The Insecurity Of Social Security

Deborah Venable

09/13/02

 

At the heart of socialism there exists an antithesis to successful human relations as well as the greatest enemy of freedom ever devised by man.  It is, therefore, American Public Enemy #1.  The foothold of socialism on American society began with the establishment of the Social Security system.  Decades later we find scars so deep in our culture that healing of the wounds that caused them remains an impossible task.  All social problems existing in America today could be improved with the abolishment of the Social Security system.  It is woefully inadequate, wantonly negligent of individual needs, and criminally confiscating of every working American.  It also remains the dreaded “third rail” of the political fast track.  Few with any power and influence to affect the demise of this socialist program are willing to touch it with a ten-foot pole.

 

The program assumes that individuals are not capable of taking care of themselves, that families cannot be woven of strong enough fiber to take care of their own, and that charity will not prevail over selfishness to see that needs are met without government mandate.  Yes, ladies and gentlemen, such assumptions are enemies to American culture, to freedom, and to the future of every American citizen. 

 

As noted, this is a very sensitive subject.  Every politician that expects to make a mark in the political arena must at least give the impression that he or she supports “saving” Social Security, fixing the system, and convincing present and future recipients of benefits that money will be there for them whenever they have need of it.  By using such terminology as “locked box” to describe the future “security” of these benefits, a politician can guarantee support from a well conditioned public and sling mud at anyone else who would dare try to point out the fallacy of this whole system or suggest that there are certainly better alternatives to it.

 

As with any other government program, this one is sorely mismanaged, blatantly abused, and wholly inadequate.  Who has the right to define anyone else’s need when it comes to distributing funds that have been commandeered from a lifetime of earnings?  The very idea that such a system could ever be conducive to a free society is ludicrous.  The decision makers in funds dispersal for disability claims make errors in deciding need all the time.  Anyone who feels secure in the fact that if they should become disabled at some time in the future, their Social Security benefits would be easy to collect is simply not tuned into the reality of this absurd system.  You will have to jump through hoops and very probably receive one or more denials of your benefits before you can even hope to convince these people of your need.  (That is unless you are suddenly stricken with a politically correct enough disease or disability.)  Remember, this is a government run program.

 

I can cite a specific case here if you are having a problem believing what I am saying.  The identity and specifics are withheld for obvious reasons, but consider if you will the following true case scenario:

 

A Navy enlisted veteran of 8 years from 12/66 to 12/74 with pride in a military record that required many days and extra hours away from a young family who continued to serve as a civilian in the civil defense industry after military service - current age is 60.

The timeline preceding this veteran’s need for Social Security Disability benefits is as follows:

 

       9/01 - Laid off from job at a defense contractor.  Efforts at obtaining other employment in the field of logistics, even on a nationwide basis, proved futile as you might expect for a man approaching his 60th birthday and in ill health. Unemployment compensation helped but could not stem the cash savings outflow.

       12/01 - After medical coverage had lapsed, symptoms of a medical condition began to appear. A series of tests indicated a kidney condition of some sort but further and more extensive tests were indicated to determine actual cause.  Savings were limited so he was forced to turn to a VA Medical Facility. After establishing eligibility and waiting for the tests to be scheduled, months passed.

       3/02 - Diagnosed with Renal Cell Carcinoma Cancer of the left kidney. In early April, kidney was removed under emergency conditions and evidence of a second cancer - Large Cell B-Cell Lymphoma - was found. Doctors think that all of the Renal Cell Cancer was excised in the operation and began an aggressive chemotherapy treatment that is progressing well and which should be completed in October.

       4/02 – Moved with wife closer to family in order to benefit from the emotional support of family in time of need.

       5/02 - As savings deteriorated further and life seemed to be spiraling beyond control, contact was made with the local office of Social Security for advice and guidance. They were very helpful, courteous, and assisted in making application for benefits under the SSA and SSI programs.

       8/02 - Initial claim was denied as ineligible under current law, but caseworker encouraged an appeal of the decision with additional medical information and a letter from the oncologist outlining current condition and an estimation of the period and level of disability.

       9/02 - Received notification of denial a second time. (Both denial decisions appear to have been issued by a state agency - DES.)

 

Continuing in the veteran’s own words:

 

“This leads to my first question.
 

       1. Why is the eligibility for a Federal program such as SSA or SSI determined by a local state agency? In both denial letters the reason given was that experience was that people with my condition should be able to return to work in less than a year and since I had to have been unable to work for that period there was adequate time for me to recover and find work. Yeah, Right! Let’s see them try in today's job market and with the health and mental stress of a major illness.

       2. Why must so much stress be put on experience of other people with so-called similar circumstances in a personal medical condition as a determining factor in award decisions? Don't individual circumstances carry any relevance even when substantiated by competent medical opinion? I hesitate to complain and it goes against my nature but if this set of circumstances were on some other brother serviceman I would be mad as all get out. The fact that I am facing them is surreal to say the least.”

 

This person is now facing bankruptcy simply because government employees found him NOT to be in need – not once but twice!  His personal savings are gone, due in part to the fact that too much of his lifetime income was confiscated from him and his employers in the form of FICA withholdings, so that his personal savings plan was inadequate to see him through such a devastating medical emergency.  Where is the “security”?  His wife, who also worked and “contributed” to SS for most of her adult life is permanently disabled and receives benefits equal to slightly over the cost of the rent on their very modest apartment.  This is their only income, but it is too much to satisfy the decision makers at the Social Security office that they have a need for his rightful benefits – even on a temporary basis.  They have no property, own nothing of value, and have little pride left because they have been forced to beg for assistance, which has fallen short of meeting their real need – a feeling of security. 

 

This man has now been out of work twelve times longer than ever before in his life.  (The next longest stint of not having to put a tie on and go to work was his last thirty-day leave from military duty.)  He is the epitome of a classic example of whom this so-called “Social Security” system should help. 

 

Don’t kid yourselves!  That is NOT its purpose.  Redistribution of wealth with a false promise of security if the need is ever there – THAT is its purpose.  That and assuring that each individual American citizen has a number by which they can be tracked from cradle to grave.  This was the evil intent from the get go, and the wolf has finally shed its sheep’s clothing to bear that out.  Life without a Social Security number, freely given to anyone who asks for it, in America today is plagued with problems.  Where is the “security”?

 

We cannot continue to support socialism in any form.  Socialists do not appreciate the value of American liberties nor do they care about individual security.  When are we going to start electing legislators and leaders who are not afraid to say that to the public?  Instead, we keep making our judgments based on how much hollow “security” these people keep promising.  What have we become – a nation of people afraid to stand alone and walk by ourselves into the future that will judge each of us by our own humanity instead of how well we bend to the yoke of social programming?  Who among us is deserving of “security” if this American veteran can be found undeserving by this vile social program?   

 

 

Home    Rant Page    Feedback Welcome!