From each according to this ability, to each according to his need.
—Communist slogan

Many people think that Social Security taxes taken out of their wages and sent to Washington each month provide for their old-age pensions and other Social Security benefits. This simply is not the case. Those taxes are levied on workers in order to pay benefits to people who have already retired . . . . The situation is in no way analogous to putting money each month into a private insurance company.
—1975 Report of the Quadrennial
Advisory Council of Social Security

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
—ancient proverb

Many honest and respectable American charities relieve enormous suffering at home and around the world. Thousands of people support them selflessly with their time, their wealth and their love.

Politicians and bureaucrats, however, have long exploited this basic human urge to help others in need. With Social Security and other programs, they have socialized economic aid to compel what should be voluntary. To gain votes, they encourage more and more members of society to look on themselves as "underprivileged" and thus "entitled" to be supported by their fellows.

To make matters worse, current Social Security Administration (SSA) rules permit those with no need for its services—including many millionaires—to receive benefits. In addition, the average life span is now far longer than when the act was passed in 1935. Though many senior citizens continue to be active and able to work beyond the traditional retirement age, most are forcibly retired by their workplaces onto government pensions. As a result, the ratio of contributors-to-beneficiaries grows smaller every year. (In 1950, it was 16.5 to 1; by 1980 it had shrunk to only 3.3 producers supporting every non producer.)

One needs only basic math and common sense to know that this trend cannot continue forever. Even the establishment press has begun to call for changes in what has been an illogical and immoral system from the start. In "The Case For Killing Social Security," Time noted,

The numbers don't add up—and the politicians won't own up. The only way to avert disaster is to start changing the system now. . . . For government to pay pensions to the advancing tide of baby boomers will almost certainly require stunning benefit reductions or huge tax increases. More likely both. After years of fiscal and political fickleness, an explosive conclusion.

Whenever and however the changes are made, they will be painful. The longer we wait, the worse they will hurt. As Steven R. Covey (The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People) said in a recent interview, I would say institutionalized dependency, where people have transferred the responsibility for their lives to bureaucracies [is the greatest challenge facing the workplace and society]. The social contract has changed. It is going, if it is not gone now. It is going to be very disillusioning to people who are dependent on institutions. There has to be a new social contract set up where everyone takes responsibility for themselves.

I am encouraged by the power of the global economy to drive quality, which drives trust cultures, which drives trustworthiness. I'm discouraged by the amount of irresponsible behavior by people who are still blaming and being part of a victim mentality. Those people are going to suffer the most, blame the most. They are going to try to effect social and political will behind government moving in, killing free trade, outsourcing, mandating income equality for all people, things of this nature. And that will kill the economic engine that makes everything happen. People must take charge of their own times. What do YOU think?

Under popular pressure to find a workable solution to the mess, Congress has commissioned numerous studies. Since their recommendations are always unpleasant, it has never implemented the fundamental changes needed. As an example of their specious reasoning (if a particularly egregious one), consider the following statement made by Senator William Proxmire during the Congressional Joint Economics Committee meeting of May 27, 1976.

Noting that 32-to-34 millions voters were then receiving Social Security benefits, Sen. Proxmire said, Can you imagine a Senator or Congressman under those circumstances saying, we are going to repudiate that high a proportion of the electorate? No. Furthermore, we have the capacity under the Constitution, the Congress does, to coin money, as well as to regulate the value thereof. And therefore we have the power to provide that money. And we are going to do it. It may not be worth anything when the recipient gets it, but he is going to get his benefits paid. (Emphasis added).

We encourage our readers to share with us articles, news accounts and other accurate information which compliment the "12 Good Reasons". Submit your articles or links here. We welcome your comments.

What can you do about it? The Time Is Now Institute is part of the solution. We invite you to a Consultation to develop a personal solution. Be sure to read all 12 Good Reasons.

Back to the 12 Good Reasons page.

Back to The Time Is Now Institute homepage.