Social Security

Social Security was born of politics as a full-employment measure of the Roosevelt New Deal. As such it failed dismally, for mass unemployment is still with us, plaguing several million Americans. Instead, it has become the most powerful political welfare system ever devised, delivering trillions of dol lars from the working population to some 30 million persons along in years. The Medicare system, which was added in 1965, provides comprehensive health care coverage for more than 35 million people age 65 and over. Altogether, 45 million Americans, almost one out of every six, partake of one or several kinds of programs. More than 130 million tax payers are forced to pay for it. The Social Security Act was signed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1935. The first retirement benefits were paid in 1940 to Ida May Fuller of Vermont. She had paid in a total of $24.95 and got back $20,897 before her death in 1975. Later retirees who made full use of Medicare reaped six-figure amounts.

Social Security is a giant welfare system although its beneficiaries are quick to call it an insurance program. "I paid in, I contributed, I earned my benefits." This is the most common argument in defense of the system. In reality, simple calculation easily ascertains that most beneficiaries withdraw in several months what they contributed. The maximum contribution from 1937 through 1949 amounted to one percent on $3,000 annual income, or $30 a year. In 1950 it rose to 11/2 percent, or $45, and thereafter continued to creep up in small increments. Few old-timers, if any, contributed more than $1,000, with interest on interest, during their working years. Living in retirement now, and having received the equivalent of their contributions from the system, they are drawing public assistance for the rest of their lives. Every political transfer system divides society into two distinct social classes: the beneficiaries of the transfer and the victims who are forced to bear the costs.

It creates insoluble political and econom ic conflict which grows with the magni tude of the transfer. The Social Security System is the source and breeding place of the most poisonous and virulent social conflict, a conflict that is growing steadily as the victims become aware of the burdens placed on them. While the first generation that launched the system won the prize and carried off a fortune, all others who fol low are condemned to square the account. The Social Security Amendments of 1977 greatly raised pay roll taxes to cover the rising costs and create a $4 trillion surplus in the Social Security Trust Fund. Since 1977 tax rates and tax basis have risen nearly every year and now amount to 15.3 percent of gross wages up to $60,000, or $9,271.80 a year. Young people are forced to contribute much more than they can ever expect to draw out. They face the distressing choice between suffering the losses inflicted by the first generation and shift ing the burden to future generations through ever higher taxes on them. Yet, no matter how frantic the shifting, it does not square the account.

The dilemma is giving rise to numer ous reform proposals. Most merely are new concoctions of the same old transfer system, searching for new victims for old beneficiaries, reorganizing the bureau cracy and appointing new administra tors. There can be no genuine reform of the Social Security System until we become aware of its true meaning and significance. To this end the following proposals may shed some light and return to the basics of a moral order: 1. Information to Recipients - To restore a commonplace truth and real ism, every recipient of Social Security benefits should be informed of the nature and source of his benefits. Every check should carry a stub that reveals the dollar amount contributed to the System by him and his employer and the cumulative amount of benefits received by him as of that check. 2. Means Test Applied - When the total benefits exceed the contributions made during the productive years, the recipient should undergo a means test.

A millionaire who has received an amount equal to his contributions should receive no more. A poor retiree who is lacking the means of support should continue to draw his benefits. But they should be truthfully called "Social Security assistance." 3. Parent and Child - When Social Security assistance seems to be called for, the children of a retired worker should be given an opportunity to contribute to the support of their parents. As the par ents are responsible for their children, so are children responsible for their parents. No Social Security System should eradi cate this moral law and Biblical com mandment. 4. Freedom of Choice - Social Security builds on legislation, regulation, taxation, and all means of force. Tolerating no resistance it exacts an ever-growing share of individual incomes. If it could be made to suffer just a modicum of freedom, it would permit recalcitrant members to depart and find their own security. Millions of Americans are waiting anxiously for the day when they will be free. They would forego all promises of benefits in the future for the joy of freedom today.

Reformation is a work of time. A national institution, however wrong and harmful it may be, cannot be totally changed at once. We must first shed light on its true nature and, above all, reveal its immoral foundation. Hans F. Sennholz If you ask, the Social Security Administration will send you a statement telling you how much you have paid in. You can then compare this amount with your estimate of benefits received, including those of Medicare. If the benefits exceed the payments, you are receiving public assistance. To get your statement, call 1-800-772-1213.

Spring Round Tables R eserve these days for our spring 1995 series of Round Table events! We've set up an exciting lineup of speakers for your enlightenment that includes Dr. Jane Orient and Dr. Mark Skousen. Don't miss these stimu lating evenings, which begin at 5:00 with a reception and dinner, and then go on to a lively discussion session. Charge: $40 per person per event; certain dis counts are available. March 4 with Jane Orient, M.D. April 1 with Joe Sobran May 6 with George Reisman June 3 with Mark Skousen Coming Seminars at FEE Undergraduate seminar April 6-8 Austrian Seminar (by invitation) July 9-14 First Summer Seminar July 23-28 Second Summer Seminar August 13-18 Call or write: Dr. Barbara Dodsworth, 30 South Broadway, Irvington-on-Hudson, NY 10533; (914) 591-7230. Light a fire for freedom! Launch a Freeman Society Discussion Club! J oin the growing ranks of Freemanreaders who have become part of FEE's network of Freeman Society Discussion Clubs. At the beginning of 1995 more than 50 clubs had been organized in the United States and abroad.

