Guess who agreed that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme?

[MrBogosity]

None other than Paul Krugman--the 20th Century version of Krugman, that is:

http://www.bostonreview.net/BR21.6/krugmann.html

Social Security is structured from the point of view of the recipients as if it were an ordinary retirement plan: what you get out depends on what you put in. So it does not look like a redistributionist scheme. In practice it has turned out to be strongly redistributionist, but only because of its Ponzi game aspect, in which each generation takes more out than it put in. Well, the Ponzi game will soon be over, thanks to changing demographics, so that the typical recipient henceforth will get only about as much as he or she put in (and today's young may well get less than they put in).

[AnCap Dave]

Hmm....who'd a thunk it?

Kind of reminds me how Sean Hannity used to speak out against Clinton and his bombing of other countries and talking about how that was the absolute wrong thing to do, then of course come the Bush years he was more pro war than almost anyone else in the country. Of course the obvious thing here is that Clinton was a democrat and Bush was a Republican and that is what motivated his switching of position. I doubt that could be said about Krugman. Rather interesting though.

[Ibrahim90]

None other than Paul Krugman--the 20th Century version of Krugman, that is:

http://www.bostonreview.net/BR21.6/krugmann.html

moral of today's story: Krugman is a fucking hypocrite.