I’m 100% for defending Social Security. It’s a vital program. Like it or not, the reality is that most Americans will need it in their old age and many even before.
It can easily be made sustainable even improved, if politicians would tell the truth and do their job managing the program; they aren’t and they haven’t for decades.
To make matters worse some Social Security advocates are not above misleading and worse trying to take Social Security beyond what was intended and creating unrealistic expectations instead on focusing on solvency and gradual improvement changes. These are the people who also outrageously characterize the SS trust as a surplus which it has never been.
Take a look at this recent statement in support of Social Security. It creates the impression that it’s purpose is to provide income equal to a full standard of living for life. That statement was Roosevelts early politicking in favor of some social insurance program, not the policy describing today’s Social Security.
Social Security was never intended to allow individuals to maintain their standard of living by itself and until the last few years, was never thought of in that way. We seem to be in a rewrite history mode. Note that at age 65 the average household income is about $80,000. (Median $54,124). I use household income because SS is a family benefit. Although average is reflective of both high and low incomes, it still reflects what SS would be required to provide to fully replace standard of living incomes, which, I think you will agree, is ridiculous. Imagine what taxes would have to be to do that.
After your read the following be sure to read the next quote from Roosevelt upon the signing of the Social Security Act. As you can see, there is quite a difference.
In 1931, years before signing the Social Security Act of 1935 into law, then-Governor of New York Franklin D. Roosevelt described his policy preference for wage insurance that provides, when wages are gone, “not merely…a roof over head and enough food, to keep body and soul together, but also enough income to maintain life during the balance of their days in accordance with the American standard of living.”
Social Security was designed as wage insurance. Its goal has always been much more expansive than the alleviation of poverty, or even its prevention. The system’s purpose is, and always has been, to replace wages so that people are able to maintain their standards of living in the event of retirement, disability or death.
Source: Forbes. August 26, 2019 Republicans Are Pushing Myths About Social Security – To Justify Their Demands For Benefit Cuts
The above is simply not true
Now read this:
PRESIDENTIAL STATEMENT SIGNING THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT. AUGUST 14,1935
Today a hope of many years’ standing is in large part fulfilled. The civilization of the past hundred years, with its startling industrial changes, has tended more and more to make life insecure. Young people have come to wonder what would be their lot when they came to old age. The man with a job has wondered how long the job would last.
This social security measure gives at least some protection to thirty millions of our citizens who will reap direct benefits through unemployment compensation, through old-age pensions and through increased services for the protection of children and the prevention of ill health.
We can never insure one hundred percent of the population against one hundred percent of the hazards and vicissitudes of life, but we have tried to frame a law which will give some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family against the loss of a job and against poverty-ridden old age.