nt lives, and based on collectively set standards of need and contribution, as opposed to returns and investments in markets" (White, 2001). The entire concept of privatization distracts us from the reason behind Social Security, i.e., that ALL Americans would have the means to live in dignity. As such, to perform its proper role in the protection of our citizens, social insurance should be "national, compulsory, and contributory, and provide benefits as a matter of right" (Brown, 1958).
             Politicians argue that there is an emergency need for drastic reform, as the current system is facing collapse, but this is not necessarily the case. It is important that we, as taxpayers, are able to wade through the often party-prejudiced political jargon to arrive at an informed opinion. The information provided in this report is an attempt to dispel some of the myths surrounding the controversy and offers an argument against the private market's ability to adequately protect individuals against risk and uncertainty.
             Social Security is a pay-as-you-go system, meaning that current payroll taxes are used to pay benefits to current retirees. In 1983, Congress introduced an element of pre-funding by adopting an increase in payroll taxes that allowed the program to take in more tax revenue than it paid out, with the surplus dedicated to supplementing tax revenue when the baby boomers began to retire (Hill, 2002). Today, that excess revenue is spent on government programs and reduction of federal debt, and the trust fund is credited with bonds equal to those expenditures. By reducing the debt, the government saves large amounts of money on interest payments and enhances its ability to borrow in the future. Any diversion of contributions would reduce the surplus and have a negative impact on the programs supported therewith. While political groups have charged each other with squandering and draining the surplus for their o...