PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
Where in the Constitution does it say that? In any case, what's "fair" is open to debate. And you can call it "welfare" if you want, you can call it whatever you want to.
1. FDR, master politician, sculpted the program so it could not be whittled down by economic measures: he called the payroll taxes contributions We put those pay roll contributions there so as to give the contributors a legal, moral, and political right to collect their pensions and their unemployment benefits. With those taxes in there, no damn politician can ever scrap my social security program. Those taxes arent a matter of economics, theyre straight politics. Social Security Online - HISTORY, FDR Quote from Luther Gulick
a. The implied promise was that ones contributions belonged to him or her, and SS was not simply a tax-funded program that could be cut thus the designation of a Social Security Trust Fund. Of course that changed in 1983, and since then the funds have been used as general revenue.
Of course that's what it says in the social security law, what I asked is where in the Constitution does it say that taxes must be distributed fairly. Willowtree had claimed it said this in the Constitution.
I think we should try to make good on all our past social security obligations if at all possible, but definitely change the law for the future so that it's not just a giant, obligatory, government-controlled savings account. It's a huge nonsensical expense for the government that assumes that people are not capable of saving for their retirement on their own.
I understand your concern, and have studied the debt situation. But politicians are not brave...and you will be hard pressed to find a majority that would scrap the SS part of the budget.
Further, consider what your response would be if it didn't exist, and there were large numbers of elderly who hadn't planned well....you get the point.