Edit: re-re-reading here, I now see I misunderstood your response and I'm sorry. I do think you're using "entitlement" in a way different from how most people u

Edit: re-re-reading here, I now see I misunderstood your response and I'm sorry. I do think you're using "entitlement" in a way different from how most people understand it in a political context, but I also now understand that that seems to be part of your point. Apologies for the confusion (I'm leaving my original response here for context). I understand what you're saying — and as I said I agree with the thrust of your post — but your use of the word "entitlement" is not universal. The courts, in particular, disagree with your use, and specifically distinguish the concept of a property right from things the government has promised to give you. SCOTUS has ruled that SS is the latter and not the former. The fundamental difference, in my lay understanding, is that the government needs to use an argument like eminent domain to deprive you of a property right, but can arbitrarily stop or reduce social security at any time if they so desire (as they can with welfare or medicare).