Intent of SSA was to be self subsidized by workers mandated contribution for retirement. It has evolved into a train wreck for sure and original intent is skewed beyond recognition.
Intent of SSA was to be self subsidized by workers mandated contribution for retirement.
That has always been the political spin, but it has never been the reality.
SS law was passed in 1935. It was touted as a "retirement plan."
The law was challenged and went to the SCOTUS.
The argument against SS was that it was a retirement plan that is not authorized by the Constitution.
FDR's lawyers argued that it was NEVER a retirement plan (even though that is exactly how they presented it to the public), but rather it was a WELFARE plan, which the PREAMBLE to the Constitution mentions (but for which there is not actually any authority).
SCOTUS accepted the FDR argument of a welfare plan and thus constitutional (even though there is nothing in the Constitution that allows for a retirement OR welfare plan). If SCOTUS did not approve it, FDR was threatening to pack the court.
It was passed in 1935, but by 1939, the idea of a "retirement fund with money in it to pay out to seniors" was completely scrapped and instead it just became another government program that takes money in each year and pays it out.
The idea of a "trust fund" for SS is a joke and a lie. Always has been.
Wait - they tell the courts one thing and then the public something else?
Shocked, I'm just shocked!!!
.
The toughest part will be to hold onto your Christianity while watching these clowns get their just rewards.
Intent of SSA was to be self subsidized by workers mandated contribution for retirement. It has evolved into a train wreck for sure and original intent is skewed beyond recognition.
That has always been the political spin, but it has never been the reality.
SS law was passed in 1935. It was touted as a "retirement plan."
The law was challenged and went to the SCOTUS.
The argument against SS was that it was a retirement plan that is not authorized by the Constitution.
FDR's lawyers argued that it was NEVER a retirement plan (even though that is exactly how they presented it to the public), but rather it was a WELFARE plan, which the PREAMBLE to the Constitution mentions (but for which there is not actually any authority).
SCOTUS accepted the FDR argument of a welfare plan and thus constitutional (even though there is nothing in the Constitution that allows for a retirement OR welfare plan). If SCOTUS did not approve it, FDR was threatening to pack the court.
It was passed in 1935, but by 1939, the idea of a "retirement fund with money in it to pay out to seniors" was completely scrapped and instead it just became another government program that takes money in each year and pays it out.
The idea of a "trust fund" for SS is a joke and a lie. Always has been.
Wait - they tell the courts one thing and then the public something else? Shocked, I'm just shocked!!! . The toughest part will be to hold onto your Christianity while watching these clowns get their just rewards.