Skip to content

The Most Fundamental Misunderstanding About Social Security

The Most Fundamental Misunderstanding About Social Security

October 1, 2012 SVadmin Comments 0 Comment

By Jeff Nygaard

Reprinted (with permission) from Nygaard Notes

Recently the Associated Press (AP) published a four-part series of stories examining “the state of Social Security and its long-term health.”  The AP said that “Few things affect more Americans than the future of Social Security, and yet it’s an issue mostly invisible during the current campaign.”  True, it’s not talked about much, but perhaps more important is the fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the program that is revealed when people do talk about it.

This misunderstanding was revealed in the very first installment of the AP series, which appeared on August 5th.  The headline on this kick-off piece read, “Social Security Not Deal it Once Was for Workers.”  Asked the AP, “How can you get a better return on your Social Security taxes?”

A large and growing number of people share the misunderstanding revealed in that headline:  They think that Social Security is a program of Individual Investment.  It’s not, and was never meant to be.  Instead, it is a program of Social Insurance.  Understanding the difference between these two types of systems is the key to having even a glimmer of understanding about what is at stake in this huge public debate.

Insurance Versus Investment

When you invest money—for retirement or anything else—it makes sense to evaluate your investment, as the AP did, in terms of what you get out of it, or your “return.”  After all, that is why people invest money: to make more money.

When we think of Social Security this way, it makes sense to ask how good a “deal” it is, in terms of what you “get back” on your “investment.”  This way of evaluating Social Security is so common that it likely doesn’t seem strange to most readers.  Let me point out how strange it is.

Imagine someone telling you your car is a piece of junk because it doesn’t float.  You’d laugh, because you know that it wasn’t designed to float.  It was designed to function on solid ground.  Not only would you laugh, you would think to yourself, “This person doesn’t understand what automobiles are all about.”  And you would be skeptical of any future assessments of the quality of automobiles.  And so it should be when people say that Social Security is a piece of junk because it doesn’t earn a good “return” for everybody.  That’s not what it was designed to do.

As I said above, the program was designed as a system of Social Insurance.  Here’s how insurance works:  With insurance, you only get something back if you lose something.  I hope I never collect anything on my home insurance, for example, since that would mean my house has burned down, or some other horrible thing has happened.  Still, I pay my home insurance premium every year and I don’t think I am wasting my money.  Why not?  Because I know that, if and when I do lose something, I have insurance.  If I never “get back what I paid in,” that’s a good thing.  And, if I lose something, and DO get back some of what I paid in, what I get back is related to what I lost, not to what I paid in.  And that, too, is a good thing.  That’s the nature of insurance.  That is not the nature of investment.

SOCIAL versus INDIVIDUAL

Insurance, in principle, is based on what we know, as opposed to what we don’t know.  What we know are aggregate numbers, or social statistics.  To use the example of home insurance, what we do know—based on history and experience—is roughly how many houses are going to burn down in a given year.  What we don’t know is which ones they will be.  So, we insure the group.  Everyone, then, who wants to be in the insured group agrees to pay a premium that amounts to their proportionate share of the costs of replacing all of the homes that will burn down this year, not knowing whether or not one of them will be their own.  Insurance, then, even in it’s most commercial form, is a social program.

When you are part of an insurance “pool,” what you get in exchange for your premium is two things: you get to express solidarity with your neighbors and fellow insurees by paying your share of the social costs of property replacement, and you get the security of knowing that, should you have a loss, all of your neighbors will share in the costs of replacing what was lost, and you won’t have to bear the burden yourself.

That, in fact, is the essence of insurance: Everyone chips in to help out those who lose something.  If it is standard insurance, we chip in by paying “premiums.”  If it is Social Security, we chip in by paying taxes.  What is the loss that Social Security is intended to insure us against?  It’s the loss of wages, or income, due to old age, death, or disability. (The program is sometimes referred to as “OASDI,” for “Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance.”)

The essence of the social insurance program known as Social Security is that it’s a deal between the generations, where those who are working chip in to help those who are not, knowing that the same giving will come their way when the time comes.  It doesn’t deny individual responsibility.  Parents are expected to support their children.  But, if the parents die before their children can support themselves, Social Security is there.

Now, in the world of commercial insurance, there is also the matter of making a profit for shareholders, who care not about solidarity, but about self-enrichment.  For them it is an investment, which introduces the tremendous irony of having people investing in other people’s bad luck—the bad luck of paying more than necessary for their insurance to allow for the “return” to shareholders—which turns out to be a sort of “anti-solidarity.”  That’s an important issue, but is not our concern at the moment.

It’s not our concern because making a profit is not part of the Social Security program.  Unlike commercial insurance, Social Security enriches no individual, nor is it supposed to.  It is a social program, the success of which is based on how well it protects all of its participants against the loss of income.  And, for the past 77 years or so, Social Security has delivered all promised benefits, on time, at an overhead cost of less than one percent.

Social Security is and has been a system of Social Insurance in which everyone pays in a proportional share and everyone receives in return the security of knowing that they are protected against poverty and deprivation.  But the AP and many others insist on talking about it as if it were a system of Individual Investment which says that some people can get a “good deal” even when some of their neighbors are getting a “bad deal.”

The AP story, to it’s credit, does quote some people who seem to “get it.”  But the best the AP reporter can say is that “returns alone don’t fully explain the value of Social Security. . .”  True, but still missing the point: It’s not about “returns.”  It’s about security.  It’s about helping each other.  It’s about solidarity.

Years of anti-Social Security (and other) propaganda has made the idea of solidarity into a foreign concept for many young people, as evidenced by the concluding quotation in the Associated Press’s article.  They found a 22-year-old recent college graduate, Mackenzie Millan of Los Angeles, and who spoke about Social Security and her future, saying,

“The money that I put aside now, it’s not like that money is going to be waiting for me. That money is going toward someone else.  If I wanted Social Security 50 years from now, when I wanted to retire, I would have to hope that someone else is still working and putting money aside in their paychecks to pay for my Social Security at that point.”

What she is “hoping” for is called solidarity.  And the idea that future generations will, indeed, be “still working” and putting money aside to pay for those who are not working is a succinct summary of exactly how Social Security is designed.  It’s worked that way for more than seven decades and, if people like Mackenzie can be encouraged to act on their hopes instead of their fears, then Social Security will not only be there for them 50 years from now, but it will be stronger and better due to their hopeful activism.


Jeff Nygaard used to manage a project called The Social Security Project of Minnesota.  Now he publishes a newsletter called Nygaard Notes, in which he talks about Social Security and much more.  www.nygaardnotes.org.  A version of this article originally appeared in Nygaard Notes #514

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Articles, Economics, Politics
Social_Security

Post navigation

PREVIOUS
IMM @ Zero
NEXT
A Guide to the Presidential Debates You Won’t Hear

Join Our Mailing List

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

PEACE IN UKRAINE

CLICK IMAGE BELOW TO WRITE ONLINE LETTER OPPOSING THE MINE

DONATE TO THE FOOD BANK OF NEVADA COUNTY

(CLICK IMAGE)

DONATE TO NEVADA COUNTY RELIEF FUND (click image below)

Subscribe to Sierra Voices Journal

Jack Kornfield: A Steady Heart in Time of Corona Virus (Part I)

Erika Lewis, Shaye Cohn, Craig Flory – Got A Mind To Ramble

“Everlasting Arms”

Tara Brach: A Steady Heart in Time of Corona Virus (Part II)

Recent Posts

  • An Apology, and an Explanation
  • NATO Chief Admits NATO Expansion Was Key to Russian Invasion of Ukraine
  • Stumbling Towards Old Age
  • Social Security Overpays Billions to People, Many on Disability. Then It Demands the Money Back.
  • The Truth About U.S. Foreign Policy

Recent Comments

  • Missouri v. Biden: Prelimary Injunction Important Victory for First Amendment (so far) on Matt Taibbi, An Example of Journalistic Integrity
  • “FDR Met With Stalin. JFK Met With Khrushchev. Nixon met with Brezhnev. Reagan met with Gorbachev. Can’t Biden Meet With Putin?” on THE Most Important Article I’ve Ever Posted to Sierra Voices
  • The Gathering Storm on Professor Jeffrey Sachs: “What you’re being told about this conflict and others is simply not true.”
  • If You Laughed at the Doomsday Clock Update, You Should Find This Hilarious on The Grim Poetry of Science
  • In Praise of Warriors, and Criticism of War on Celebrated to Death: Memorial Day Is Killing Us

Archives

  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • November 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • December 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • January 2014
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009

Categories

  • Abortion
  • Afghan Trap
  • Afghanistan
  • Aging
  • AI
  • Alzheimer's
  • American Empire
  • Anti-Depressant
  • Anti-Semitism
  • Anti-War
  • Arms Sales
  • Articles
  • Atlas Obscura
  • Authoritarianism
  • Beavers
  • Black Lives
  • Black Lives Matter
  • Blog
  • Book Bans
  • Buddhism
  • Budget
  • Buskers
  • California
  • Capitalism
  • Carbon Offsets
  • Cartoon
  • Censorship
  • China
  • Chris Hedges
  • Climate Change
  • Cold War II
  • Compassion
  • Constitution
  • Corona Virus
  • Corruption
  • Cosmology
  • Costs of War
  • Coup
  • Covert Regime Change
  • COVID-19
  • Crimea
  • Dams
  • De-Dollarization
  • Democracy
  • Democrats
  • Depression
  • Disenfranchisement
  • Douglas Macgregor
  • Drones
  • Drought
  • Economics
  • Ecosystem Engineers
  • Education
  • Election Fraud
  • Electoral College
  • Empire
  • Environment
  • Extinction
  • Extraterrestrial Civilizations
  • Farming
  • Fascism
  • Fascist Populists
  • Feminism
  • Filibuster
  • Fire!
  • First Amendment
  • Flood Control
  • Floods
  • Food Insecurity
  • Foreign Policy
  • Forest Ecology
  • Forest Management
  • Fracking
  • Free Speech
  • Freedom of the Press
  • Gardening
  • Gender
  • Genocide
  • Global Warming
  • GOP
  • Great Movies
  • Grist
  • Groundwater
  • Halloween
  • Health Care
  • High Country News
  • History
  • Humor
  • Hunger
  • Idaho-Maryland Mine
  • Ignorance
  • Immigration
  • Indigenous Peoples' Day
  • Insects
  • Insurrection
  • Iran
  • Israel
  • Joy
  • Labor
  • Lobbying
  • Local
  • Lunar Influence
  • Marijuana
  • Masks
  • Media
  • Medical Care
  • Men
  • Men's Issues
  • Mental Health
  • Middle Class
  • Military Industrial Complex
  • Mining
  • MMT
  • Modern Monetary Theory
  • Moral Obligations
  • Music
  • Native Americans
  • NATO
  • Neocons
  • Neoliberalism
  • New Cold War
  • Nuclear Fusion
  • Nuclear War
  • Nuclear Winter
  • Nutrition
  • Oligarchy
  • Oysters
  • Palestine
  • Pandemic
  • Parenting
  • Peace
  • Peter Russell
  • Pharmaceuticals
  • Physics
  • Poetry
  • Police
  • Politics
  • Populism
  • Press
  • Propaganda
  • Putin
  • Race
  • Regime Change
  • Religion
  • Republican Derangement
  • Republicans
  • Reviews
  • Revolution
  • Right-wing terrorism
  • Rights of Nature
  • Rise Gold
  • Rivers
  • Roe v. Wade
  • Romance
  • Russia
  • Russiagate
  • Science
  • Scott Ritter
  • Slavery
  • Sleep
  • Smoke Inhalation
  • Social Security
  • Spineless
  • Student Debt
  • Summer
  • Supreme Court
  • Technology
  • The Hartmann Report
  • Trump Virus
  • Tuba Skinny
  • Twitter Files
  • Tyranny
  • Ukraine
  • Uncategorized
  • Unipolar vs. Multipolar
  • Vaccine Refusal
  • Vaccine Safety
  • Voting
  • War
  • War Crimes
  • War on Government
  • Water
  • Watersheds
  • Wells
  • Wildfires
  • Winter
  • Women's Issues
  • Work
  • Yemen
  • Yugoslavia

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
© 2023   All Rights Reserved.