NY Democrat Steals $64.8 billion

I am confused. Was Bernie Madoff an elected official ? Originally Posted by VitaMan

No, he wasn't that's probably why he was sentenced to 150 years in prison for orchestrating the biggest Ponzi scheme in history.

No, he wasn't that's probably why he was sentenced to 150 years in prison for orchestrating the biggest Ponzi scheme in history. Originally Posted by Levianon17

Actually Levianon, Bernie Madoff was a piker. The biggest Ponzi scheme in history was orchestrated by Democratic and Republican politicians, not political donors like Bernie Madoff and Brant Frost IV. It's the federal debt and unfunded entitlements.

The scheme is thousands of times larger than Bernie's fraud. Correct, none of the politicians will face 150 year prison sentences. Instead their names will be plastered on the sides of battleships the military didn't want and on roads to nowhere, monuments to their wastefulness. And even with the 1% interest rates advocated by Trump or the 75% tax rates pushed by Elizabeth Warren, the Ponzi Scheme will go on. Until the money runs out and our and future generations are left holding the bag.

Tiny, I don't think you know the actual definition of what a Ponzi scheme is after reading your last post but whatever, it doesn't really matter with all of the nonsense in this forum... at least you were right about Madoff running one so one out of two isn't that bad. LOL

Edit for below: Again, Tiny your government examples are not a Ponzi scheme, but if you want to convince yourself and others that it is to keep this thread from going to the sandbox, knock yourself out.

Tiny, I don't think you know the actual definition of what a Ponzi scheme is after reading your last post but whatever, it doesn't really matter with all of the nonsense in this forum... at least you were right about Madoff running one so one out of two isn't that bad. LOL Originally Posted by Lucas McCain

A Ponzi scheme is "an investment operation that pays returns to its investors from the money of new investors, rather than from profit earned through legitimate business activities." If the federal government continues running budget deficits of 6.5% of GDP it cannot generate the "profit" (government revenues less government expenditures) to repay investors in its debt. And in fact the federal debt held by the public as a % of GDP will continue to grow. The federal government will have to find new investors to replace those who don't roll over treasury instruments at maturity, just like Bernie had to find new suckers when investors in his fund cashed out.

Not only that, but the feds will need more money from investors to fund the deficits. Yes, the federal government is kind of like a Ponzi scheme operator whose lifestyle becomes more and more extravagant. He started out buying a Cadillac and a place in Plano with investor money, and now he's got a garage full of Ferraris and a house in Preston Hollow.

Government has the ability to increase taxes and reduce spending. But will it, sufficient to be able to pay back debtors out of government revenues? That's a rhetorical question.

Edit for above: If you just want attaboys from posters who believe like you do please consider posting in the NYT comments section instead of pushing here to have opposing views relegated to the sand box or deemed off topic.

Tiny, I don't think you know the actual definition of what a Ponzi scheme is after reading your last post but whatever, it doesn't really matter with all of the nonsense in this forum... at least you were right about Madoff running one so one out of two isn't that bad. LOL Originally Posted by Lucas McCain

... Looks like Tiny DOES know the definition of a Ponzi scheme.

#### Salty

The following is not permitted on the site:

Insulting Others
Targeting other members for attacks
Harassing other members, groups of members, class of members, etc
Disrespecting other members on the site
General rudeness toward other members on the site

Thread Closed