Very interesting article. I challenge you to reconcile the crux of your article with the reality that Social Insurance (referred to as "Social Security" in the United States) is in its very essence a government-operated ponzi scheme given that legislators have frequently spent funds originally designated for social insurance on other government projects, namely the War on Terror (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/03/facebook-posts/did-george-w-bush-borrow-social-security-fund-war-/). Given the often cited reasons for why social insurance is supposedly not just a ponzi scheme (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/is-social-security-a-ponzi-scheme/2011/08/25/gIQA2t0dcL_blog.html), what should be done about the fact that the manner in which it is administered today has rendered it exactly a ponzi scheme? Should future legislation that seeks to protect against the fraud potential continue to ignore this glaring reality? It's sad that most lawyers seem too incompetent to recognize the unequivocally fraudulent nature of social insurance as it is used by politicians today (at least in the United States) because of the "good" it does for elderly citizens. Perhaps social insurance "taxes" should also be acknowledged as smart ponzi schemes in the future when those "tax payments" are accepted in the form of crytocurrency in the not-too-distant future in order to fund wars and foreign policy initiatives. Your thoughts?