It's a safety net and no matter how much you put into it, very likely you won't get what you "invested" into it. Congress can reduce benefits on a whim. Nor was it to be all and end all for retirement, it was a supplement to your current savings. Our problem, we didn't require pension's, 401k's, etc.

I know a number of people who will die never drawing from it as they don't have anything saved up and Social Security will not be enough to cover thier living expenses. It's a lie to say its a savings program that can be replaced.

I honestly don't care if I get back all I put in - maybe disabled folk got that "extra money", for example

and it isn't a savings program.

Of course, millions of people rely solely on it. Things happen in life. Not everybody is privileged.

...and I know that.

Problem is, most don't know that. And some put bare minimum into Social Security, my father died at 58 and my mom barely gets anything due to his limited contributions. His accountant was the one who forced him to put money in. The only reason we own two homes (technically I have a third, but I won't count Ark7 as an ownership) was because of me forcing to make long term investments.

Most just look at the near term and I get it. However, you still should put money away for longer term for yourself or family.

There is a reason why SS and Medicare constitute the "third rail" of US politics.

Furthermore, "libertarianism" has already been tried in this country and failed greatly with something called the Great Depression. What does this idiot think people did back then who were poor in old age? They had poorhouses then. My parents had lived through that time, and it was no picnic.

It's like these greedy, sociopathic dimwits have to be schooled again and again and again about history. There is a reason why a "mixed economy" was established. It had to do with preserving capitalism by reining in its worst impulses.