Slashdot Mirror


Ponzi Schemes Multiply On YouTube

Hugh Pickens writes "While it's probably not true that P. T. Barnum was the originator of the saying 'there's a sucker born every minute,' the proliferation of nearly 23,000 Ponzi schemes on YouTube, with an astounding 59,192,963 views, proves that the sentiment is still alive and well. The videos usually don't ask for money directly, but send viewers to web sites where they are urged to sign up for the 'gifting program,' usually for fees ranging from $150 to $5,000. One of the videos recently added on YouTube featured Bible quotes, pictures of stacks of money and a testimonial from a man who said he not only got rich from cash gifting, but also found true happiness and lost 35 pounds. 'They make it seem like it's legal and an easy way to make money, but it's nothing more than a pyramid scheme,' says Better Business Bureau spokeswoman Alison Southwick. Some of the videos claim that because it's 'gifting,' it's somehow legal. 'They talk about "cash leveraging," whatever that means, and other vague marketing talk,' says Southwick, but the basic scheme is that participants are told to recruit more people who will put in more money. 'It's just money changing hands,' says Southwick, 'and it always goes to people at the top of the pyramid.' A spokesman for YouTube, which is owned by Google Inc., said the company doesn't comment on individual videos."

22 of 346 comments (clear)

  1. They learned it by watching the government. by Rockoon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just as the government learned it by watching Ponzi, these youtubers learned it by watching the government.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
    1. Re:They learned it by watching the government. by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Right, because taxation never produces libraries, public roads, schools, an FDA, FCC, or any number of other services.

      All taxation does is make a handful of oligarchs rich, right?

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    2. Re:They learned it by watching the government. by cayenne8 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "Well the population will surely stop growing if you let people die in the street won't it? Good alternative plan you have there."

      Well, considering that most people on Social Security are well past their reproductive years, it won't keep them from adding to the population.

      I'm heavily against govt. (especially the feds) spending on things which it is not constitutionally mandated to do, but, even I see some need for a very, very basic social safety net for the elderly and infirmed. However, the ponzi scheme that is the SS program, isn't what I'd like to see. It is going to go bankrupt in a few years. Likely when I retire, it will not exist I fear. It really sucks that I have paid all this fuckin' money into a black hole, which will not come back to me. Frankly, even at this last point, if the govt. would let me, I'd sign away any 'rights' I have to collect SS, if they'd let me OUT of the program at this point, and let me keep and invest my money on my own.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    3. Re:They learned it by watching the government. by Rockoon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You got it backwards.

      Master Charge owns the debts of others
      United States owes debts to others

      See the difference? Its hard for the government to write off bad debt when its the one thats upside down.

      ..and whats this about a tax deduction? The solution to the problem of not enough tax revenue, you believe, is to reduce tax revenue further? Did you even think about it before you typed it?

      ..and whats this about right wingers? Did someone convinced you that this was a political idiology problem (with the 'right' being the 'enemy') rather than a fiscal numbers problem?

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    4. Re:They learned it by watching the government. by cayenne8 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "It's the private retirement funds that are screwed, that's why a govt funded one is vital. Maybe it's different where you live but here everybody votes and if the govt ever tried to stop pension payments they'd be out on their arse before the ink was dry on the bill."

      With the usage of the word "arse", I'd have to guess you are not an American.

      I'm guessing Europe, UK?

      It is just a different mentality, you are used to thinking of the large government 'nanny' state, where the state takes care of you from birth to death. Over here, we (at least we did) believe in personal resposibility, the individual, and taking care of your own.

      During your working life, you are supposed to save for 'rainy' days, and retirement. In the constitution, the federal government, over here, is pretty much only supposed to be there for defense, and to be more or less, a mediation between the states, where the real power is supposed to reside.

      However, that balance of power has slowly eroded over the years, and national programs and the like have come from the feds, which they really should not have the power to do or force upon citizens of each state. That's what myself and others are generally complaining about.

      Many of us want to get back to the 'roots' of the US, and get rid of government mandated ponzi schemes (like SS). We don't want to go the way of Europe, and have a large, overbearing nanny state. As it has been said before, a government that is big and strong enough to give you everthing, is also big and strong enough to take everything from you too.

      I'd rather be left to struggle more on my own, and be more free of govt. entanglements.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    5. Re:They learned it by watching the government. by jabithew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't know when, but at some point in the last few years wanting to have a balanced budget became the sure sign of a right-wing extremist.

      The tax deduction only works for Master Charge, because it can take defaulted loans as losses, which then count against its income.

      GP makes no sense. The US could simply refuse to pay off its debts, but to claim that this would have no consequence, or even be beneficial, is surreal. All of a sudden US treasuries, up till now the benchmark of safe investment, would be worthless. Investors would switch to safer euro-denominated bonds, probably from Germany. The markets would be awash with worthless dollars everyone wants to convert to euro. The dollar would collapse. China might start cutting its losses, accelerating the process. The euro would become the global reserve currency, assuming that European economies weren't too hammered for it to switch elsewhere.

