Social Security is literally the most popular government program, and these supposed public servants are actively attempting to slowly destroy or privatize it.
Social Security presents a real-world example of the fallacy of tax revenue paying for our government at the federal level. What is the first thing politicians want to protect when they get into their regular squabbles over raising the debt ceiling? It is always Social Security, Medicare, federal retirement and health benefits, etc.
Why would benefits that "can't", by law, add to the deficit and require raising the debt ceiling be curtailed in this for-show exhibition of political grandstanding? Until just recently, Social Security payroll deductions funded 100% of benefits paid and then some. So what is not being told to the public about such a contradiction and the need to extend the ceiling to pay benefits?
The truth is that payroll deductions don't, and can't, fund anything and that all spending at the federal level is via brand new money creation. Anything that the government receives in "revenue" is deleted by the debt that it was originally created by. The national debt that gets everyone's panties in a bunch is nothing more than a tracking number for the number of US dollars in circulation and savings.
Because the federal government is the monopoly issuer of US dollars it can never fail to pay any obligation that is denominated in dollars. It is only constrained by the resources and labor available and inflation, but never by revenue. It can literaly "afford" anything that it can resource in the private sector, even without a dime of revenue from taxation or borrowing.
It must first spend/create money in the economy before it can collect or borrow, so it is more accurate to state that "spending" funds both tax payments and Treasury debt than is the opposite. Once this sinks in (and we realize that money doesn't grow on rich people or business) it becomes obvious that no government program can become insolvent or "go broke".
They can, however, fail to gain the political support necessary to defend them and be "defunded". If any federal program fails to remain beneficial to the people it will be because politicians want it to fail, not economics. This holds true for "ANY" suffering that can be mitigated by additional spending at the federal level. If granny is surviving on catfood at the end of the month it is because our representatives don't want her to have better, and this will be just as true for any future generations as it is now.
