4 ms·
"It's money that was paid into social security with the explicit promise that you'd get it all back upon retirement" That's not even close to true; there is no
by h4nkoslo 10y ago
"It's money that was paid into social security with the explicit promise that you'd get it all back upon retirement"
That's not even close to true; there is no legal connection that requires you "get it all back" or that the government can't arbitrarily adjust benefits up and down.
In practical terms the program is a transfer from present workers to past workers, it doesn't fundamentally operate as a savings account.
- freehunter 10y agoPractical terms or not, that's the founding principle of the social security program. People can't/won't save for retirements, so we (the government) will take money from them now and pay it back later when they retire. If the government can say "we took all this money from you in the past but won't give it back now", there was literally no point in paying social security taxes.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- pilom 10y agoIt makes much more sense if you don't think about SS as a pension. It is a tax you pay to not have old people destitute on the streets. That's all. It isn't a savings account or an annuity. It's a tax to take care of old people today. When you get old, you may be eligible for funding to keep you off the streets. You might not. That is what SS is and should be marketed as.