4 ms·
I would argue not to include SS benefits as savings purely because SS payments are a tax levied upon the rest of society rather than any sort of fund, trust, et
by turc1656 7y ago
I would argue not to include SS benefits as savings purely because SS payments are a tax levied upon the rest of society rather than any sort of fund, trust, etc. that actually has money allotted to someone. It's basically just an IOU from Uncle Sam that they will tax other people to pay you.
Therefore, that is subject to change at the whim of those in charge of changing the laws. Sure, it's politically ugly to reduce/eliminate, but a severe recession could easily change that.
- AnimalMuppet 7y agoYes and no. There actually is a trust fund with actual money in it. That money is invested in Treasury bonds. Individuals don't have "accounts", exactly, but they do have benefits allotted to them. Yes, it's a tax (though they don't call it that). No, it's not a savings account. And yet...
- turc1656 7y agoTrue, but that general fund/account is routinely raided by congress periodically to pay for things so it being separated is purely for show and is totally meaningless since they take money from it from time to time.