[dillywho]

I will probably mess this up, but here goes since my thoughts are sometimes hard to put to paper.

As someone else stated, you either paid into SS in order to work or you couldn't work (with the exception of a few jobs, RR for instance). Someone else pointed out that there were not other choices available for investment. I can remember when only those with thousands to invest were able to do so.

As for SS being "unfunded", I don't understand that. It is very much funded to this day since the rules remain the same. It was established as a "Trust Fund", which meant that it was to remain separate. That got changed so that those funds ended up being spent via the General Fund. Another way it is funded is by those who die before age 62 and have no spouse eligible to draw as a widow or no dependent children under 18 or disabled. My brother was still working at 65, never took any of his, and died suddenly. This happens all the time. Unfortunately, many die just prior to age 62.

Now, to the so-called means testing. How would that be had we been able to do our own fund that we faithfully paid into along with contributions from our employer(s)? I sure wouldn't go for that!

Yes, SS was supposed to "supplement" our retirement. Fortunately, for many of us, retirement plans were available to us. No way could we make it on our SS alone. Since SS is based on earnings, wages were not what they are today, and wages also have to do with demographics. The more you make, the greater your contribution. That's just the way it is.

And, no, I do not feel "guilty" for drawing SS, anymore than I would feel guilty about taking anything else I paid into. It is not the fault of us that this fund has been changed from its original intent. Retirement funds are set up the same way.....you draw until you die, even if it exceeds your contributions. The holders of these are just gambling that you and/or your beneficiary will die sooner rather than later.