GrundlButter
joined 2 years ago
You're not wrong, but having a specific score of upvoting problematic content feels like a new low.
A social credit score, if you will. Government is gonna love purchasing this on the cheap. Hell, maybe they already have.
I would say it shares a key similarity to a ponzi scheme, but has entirely different goals, methods, and results.
Both of them pay initial "investors" with later investors funds. In a ponzi scheme, this is unknown to the later investors so that they can eventually be left holding the bag. But in social security, this is a known commodity, and the thought is that there will always be more people.
Unfortunately, that last part gets a bit nuanced with population decline and growing needs of the elderly. Either way, it's a good system or a good scheme, but it's definitely not a ponzi scheme. Because just like healthcare, even if we don't fund social security, elderly and disabled people are still going to need care and skip out on their bills when they die. So in the end, we're still paying for it but with extra steps and lawsuits.