>That would eliminate even the thin handkerchief of SS being a sort of mandatory government-run savings program It would have been called mandatory social savi

>That would eliminate even the thin handkerchief of SS being a sort of mandatory government-run savings program It would have been called mandatory social savings if that was its intended purpose. It's not. It never was. It's social security. >one of the arguments that people regularly make in favor of SS when they feel it's under threat: "it's your money" This is actually one of the arguments used to try and justify privatizing it and handing over the money to Wall Street to invest instead (Bush tried to do exactly this and Obama made noises about it). >And by removing the contribution cap, it'll suddenly have a lot of very wealthy enemies It ALREADY has a lot of very wealthy enemies who are trying to privatize it. One of the most prominent is Stan Druckenmiller, who is fairly open about inciting intergenerational warfare - telling "millenials" that "boomers" are the cause of their problems and that the "fix" is privatizing social security and austerity: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/10/who-should-young-people-throw-under-the-bus-granny-or-billionaire-hedgie-stan-druckenmiller.html http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/10/who-should-young-peop...