DAN MITCHELL: Hillary’s Hard Left Turn on Social Security.
Defenders of Social Security often make a point of stating that the retirement system is a form of “social insurance” because people become eligible for benefits by paying into the system.
Welfare programs, by contrast, give money to people simply as a form of income redistribution.
Proponents of the status quo are right. Sort of.
Social Security is an “earned benefit.” The payroll taxes of workers are somewhat analogous to a premium payment and retirement benefits are somewhat analogous to a monthly annuity payment.
But “somewhat analogous” isn’t the same as real insurance. Money isn’t invested and set aside to pay benefits. Instead, Social Security is a pay-as-you-go program, which means the payroll taxes of current workers are paying for the benefits paid to current retirees.
If a private insurance company did the same thing, its owners would be arrested for operating a Ponzi Scheme.
But the government can get away with this kind of system because it can coerce younger workers to participate.
Or, to be more accurate, the government can get away with this approach so long as there are a sufficient number of new workers who can be forced into the program.
The problem, of course, is that the combination of longer lifespans and fewer births means that Social Security is promising far more than it can deliver.
And we’re talking real money, even by Washington standards. According to the Social Security Trustees, the cash-flow deficit over the next 75 years is approaching $40 trillion. And that’s after adjusting for inflation!
Don’t worry, we have the finest minds working on this.