Social Security has existed for 90 years. Why it may be more threatened than ever

When President Franklin de Roosevelt signed the Social Security Law 90 years ago this week, he pledged that he would provide economic stability to the elderly as the United States gave a “economic structure to be largely greater.”

Today, the program provides benefits for about 69 million Americans per month. It is a major source of income for people over the age of 65 and is popular throughout the country and political lines.

It seems more threatening than ever.

Just as for decades, social security faces a deficit looming on money to pay full advantages. Since President Donald Trump took office, the program has faced more turmoil. The agency’s employees have been reduced. Calculating unions and invitation groups concerned with sharing sensitive information. Trump administration officials, including the president, have for several months falsely claimed millions of dead people who receive the advantages of social security. Former senior advisers, Elon Musk, described the program as a possible “Punzi” scheme.

Trump and other republicans said they will not reduce the advantages of social security. However, the program is still far from the proper economic system imagined 90 years ago, due to the changes made – and has not been made – under Democratic and Republican presidents.

Below is a look at the previous and current challenges on social security, proposed solutions and what it can require to support the program.

Go-Broke’s history has been transferred

The so -called GO -PROKE history – or the date that social security will not have enough money to pay full benefits – until 2034, instead of the estimate of last year for 2035. After this point, social security will only be able to pay 81 % of the advantages, according to an annual report in June. The report concluded that the previous history came at a time when new legislation contributed to the advantages of social security in the expected dates of maturity earlier.

In January, Insaf Social Security Law signed by former President Joe Biden in the law, in January. The provisions of sudden removal and compensation for government pensions were canceled, which increases the levels of social security benefits for the former workers.

Brendan Duke said at the Budget and Politics Priority Center that the new tax legislation of the Republicans signed in the law in July will accelerate the insolvency of social security.

“They haven’t had an idea to fix it yet,” he said.

The privatization conversation has been revived

The idea of social security privatization recently appeared when Treasury Secretary Scott Pessente said this month that the new investment accounts postponed with taxes called “Trump’s accounts” may serve as “the back door of privatization”, although the treasury has retracted those comments.

The public was widely against the idea of privatizing social security because former President George W. Bush began a campaign to privatize the program in 2005, through voluntary personal retirement accounts. The plan was not received by the public.

“Social Security should reduce the size in order to maintain the benefits for future generations. It supports reducing benefits for wealthy retirees.

“We will have to choose,” Hopard said. “If you want the advantages of social security as they are today, we will have to raise everyone’s taxes a lot. If this is what people want, this is a list, pay the high price and continue.”

Another option is to increase the minimum benefits and slow the growth of benefits to each other, which Hopard said will achieve the ship without the need for large tax increases, if this is done over time.

“It is really a political choice,” he said, adding, “None of them is free of pain.”

Nancy Altman, head of social security business, is a group to call for the advantages of social security, is more concerned that advantages management can be privatized under Trump, rather than moving towards summarized accounts. The agency has reduced more than 7,000 of its operating power this year as part of the Ministry of Governmental efficiency efforts to reduce the size of the government.

Martin Omali, who was the Commissioner of the Social Security Agency during the Biden era, said he believed the problems deepened more.

“There is no openness and there is no transparency” in the agency. “We hear about the field offices that flow on the brink of collapse.”

The representative of the Social Security Administration did not respond to the comment.

Fears are still ongoing

The Associated Press Research Research poll in Public Affairs Research in April found that an increasing share of the elderly – especially Democrats – supports the program but it is not confident that the benefit will be available to them when they retire.

“Much we hear is to run out of money.” It depends on social security to keep its money on its feet, and it is grateful for the program and believes that it should be expanded.

“In my opinion, there are many easy reforms that are not a political extension,” she said. It includes increasing the maximum income tax on high -income people and perhaps raising the retirement age, which is currently 67 years of people born after 1960, although it is less inclined to support this change.

Some call for reducing the program

Rachel Greesner is an oldest research colleague at the Heritage Foundation, and it is the group behind the project 2025 for the project in the second Trump state. He called for an increase in retirement age.

Gardller says that social security no longer serves its intended purpose is to be a social safety net for the elderly people with low and very larger. It supports follow -up to privatization, which includes allowing retirees to put social security taxes in a personal investment account.

It also argues by reducing the program to a degree in which each retirees will get the same advantage of social security as long as it worked with the same number of years, which it says will increase the benefits of the lower third of its owners. How this will affect the middle -class owners is unclear.

“When talking about the need to repair the system, we need to repair it so that we do not have a random 23 % of the discounts for everyone,” said Gardrler. “We need to fix the system in a more thinking way, in order to protect those who are most vulnerable to weakness and dependence on social security.”