In 44 B.C., Cicero argued how "Old men...as they become less capable of physical exertion, should redouble their intellectual activity, and their principal occupation should be to assist the young, their friends, and above all their country with their wisdom and sagacity." (1) As a culture this should have been the law of the land, however over the last six decades or so America’s elderly population have not only been stripped off their money, but also of their social standing, political rights and the level of care they are given. If you consider that in the day and age in which we live a man who is retiring at the age of 65 is maybe able to retire, maybe not, and after probably around 40 years of being part of the work force the amount of money he will be able to retire with is less than a third of what he would have retired with in 1940 when the life expectancy was much longer as well. (1) The first national Social Security was implemented in 1883 and the “magic-age” of 65 was determined as the age when a person should be eligible to no longer work and be taken care by his or her government. It is important to address here that the average life expectancy at this time was only 37 years old. So from its inception only about 54% of men and 62% of women even lived to be the age of 65 and now 130 years later the average American lives to be nearly 78 with some people living way past there. This longevity of life has put quite a damper on the government’s plans. (2) Over time the government’s social security plan began paying out more money then it was taking in. As the government began taking in less money that this aging population would have access to the medical cost for the elderly was simultaneously skyrocketing. (1) Throughout the 1990’s the rising costs of care for the elderly population scared politicians and those responsible for basically stealing the years worth of social security to pay the nation’s debt. During this time the rising cost of Medicare and Medicaid was increasing at a rate of nearly 10% per year. (1) By the end of 1998 Medicare had reportedly spent $212 billion dollars and just six years later this number had risen to nearly $300 billion dollars. (3) These numbers were astronomical and the government couldn’t keep up or regulate this spending with a large percentage of the population aging and the social security being tied up in government debt.
Essentially social security had become the nation’s elderly populations welfare. We don’t call it this because welfare has a negative connotation, and as a government we try to remain politically correct and not to offend. (3) Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, the main programs for the elderly, exceed over 40% o the federal spending. The definition a welfare program is a government providing financial aid to individuals or a group that cannot support themselves….isn’t this what Social Security does? Welfare also allows the government to at any time alter or change the conditions and policies of the program as they see fit…isn’t this what Social Security does? When the social security “trust fund” was set up with its nearly 2.6 trillion dollars it was expected to be able to cover the benefits that decades of workers had paid in taxes, however this “trust fund” would only cover the number of Americans who deserved these benefits for 3.5 years. The trust fund was depleted in 1983. (3) Congress has over the last 60 years altered the benefits many, many times. In 1960 the Supreme Court rejected a case citing that Congress can alter, repeal, or change the Social Security program whenever it wants to. (1)
All of this makes social Security the elderly welfare. The benefits constantly change. The benefits are not proportionate to the wages that a person earned in their life but skewed to match lower income wages. These realities for the elderly have been constantly ignored. (3) Our government encourages people to think that they “earned benefits and the Social Security budget is larger causing nearly 54 million recipients of Social Security are then fooled to believe that they re not effectively on welfare of the state. This is a huge issue for not only the American taxpayer and the elderly, but also for our nations larger budget issues. (1) We have been borrowing from Paul to pay Peter for so long that our annual benefits of social security far exceed the payroll taxes, the trust fund, and this gap will continue to grow. Social Security does affect our larger budget debts and problems contrary to what our government says.
Over the years and years of scaling back the Social Security benefits and limiting the programs ability to care for the aging population of our country have left our elderly in poverty and becoming a burden. So after many failed attempts to dismantle and correct the welfare state or even to restrain its growth conservative critics have developed a new approach. (3) By privatizing the universal framework of social security and Medicare they are hoping to be able to have a universal program with rock hard nationwide support. The key difference in this approach compared to the many failed approached is that instead of limiting the benefits of social security and Medicare it redistributes them in a fair and even manner that allows the benefits to go farther and last longer. (2) The annual benefits of social security have already far exceeded the payroll taxes. This gap will continue to grow as more and more people reach the age of 65. The trust fund is made up of treasury bonds and once people begin to redeem these more and more cash will need to be raised to match the growing debt. The connection between Social Security and the national debt is offensively apparent. (3) The impenetrable accounting of the American treasury makes it nearly impossible to know for sure what is going on with the so-called “trust fund” of Social Security. The government should consider, when thinking about the benefits associated with Social Security or the elderly’s welfare, the Bill of Rights for the Old. These provide that the elderly shall have an adequate home in accordance with the American standard of living. That they should have the best possible physical and mental health which science makes available without regard to economic status, suitable housing those older citizens can afford. We are responsible to provide full restorative services to anyone who shall require institutional care. They should have the opportunity for employment with no discrimination due to age. It requires retirement in health, honor and dignity after years of contribution to the economy. Pursuit o meaningful activity within the widest range of civic,, cultural, and recreational opportunities. Social assistance is to be provided and coordinated and readily available when needed. Provide immediate benefit from proven research knowledge, which can improve their health or happiness. Finally, freedom, independence and free exercise of individual initiative in planning and managing their own lives. (1) Now ask yourselves government officials, does the mediocre welfare, social security plan that you have in place hold up next to the bill of rights that was established to be parameters for how the older generations of American citizens is cared for, provided for and respected…I should think not.

References:
(1) http://gerontologist.oxfordjournals.org/content/45/3/292.abstract
(2) http://www.trinity.edu/mkearl/ger-pol.html (3) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/06/AR2011030602926.html