years of benefits.
I don’t know about rates of return, present value and such. But I see this as a good deal, and it can be an even better deal for lower-income beneficiaries.
But there’s one deal that’s better still: Medicare. In total, I paid $98,063 in Medicare payroll taxes. That sum was easily exceeded by the cost of one short hospital stay and the accompanying medical care. My wife paid no Medicare taxes, but received several hundred thousand dollars in benefits for her eye injury.
I hope to add to my Social Security “return.” But I’m happy to let others come out ahead on Medicare spending.


I do object to your calling the idea of IOUs as a trust fund as nonsense. It confuses a lot of people enough as it is. The federal government is the borrower and the lender and it can be nothing else but spend what is taken in today and issue a “bond” or IOU to pay what is promised at a future date.
People can argue whether they can do better as an investor but that option isn’t actionable since payroll tax must be paid. So it could be labeled nonsense. The returns you mention for yourself are not universal due to the many variables per each account holder.
The Ponzi scheme accusations that people make are as you addressed.
LikeLike
IOU has a less than guaranteed connotation. Thats why it confuses people All bonds issued are IOUs, but they are guaranteed by the faith and credit of the US.
LikeLike
Well said. It’s high time for informed experts to set the record, and facts, straight on this and so many topics.
LikeLike
You could do far better on your own but it will never happen. We could be stuck with this poorly run operation for decades to come. More and more fixes every decade or so.
With a bit of creativity we could have the money from the employer and employee “sent” as it is today to the Feds and invested in an individual account with the Thrift Savings Plan. Life Cycle fund could be selected for folks. Life insurance and disability offered to federal workers could be part of the plan as well as long-term care now offered by the Feds.
At the end of someone’s work-life an annuity could be mandated for a basic income floor and money withdrawal from the Life Cycle Fund could supplement that.
The big advantage of course is the money is not lost if someone dies early. It can be inherited–maybe only from the Life Cycle Fund.
The Galveston Plan has done a great job of substituting for SS and Australia revamped its retirement system a number of years ago.
Now, we might be too large and diverse to try something like this. But for my grandchildren it would be the group that we begin with.
LikeLike