The initial reason for starting the program as stated by Foner was, “to provide relief to the elderly and disabled” (829). In other words when all else fails and your in a bind, Social Security can be of assistance, especially if you have a family and have no source of income. The importance of the program is relevant to everyone, but in most cases those who may benefit from this program the most are usually not considered very wealthy. The effectiveness of this program speaks for itself in definition, but there are problems relating to social security.
One problem is the baby boom has tapered off, leaving little investment to support the upcoming needs and expectations for future generations who are disabled or elderly. Another problem is inflation has swallowed every program in existence by absorbing constant attempts at increasing overall incomes. In other words many state government institutions are not accounting for capitalistic trends which may initiate set standards for housing cost and food cost, as well as medical cost. Transportation is almost impossible to those living on social security and public assistance, especially with today's gas prices. Other problems that exist are related to the time it takes for a person to receive assistance.
The wait for Social Security Disability can be well over six months and approval can take many years. This can be a heightened problem factor because people who are injured and elderly most often do not have that kind of time to spare. Realistically the only alternatives for many people are to deal with poor health care and living conditions until they are approved. Still their incomes will not meet many needs or expectations because of the trends that cause inflation. On the other hand no programs at all would lead us back to a time of vulnerability just before World War 2 and the Great Depression.
President Franklin Roosevelt saw the poor living conditions for people during these times as immediate life threatening problems that needed to be addressed. Roosevelt decided social security should be a state funded organization, at the same time he believed that workers should contribute to their own benefits. Foner states, “He believed that paying such taxes gave contributors a legal moral, and political right to collect their old age pensions and unemployment benefits, which no future congress could rescind” (829).
Although the shortcomings were beneficial the program itself had long term issues. Foner states, “Although a milestone Social Security was in some ways a conservative measure” (829).
The immediate benefits of the proposed plan proved economical to the permanent installment of Social Security Administration in the United States. An anonymous People and a Nation critic States, “The government did not pay for the old age benefits the workers and their bosses did” (713) Partly due to Roosevelt's idea of keeping the plan self reliant to Americans, wage deductions proved invaluable to the success of the plan. Taxes were more equally disbursed among Americans for Social Security. An anonymous People and a Nation critic states, “Tax was regressive in that the more workers earned the less they were taxed proportionately” (713).
One immediate benefit of the proposed plan as stated by an anonymous People and a nation critic was, “it was deflationary because it took out of people's pockets money that did not repay for years” (713).
Most people's feelings towards social security are positive as the program has been successful in aiding those in need. I would greatly like to see larger disbursements of money to compensate for inflation and the cost of living. A Federal based social security system may leave less room for trickle down tax deductions and allow for more equally fair program. At the same time a local level program could benefit the economy on a more up close scale. The problem that lies in state and local run organizations is often the fact that differences in ideas and political corruption such as white collar crime are more easily overlooked. Foner states, “The down side is that being run by the state and local authorities, the program often failed to provide assistance to everyone” (829). On a Federal level the plan could be easily organized with the interest of citizens and their rights. At the same time local programs might provide the same type of invested assistance for our future generations.
The idea of private funding has been a rising issue in society, because private investments could present problems due to mixing politics and corporate interest. It is important that we preserve the balance of the benefits without total corporate control, to preserve as much democracy as we can, but at the same time give an equal balance of Federal protection to workers and employers as well. A good measure in building the programs integrity is applying a proportion of the Federal interest rates to our own federal reserve each year. At the same time investing is the key stimulating the economy. If a corporation controlled most of these interest rates the term economic totalitarianism would be possible to establish a definition, especially during times when their stock market was down. We must come to terms with what's important for our future as a whole. One thing is for certain, preserving Social Security in America will always be an important factor in establishing strong humanities throughout America, keeping our society beneficial for everyone.