      The status quo, allowing America to effectively raise cash on its own terms, would be destroyed, and the American public would have to learn to deal with difficult terms of debt like the rest of us.

      So yeah, good luck with that.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    6. Re:They learned it by watching the government. by Cathbard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Australia actually. Over here we have always had a "look after the underdog" mentality and don't think it's right to throw people to the wolves simply because they didn't have the ability to get rich. Personally I am glad that is the case, I find the "make money or die" perspective quite obscene, not everybody has the ability or aptitude to make money and that has no bearing on their worth to society. In fact I know lots of musicians and artists that did their best work while on the dole (unemployment benefits) and enriched us all. I also know several people on welfare that do great charity work. Making money is hardly a method of assigning worth imo and it certainly shouldn't decide whether a person lives or dies. But hey, I'm not an American, as you say, we think differently.

      --
      "A cynic is what an idealist calls a realist" - Sir Humphrey Appleby
    7. Re:They learned it by watching the government. by cayenne8 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "Australia actually. Over here we have always had a "look after the underdog" mentality and don't think it's right to throw people to the wolves simply because they didn't have the ability to get rich."

      But I'm not arguing that everyone has to get rich or perish. Just work hard, and live within your means. That means you don't spend on luxuries (HDTV, cable, fine cars, good booze) till you've bought groceries, and put back money for retirement and general savings. The problem is, that largely people have come to expect the govt. to fund their retirment and take care of all the basics, while they go spend their money on 'fun' stuff as mentioned above. If they stayed at home and cooked...they'd not have the weight problems, and they'd save money, etc.

      "In fact I know lots of musicians and artists that did their best work while on the dole (unemployment benefits) and enriched us all. I also know several people on welfare that do great charity work."

      I love artists and what they do...I applaud people for doing charity work. However, I don't feel it is my place to work hard, bust my ass to earn money, and then turn around and hand it over to people that are sitting around, doing 'fun' stuff like art and music. Hell, if I could be supported, I'd learn to play the guitar or paint or take more time to enjoy my writing. Unless you are good enough to sell your stuff, that is a HOBBY, it is not a livelyhood. Many charities hire people to work for them...no need to be on the 'dole' when you can work for a charity doing good deeds.

      Again, no...not saying you have to get rich. But I don't believe in supporting people to have an easy life. I don't mind giving to the elderly, and the infirmed that cannot work. But, anyone that can work....should.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    8. Re:They learned it by watching the government. by mshannon78660 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't completely disagree with you here, but I'm guessing you're younger than I am. Your philosophy of 'everyone who can work, should' is great when we have full employment - but in recessions and depressions, there simply are not jobs for all the people who want to work, or who should work. Those people are burning through the money they saved for a rainy day. And often, their joblessness has nothing whatsoever to do with their worth - they just happened to be working for the wrong company (one that either ceased to exist, or at least had to lay off large numbers of workers) at the wrong time (when unemployment rates are high, so competition for the very few openings there are is much greater than normal, and perhaps in the wrong place (we usually just hear about the national unemployment rate - often it's much higher in specific places - especially if the major employer in a region goes under). Personally, I've been fortunate in my life - but I can still remember the early 80s when, even though the town I lived in had relatively low unemployment (compared to the national average), when a chain restaurant would open in town, they would get 300-400 applicants to show up on one day for a job fair. All of those people were competing for about 30-40 jobs (and we're talking pretty low wage jobs, too). It was a college town, and the jokes about taxi drivers with PhDs had essentially come true - the cab companies required at least a bachelor's degree for applicants. Those are the reasons why we have a safety net like social security - you can absolutely be a solid worker who tries to save for your retirement, and be completely wiped out, close enough to retirement age that you can not possibly recover on your own. And if you're working at Wal-Mart, or some other similar wage job, good luck saving anything (especially with bank fees, since you won't have enough of a balance to avoid them) - most people at that wage level can't afford health insurance, so getting sick (or needing dental work, etc.) can easily wipe out anything they can manage to save.

    9. Re:They learned it by watching the government. by operagost · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is why the left-right political ideology simply doesn't work. People called "W" a right-winger, when he greatly increased the size of government and added social programs like prescription benefits. Calling that "right wing" is simply childish. The idea of a government strength scale based on Aristotelian/Platonic ideas-- from anarchy, to democracy, to republicanism, to oligarchy, to totalitarianism-- is far more realistic and brings the M.O. of politicians into sharp focus.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  2. "educate yourself! educate yourself!" by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...this is precisely why we really need to reconsider our public schooling system.

    If we abolish forced schooling, and insist that people "educate themselves" They'll find one of these scams, get taken for an expensive ride, and then left dumbfounded as to what happened.

    Solid critical thinking skills start with a decent education. Decent education starts by making it free, neutral and accessible.

