"News" = "Advertisements"

I was watching the "news". They had a story on the "X Factor".

Is this news, or is it an advertisement?

In fact, the "news" contains many hidden advertisements for the State, and subtle pro-State brainwashing.

For example, notice the staccato tone of the news speaker. It's a type of hypnosis.

Who, Pencil?

I have some 20+ year old pencils. I have some newer pencils.

For the new pencils, the point frequently breaks when I sharpen it.

For the old pencils, they sharpen without difficulty.

Nobody knows how to make a pencil anymore.

Raw Cantaloupe, Raw Milk

This story is interesting. A lot of people got sick form contaminated cantaloupe. 72 people got sick and 16 died.

The contamination was traced back to one large farm, Jensen Farms.

Shouldn't there be any liability for the farm? If 16 people died, and a wrongful death claim is $5M+, then there should be liability of $80M+. Even if there is a lawsuit, damages probably won't fall on the executives and workers.

When you have a large factory farm, and there's contamination, many people get sick.

When you have small local farms, any contamination affects fewer people.

To prevent contamination on large farms, regulations are passed. In practice, these regulations are a regressive tax on small farmers. This encourages abuse by large factory farms.

That is very interesting. More people have gotten sick from cantaloupe poisoning than from raw milk. However, State thugs are very eager to crack down on raw milk sellers and buyers.

Yankees Starting Pitching Error

The Yankees and Tigers both made a serious error in Game 1. They knew that a rain delay was a near-certainty, with a likely rainout. They both wasted their superstar pitchers, Verlander and Sabathia. They won't be able to pitch again until Game 3.

They should have used relievers in the first two innings. For example, the Yankees could have used Soriano or Robertson for the first two innings. Then, if there's a rainout, Sabathia is saved for the next day. If there's a rain delay but no rainout, then Sabathia pitches after the delay.

The Yankees have great relievers. They should have been willing to use relievers for the first two innings.

In the unlikely event that the relievers give up a bunch of runs, then Sabathia can be saved until Game 2.

I never understood why teams never try that. If you have great relievers, you can use them for the first few innings and put in your starters later.

With a near-certain rain delay, the Yankees and Tigers should have saved their star pitcher until after the delay.

Firefox Interesting UI Tweak

I noticed an interesting UI tweak in Firefox. It no longer displays "http://" at the start of a URL. If you do other protocols, like file://, it displays the prefix.

If you cut and paste the URL, it adds the "http://" for you.

I like the tweak, because "http://" is an obvious space-wasting default.

It's interesting to notice the difference between nice UI tweaks, and crap like delicious. Open source projects tend to have nice improvements (Firefox, WordPress). Closed-source projects tend to be lousy and aimed at controlling users (Facebook, Delicious).

State Priorities?

My parents have been fighting with Verizon, to get them to try to fix the landline service.

The customer support is one big runaround. When they call, they say "Use our website!" When we look on the website, it says "Call us!"

I also got one big runaround from Verizon, trying to claim the $100 credit for trading in my old cellphone after my upgrade.

Verizon has a monopoly. The have no incentive to give good customer support.

As I already mentioned, I recently lost my job. I decided to file an unemployment claim. I had to call them for something. (I filed one week late. After I called, they gave me credit for that week.)

Here's something that shocked me completely. The "customer support" for the NY Unemployment office wasn't a clueless twit! She actually knew what she was doing and fixed the fact that I filed one week late. (However, it must be a common error. Their script probably covers that case.)

(Some people say that it's immoral to accept an unemployment claim. I was forced to pay for it via a payroll tax. I might as well claim the partial tax refund now. If I don't do it, then the State will just waste that money on something else. Because my employers had to pay unemployment tax, I got a lower salary.)

Another interesting thing about unemployment claims, is that it enables the State to track workers much better. If you give unemployed people a cash incentive to register with the State, then it's much easier to track things.

That shows where State priorities are. When you need your phone fixed, the State monopoly gives lousy service. The unemployment office is important!

I found that hilarious. Verizon gave me lousy customer support, but the unemployment office was surprisingly competent.

Social Security Is A Ponzi Scam

I've written about this before. Social Security is one big Ponzi scam.

