A Counter-Arguments About The Failing Social Security System

Social Security Crisis

Brendan O’Daniell

Ms. Scannell

Virginia High School

16 November 2015

Abstract

Some people would argue that there is a major crisis in the Social Security system. Honestly, it is a huge mess, and multiple valid opinions can be established. The fact of the matter is, there is a major problem concerning Social Security. Life expectancy is going up and more people are pulling from the pool of money than people putting into it. There are also many other conspiracies as to why the system is failing that will be discussed in this paper. Some counter-arguments regarding the failing Social Security system are that budget cuts can be made, and people that don’t need it can opt out of it. Those are some pretty valid points,

Roosevelt. In 1932, Roosevelt decided that the government needed to provide for people with disabilities, had a death in the family, or just couldn’t physically work anymore. One bill led to another and they established the Social Security Act in 1935. Just following the Great Depression, Roosevelt knew that people needed help financially, and he definitely delivered. He once stated, “Social Security is the principle that we are all in it together, and it reflects basic American Values.” (1934). How the Social Security program works is you have working Americans putting money into the system every paycheck, paying for the people who qualify to receive benefits. On the backside, when that person later becomes qualified for benefits, they will receive back what they paid in. A seemingly flawless program that somehow went downhill. A little over one-fourth of Americans qualify for some type of social security benefit. Social security is not enough to live off of for some people, though. One thing is for sure, the system has definitely altered since it was created under FDR. It wasn’t until 1939 that congress decided to build upon their program. It was decided that if the retiree had a spouse or children, they would receive added benefits due to the added cost of living. Up until 1940, Social Security was given in a lump sum, rather than monthly. It is unclear why it was changed, but it must have been for the

In response to that, there is no reason to scare people that are spending money towards the government. The only relevant explanation has to be that they want people to quit pulling from the pool of money in order to expand the system. The most relevant and most important fact supporting the lack of crisis in social security is that the government will not allow it. The collapse of social security would mean the poverty of millions of elderly Americans. If millions of Americans go broke, the economy of all businesses will go down the drain, and eventually the complete dismemberment of the federal government. This is completely true. The problem with this theory is that the government doesn’t have as much control over the crisis as they think. Yes, it would be detrimental if the system collapses, but the government isn’t doing very much about it, publicly, at least. If they don’t do something about it soon, it will no longer be in their control. The runaway train is taking full effect, and you can’t stop a moving train in a small amount of time. Basically, the fact that the crisis has gotten out of hand disproves the fact that the government still has control. Realistically, does the government seem like it has control of anything? Another theory that caught wind concerning the crisis also defends the system, and claims that it is still in control. It is