2 ms·
This is incorrect per the US Supreme Court e.g. Flemming v Nestor in 1960. Social Security contributions are purely an income tax like any other, it is explicit
by jandrewrogers 2y ago
This is incorrect per the US Supreme Court e.g. Flemming v Nestor in 1960. Social Security contributions are purely an income tax like any other, it is explicitly neither a pension nor insurance plan. Contributions create no obligation for the government to give you anything in return, same as the other income taxes you pay. The government largely treats it as tax revenue.
It is intentionally (mis)represented as a pension plan where contributions are connected to benefits but that fiction is solely to maintain popular political support, they can disqualify citizens from eligibility at any time regardless of contributions and, on occasion, have.
The main issue with Social Security is that most people in prior generations took far more out than they contributed, in part because it wasn’t really a requirement since it wasn’t actually a pension.
- skhunted 2y agoIf the Supreme's deem it so then it must be. Are there any decisions they've gotten wrong? Your benefit is based on what you pay in. It pays out less than what it takes in. If it were privatized you and the Supremes would call it a pension. It acts like a pension, quacks like a pension and is a pension.
- potato3732842 2y ago>Are there any decisions they've gotten wrong? This list paid for with your tax dollars: https://constitution.congress.gov/resources/decisions-overruled/ https://constitution.congress.gov/resources/decisions-overru...
- lazide 2y agoNotably, if the gov’t starts making pensioners subsist on cat food because they refuse to honor their obligations, hopefully a whole lot of senators will be out of jobs ASAP. SS is explicitly sold as a pension. If it stops acting like one, there will be consequences - even if it means rewriting laws.