In some ways, Social Security is worse than a Ponzi scam. With Bernard Madoff, I could have protected myself by refusing to invest or doing due diligence. With Social Security, I'm forced to participate via taxes. Also, State accounting is exempt from the rules that normally apply to the private sector. If the State does something, it's presumed to be a good idea.

This is a current issue, because Rick Perry criticized Social Security.

It seems that Rick Perry's character is "I'm saying politically incorrect things. Therefore, all people who believe these things are fools."

Rick Perry has picked a few "politically incorrect" statements.

1. Social Security is a Ponzi Scam. (true)
2. "Carbon dioxide causes global warming" is a scam. (true, but Rick Perry presents a weak criticism, which almost makes it seem like an edorsement)
3. criticizing the Federal Reserve (again, it's a weak criticism)
4. I doubt evolution. (gotta throw in something silly to make him look like a complete fool)
   

BTW, Rick Perry seems like the insider's choice, for the next President. Ron Paul is the least evil candidate. The fnords seem to indicate that Rick Perry will win.

Getting back to the post title, Social Security is a Ponzi scam.

First, I'll address one irrelevant point, "Social Security is Unconstitutional". The Social Security tax is an income tax. It's as valid as everything else the IRS does. (I'm ignoring people who say that the income tax is invalid due to a legal technicality. Unfortunately, Federal judges and appeals court judges have consistently ruled that the income tax is 100% legal, as currently enforced. Even if they are wrong, they have a "justice" monopoly and their decision is final.)

Suppose that younger workers were given the choice to opt-out. They agree to not make any future claims, and in return they don't pay any more Social Security taxes (both employer and employee portion). The worker effectively pays the employer portion of Social Security tax. His salary is reduced by the amount of payroll tax the employer pays.

A pro-State troll says "You're being silly. Social Security would collapse in insolvency if younger workers could opt-out." Isn't that proof it's a Ponzi scam?

A pro-State troll says "Social Security isn't a Ponzi scam. It's pay-as-you-go." This is arguing definitions. Pay-as-you-go is a fancy word that means "Ponzi scam". Current Social Security taxes pay benefits to people who pay in previously. That's a Ponzi scam; current payments go to previous investors.

A pro-State troll points out "Government is not required to obey the same accounting rules as the private sector." Any private business that used the same methods as Social Security would be shut down for operating a fraud. Government does it and passes a law saying it's legal. That doesn't make it not-a-scam.

There's no way that current Social Security promises can be kept, unless there's massive inflation, tax hikes, or benefit cuts. It's a Ponzi scam.

Like all Ponzi scams, Social Security was initially profitable for the scamsters, until it collapses as the scam is exposed via insolvency. Until 2010, Social Security was a massive profit center for the State. Until 2010, Social Security taxes collected exceeded benefits paid. The surplus was not put into a "trust fund". That's an accounting fiction. That money was immediately spent. Because Social Security ran a taxation surplus, deficit spending could occur elsewhere without causing inflation.

Consider this analogy. "Bernard Madoff is running a Ponzi scam. Let's give him another $5B so he can keep his scam running." That's obviously silly. That's what all the "reform Social Security" proposals sound like.

With Bernard Madoff, his scam was stopped and leftover money was returned to investors. The Social Security scam should be stopped and the leftover money should be returned to taxpayers. There's nothing in the Social Security trust fund, just a stack of IOUs. The "leftover funds" is $0.

In many ways, Social Security is worse than any private-sector Ponzi scam. I didn't invest with Bernard Madoff. In the private sector, I can be clever and not be fooled by scamsters. Under threat of violence, I'm forced to participate in Social Security via taxes. Via State lawmaking magic pixie dust, Social Security is not-a-scam, because State lawmakers and comedians say so.

Social Security was sold to the public as an "insurance plan". To maintain that illusion, the Amish were given an exemption. Social Security is an income tax. The complicated "benefit formula" helps hide the fact that it's a tax. It makes it seem like you're paying taxes in exchange for some future benefit. Even for current retirees, they're getting a lousy return compared to most other investments. It's going to be even worse for younger workers.

Social Security is one big Ponzi scam. Anyone who says otherwise is either a fool or a liar. Current Social Security taxes pay benefits to previous "investors"/taxpayers. That's a Ponzi scam.