Social Security, as it is posted in Wikipedia:

…refers to the Federal Old-Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance (OASDI) program. The original Social Security Act and the current version of the Act, as amended, encompass several social welfare or social insurance programs…. The Social Security Administration is headquartered in Woodlawn, Maryland. Largely because of solvency problems ranging from immediate crisis to large projected future shortfalls, reform of the Social Security system has been a major political issue for more than three decades during the presidencies of Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush. … The largest component of OASDI is the payment of retirement benefits. Throughout a worker’s career, the Social Security Administration keeps track of his or her earnings. The amount of the monthly benefit to which the worker is entitled depends upon that earnings record and upon the age at which the retiree chooses to begin receiving benefits. For the entire history of Social Security, benefits have been paid almost entirely by using revenue from payroll taxes. This is why Social Security is referred to as a pay-as-you-go system. … The Supreme Court decided, in Flemming v. Nestor (1960 that “entitlement to Social Security benefits is not a contractual right”. In that case, Ephram Nestor, a Bulgarian immigrant to the United States who made contributions for covered wages for the statutorily required “quarters of coverage” was nonetheless denied benefits after being deported in 1956 for being a member of the Communist party. In simple terms, the decision means that Congress can cut benefits at any time.

And for any reason they decide is right. So, tell me, is it your fund in a private account designated by the established social security number system? An answer other than “no” would be naïve.

As a side note here - argument recently that illegal immigrants, whether legally here or not, deserve to receive benefits if they paid into the SSA system. Nonsense. The argument would be that they are here illegally, and just as the Supreme Court decided concerning a legal immigrant who had been deported (cited above) because of his affiliation with the Communist Party was denied benefits, how can those elected officials in Congress say that illegal immigrants have the right to benefits for legal immigrants and American citizens? Another point to make if you are fighting Congress on the amnesty issue.

Trust Fund Operations – SSA government historical site:

Even though there is presently more FICA taxes coming in each year than benefits paid out, this has not always been the case. Since 1937, there have been 11 years in which benefits paid out exceeded income and so the assets of the Trust Funds had to be spent to make up the difference. This cashing-in of the Trust Fund bonds amounted to about $26 billion in those 11 years.

And since its inception by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, it has never been voluntary. Anyone working is required to have an FICA designated amount deducted from their payroll and self employed individuals must pay a quarterly or yearly amount called the Self Employment Tax. Participation is mandatory, and therefore just another means of taking away the citizens’ freedom of choice – an intrusion, as well as a scam. There have been, however, exceptions to this rule where persons working for state/local governments, under certain conditions, have been able to voluntarily choose to have their employment covered or not covered. Which means if you don’t work for the government, your FICA deductions are in control of the government – who decides what to do with your money; and it certainly could never be called an investment because investments are designed to provide one with some level of return and the money you invest is yours – not under control of some entity that uses it for purposes of their own choosing and tells you that it is not “contractual” funds nor benefits provided. Thus, all the hype about how great and/or necessary the SS system is to American workers – the government, as an old Missouri saying goes, is “pissing down your back and telling you it’s raining.”

The tax rate in the original 1935 law was 1% for each employer and the employee (co-pay system) on the first $3,000 of one’s earnings. The rate was never fixed and the amount taken out of employee payrolls and the amount that employers are required to pay has risen sharply since that time because Congress has claimed that the system is going bankrupt. But it is not going bankrupt because the government doesn’t collect enough, the government over the years (no matter what political party congressional members are affiliated with) have committed embezzlement, plain and simple. They have taken funds from the “trust” fund and used it for other expenditures. This is why the Supreme Court has made decision after decision on the side of the shady characters we elected that is constitutes the legislative body of government we call Congress. And don’t let any congressional member fool you – it is Congress that is responsible for the government funds, and not the presidential administration (other than its enforcement under the Treasury Department, et cetera).

Many say that President Roosevelt promised that the money the participants paid would be put into the independent “Trust Fund” rather than into the general operating fund, which would make it only for the use of the Social Security Retirement (and disability) program. From its inception, the “Trust Fund” was not really anything like its name. It is true the method of government spending is complicated and the government will deny that they have used the funds supposed to be held in “trust” for the American people who have contributed to the system, it has been handled more like an entitlement rather than a retirement investment program.

Originally, Social Security benefits were not taxable income, but it was not set down in writing by President F. Roosevelt’s administration. Treasury rulings can be found at the SSA government site. The taxation of Social Security benefits did not become law until 1983, a bill that President Reagan should not have signed and the Supreme Court should have disallowed it - because it taxes money already taxed. And because the government pays no dividends or interest on the money, there isn’t any “income” to be taxed. Another argument against the income tax system as well. The puny amount we get per month from the SSA when we retire is taxable, sometimes with some deductions that we may see at the end of the fiscal year. In addition, the government penalizes those retirees that supplement that puny retirement income with either full or part-time employment by either reducing your monthly retirement check or stopping it altogether. So, tell me once again, how all that money you have put into the system (and your employers' contributon) is YOUR money.

A good publication to read is Kent Smetters, Yale University Press, Real Deal: The History and Future of Social Security obtainable in PDF or HTML. You need to read it and you should also arm yourself with real facts about the system and then continually write to your congressional members (you voted for) and hound them until something is done. Don’t bother writing to the President, this one or any future ones – it is Congress who is responsible for fixing this. President GW Bush, in one of the few things he has advocated that is useful or good, is the idea to have the option of American citizens to privatize their SS funds, and, more importantly, make it truly an individual account. Congressional idea of reforming the system is raising the amount taken from your paycheck and the like amount collected from your employer. That is nonsense. And, by investing part of or all of those funds, if the person so chooses, there will be some return from the principle paid and become truly a retirement trust fund instead of just an IOU that is stymied by rules made up along the way by our government.

And, I cannot emphasize enough that it is you the voter who is responsible for who sits in Congress. If they are not performing their job as you expected – vote to fire them. But before you elect anyone, be sure to check our their voting record, as well as their personal background – not by what the opposing candidate and his/her party accuse them of, but what they have actually been involved with and, if they have served in any capacity in the government, just what they voted for and approved in the past. This is important, and it is also the responsibility of the voter. If we do not like the way our government is handled, we can only look in the mirror and point your finger at the image you see. Voting should not be an extension of your emotions, nor a reflection upon how you see the person to be elected or remain in office physically or how well the person orates (Hitler was a dynamic orator) – but what that person holds to be his/her ideology, their stance upon the adherence to the Constitution, their past voting record (if they have one) and their views on the various issues at hand. This means research – and research is important, as Kritter Girl at Kritter Korner will tell you when deciding on a particular pet to be added to your household. [Forgive the plug, couldn’t help myself].

Let’s work together to ensure that elected officials keep in mind why our government exists and that they adhere to and protect the U.S. Constitution, and advocating the standards and principles that the founders of our nation worked so hard to achieve. Don’t be more loyal to political entities – be loyal to our nation and your fellow Americans.

Further Research:

How Stuff Works
Social Security Benefits
Benefit Calculator
Understanding Social Security Benefits [PDF]
Understanding Social Security Benefits [HTML]
The Social Security Scam by Lew Rockwell
The Social Security Scam by David J. Stewart
Energy Bulletin
The Social Security Scam and Immigration by Paul Craig Roberts
Your Social Security Number - How Secure is it?
Social Security: From Scam to Scandal by Doug Dowd
Making Economic Sense - Mises Organization
Leiter Reports - Social Security Privatization
The Folly of Social Security Privatization - Mother Jones [an alternate view]
Scam for Social Security by Robert Freeman
How to Find Out if Your Social Security Number has been Stolen