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  3. Sign of the times by VShael · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just like during the Great Depression, this will be a time of resurgent con-men as the majority will (in desperation) try anything to get cash.

  4. A fool and his money... by onion2k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The notion that you can "gift" (or "buy") your way to being rich without doing any hard work, or having a creative idea, is so completely stupid that anyone who believes it, assuming they're in full control of their mental faculties, deserves what they get.

  5. Re:"educate yourself! educate yourself!" by QuantumG · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You'd be surprised how quickly a sucker learns after his money is gone forever. Sounds like a cheap education to me.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  6. Re:"educate yourself! educate yourself!" by Kuroji · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You'd be surprised how many people fall for one of these schemes, then move on to the next, lose out, and move on to the next to lose out again...

  7. Re:Why should it be illegal? by American+Terrorist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why should it be illegal to play pyramid schemes? Just because people are stupid enough to fall for them? I have no sympathy for people who are lured in by promises that are quite bluntly too good to be true, where thinking about it for only a minute would give you enough reasons to stay away from it.

    Libertarian intellectualism at its finest. Why don't we just scrap all the laws and let people fuck each other over every way imaginable? People do stupid things, laws try to prevent and minimize the harm done by those actions.

  8. Re:"educate yourself! educate yourself!" by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Want to see an economy tank all we need is a couple million illiterate people come of working age.

  9. Re:"educate yourself! educate yourself!" by Kjella · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Solid critical thinking skills start with a decent education. Decent education starts by making it free, neutral and accessible.

    That's a good start, but critical thinking must also be focused on as a skill. It's far too easy to regurgitate a textbook and even regurgitate what other people have thought on the matter. In things like math it's easy to learn the method without understanding, and in things like science you spend a lot of time catching up with that others have done or experiments with an expected outcome that is more reproduction than experimentation. Linguistics teach you to express things but again doesn't really help critical thinking alone.

    Sure, you can do more critical thinking on subjects already discussed to death by millions of scholars around the world, but given the tendency to google instead of thinking yourself it really only works on those who already want to think for themselves. To teach critical thinking you need to make them "think where no man has thought before". Make up a situation they won't find on google, ask them to argue some opinions, form arguments and give reasons for their logic. Unfortunately that is orthogonal to teaching them about the big and important events in history, which is so much more concrete and measurable. So we get people that know a lot about the world and understand little of it.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  10. Re:It's *money* which is the Ponzi scheme by lyml · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, because economy is a zero sum-game.

  11. Re:Why should it be illegal? by Anna+Merikin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's why:

    If it illegal to take someone's money by use of force, so it should *not* be legal to do the same with a pen or a computer.

    If the strong of body cannot rob the weak, the strong of mind should be prohibited from doing the same.

  12. Re:Why should it be illegal? by xigxag · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why should it be illegal to play pyramid schemes?

    Because outside of the damage they inflict upon naive individuals and their families, if left unchecked (as we basically saw with the housing bubble) they have the potential to inflict damage upon the real economy.

    Because a large percentage of people are not smart with money but are otherwise extremely capable of being productive contributors to society. As a society it benefits us for people to be justly rewarded for their fruitful labor, which requires mitigating the potential harm of their money-foolish character flaw.

    And finally, to the extent that money becomes a hack as opposed to an accurate representation of labor and capital, it is devalued as a concept, which decreases its global worth and utility.

    --
    There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
  13. Re:It's *money* which is the Ponzi scheme by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1 year later I'm a bit stuck because I've paid off most of the loan to the FED but that last $5 is a real bitch because it just doesn't exist. So what do I do?

    If it's (hyper)inflation you spend it as soon as possible before it loses value until it collapses like the reichmark in 1920s germany or just recently the zimbabwean dollar. If it's stagflation you hoard it as money is increasing in value. What you're missing here is that somewhere, real value is produced. Imagine that there's 100$ total and there's 10 foobars, the only goods to trade so each is worth $10. Now there's a foobar maker, which produces another foobar - there's now 100$ and 11 foobars and the new market price is 9$. Who's earned value? The people sitting on a 10$ bill. Now imagine how well it works if everyone wants to sit on their 10$ bill.

    So what's the solution? To print money, they print one more 10$ bill and suddenly there's 110$ total and 11 foobars and the money market works. Of course they can fall to the temptation and print more money than actual growth, say 110$ and 10 foobars, meaning you can sell a foobar for 11$. The government basicly took part of the value out of everyone's 10$ bills. But people have a very simple way of fighting this - don't sit on money, sit on goods as printing money only increases prices. In those situations money is just an intermediary as you swap one good for another, you buy gold or a saner currency.

    Of course the government like everyone else like skimming something of the top, but for the most part they work hard to keep the financial system going. Once you stop believing in the currency you also stop believing in deposits and credits because they make you "stuck" in that currency and so the whole economy withers. Like with the human body, you have vital organs but if you have no circulation system then none of those will survive either.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings