I would differ, for several reasons. First, parents spend hundreds of thousands of dollars or more to raise and educate children. Presumably, the children received value that will last their whole lives. They will owe Social Security tax only to the extent that they earn money, and only up to the FICA limit. Second, there is no zero-sum game between generations; most pensioners instantly spend their SS benefits back into the economy, where it drives GDP. Or, if they keep it in banks, it creates reserves, and banks can lever reserves into 10 times as much in business loans. Money always moves up toward those who can afford to save instead of spend. Even when saved, it doesn't sit still or move down. Money never vanishes until it is taxed back by the federal government. Then it disappears, to be replaced by new federal spending. Social Security isn't a perfect way to insure a whole country's longevity risk. But no better way has been found. No private life insurer, or consortium of life insurers, has a deep enough balance sheet to underwrite that amount of risk, in perpetuity. Only the federal government, whose IOUs (cash and debt) are money, has a balance sheet with the necessary breadth, length, and depth to shoulder that risk. And the power to make the program universal and mandatory. A federal program never needs to be "pre-funded," because you don't need to pre-fund IOUs. That's the system that Alexander Hamilton copied from the British. While it may be true, in a superficial sense, that our grandchildren will "inherit the debt," they will also inherit our assets--an amount equal to the debt. Every Treasury bill, note, or bond is both an asset and a liability. We should worry more about the $18 trillion that banks have loaned into the economy and which remains unpaid. That debt will turn over but its absolute value will only grow over time.
I would differ, for several reasons. First, parents spend hundreds of thousands of dollars or more to raise and educate children. Presumably, the children received value that will last their whole lives. They will owe Social Security tax only to the extent that they earn money, and only up to the FICA limit. Second, there is no zero-sum game between generations; most pensioners instantly spend their SS benefits back into the economy, where it drives GDP. Or, if they keep it in banks, it creates reserves, and banks can lever reserves into 10 times as much in business loans. Money always moves up toward those who can afford to save instead of spend. Even when saved, it doesn't sit still or move down. Money never vanishes until it is taxed back by the federal government. Then it disappears, to be replaced by new federal spending. Social Security isn't a perfect way to insure a whole country's longevity risk. But no better way has been found. No private life insurer, or consortium of life insurers, has a deep enough balance sheet to underwrite that amount of risk, in perpetuity. Only the federal government, whose IOUs (cash and debt) are money, has a balance sheet with the necessary breadth, length, and depth to shoulder that risk. And the power to make the program universal and mandatory. A federal program never needs to be "pre-funded," because you don't need to pre-fund IOUs. That's the system that Alexander Hamilton copied from the British. While it may be true, in a superficial sense, that our grandchildren will "inherit the debt," they will also inherit our assets--an amount equal to the debt. Every Treasury bill, note, or bond is both an asset and a liability. We should worry more about the $18 trillion that banks have loaned into the economy and which remains unpaid. That debt will turn over but its absolute value will only grow over time.