Leonard E. Read once observed that rancid intellectual soil nurtures an unending variety of socialist fallacies and that "finding the right is the key to salvation." FEE is making the right both known and preva lent by launching discussion clubs nationwide, and by providing free lit erature and speakers to improve understanding of the moral and intel lectual foundation of a free society. Club members receive a number of special benefits, including discounts on FEE publications and invitations to special FEE events. For more information about starting a discussion club, or joining a Freeman Club that may already be meeting in your area, write Felix R. Livingston, Director of Freeman Services, 2814 Hilsdale Harbor Way, Jacksonville, FL 32216, or call/fax (904) 448-0105.

New from FEE! THE LUSTRE OF GOLD W hy is the gold standard viewed with disfavor by many? What is it that causes politicians and economists, such as John Maynard Keynes, to disparage and decry a monetary system which has been man's standard for thousands of years? The gold standard is a monetary system in which gold is proper money and all paper moneys are merely substitutes payable in gold. It is as old as man's civi lization. Throughout the ages it emerged again and again because man need ed a dependable medium of exchange and gold was found to be such a medi um. The gold standard that builds on freedom does not fail of its own accord. It springs eternally from freedom but succumbs to force and violence. Its implacable enemy is government in search of more revenue. The seventeen essays in this collection examine the rejection of gold, the histo ry of the gold standard and private coinage in the United States, and the prospects for monetary reform. Contributors include Hans F. Sennholz, Mark Skousen, Henry Hazlitt, Elgin Groseclose, Robert G. Anderson, and Lawrence W.Reed.

150 pages + index $14.95 paperback THEFREEMAN IDEASON LIBERTY 1994 Bound Volume S turdily sewn in a single volume with navy blue cloth cover and gold foil stamping, the twelve issues from January through December 1994 - 720 pages, fully indexed for handy reference to the latest literature of free dom. More than 100 feature articles on topics such as education, environment, government regulation and control, health care, individual rights, morality and ethics, private property, voluntary action, and international trade. Reviews of more than three dozen books. $19.95 each Save! Special introductory price: $16.95, through March 15, 1995 Note: Freeman bound volumes for the years 1986 through 1993 are available at $16.95 each until March 15. (Regular price is $19.95 each.) LAND CONTROL AS MIND CONTROL 101 The Freedmen's Bureau had the first peace time federal education mandate. Overtly, it was to educate the ex-slaves so they could survive in a free society. Co vertly, this education was to transform so called racist whites. "A growing conviction prevails favorable to the introduction by the United States government of a general sys tem of education for the states . . . Igno rance in the Southern· states is one of the most serious obstacles in the way of a thorough reconstruction.' ,42 Congress forced a federalized education into the South through new state constitu tions which compelled tax-supported schools supervised from Washington. But initially Congress authorized no funds for this, either to the states or the Freedmen's Bureau, fearing taxpayers would balk at this great new centralization of power.

So the Freedmen's Bureau funded its schools without Congressional approval or citizen acceptance, setting the legal prece dent for current off-budget funding meth ods: "2,118 schools [are] under the care of the Bureau . . . the expenses of the Bureau were met the first year with the proceeds of rents, sale of crops, school taxes, and tuition and sale of 'Confederate States' property. The amount raised from all these miscella neous sources was $1,865,645.40."43 By law, all operations of the Freedmen's Bureau ended in January 1871, but off budget funding made it self-supporting. It did not depend on the law to continue its existence. Representative Thompson Mc Neeley of Illinois was shocked to find this out: "In 1867, $800,000 was appropriated for transportation. And now [in February 1871,a month after its legal termination] the House is asked to appropriate $6,000 for 'transportation of officers and agents.' I thought this bureau was to come to an end some time ... we have been promised from time to time that it should come to an end, yet in this bill there are appropriations to the extent of$139,OOOto keep it up and continue it. ,,44 As with many of its other unconstitutional operations, the Freedmen's Bureau confis cated property and nationalized existing schools in the Northern states, too: "There was, at the close of the last school term, in the 13 states lately in rebellion, and includ ing Kentucky, Maryland, and the District of Columbia [all in the Union], 975 regularly organized schools, 1,405 teachers, 90,778 pupils.' ,45 Soon civil government began to use the same off-budgettechniques. This is from the "Minority Opinion" of the Reconstruction Committee, as to why the new Alabama state constitution was unconstitutional: "It is made the duty of the governor by an ordinance, which is not published with the constitution, for the information of the peo pie ... to organize 'immediately 137 com panies of volunteer militia . . . all proceeds of the sale of contraband and captured property seized or captured by the militia shall constitute a part of the fund out of which they shall be paid,' thus inciting the volunteers to harass the people in time of peace by unlawful seizure to provide the means of paying themselves. ,,46 When the Freedmen's Bureau federalized Southern schools, anew "progressive" cur riculum was also needed. Where would it come from? It came from the Agriculture Department, which controlled the research of the Morrill colleges; not only crop re search but all research. This meant that curriculum experiments were directed and distributed by the Agriculture Department; it meant that land control and mind control were now centralized in this one agency, which now had Cabinet-level status.

Direct mindcontrol was now an important part of the Agriculture Department's mis sion: "Nature teaching has been introduced into the common schools . . . teacher's manuals and the textbooks for instruction in this branch are being prepared. ,,47 (Nature teaching, Le., "science," emphasized what was observable; it stressed the here and now over the past. The past reflected things like racism, like the heroism of "The Rebel lion." Progressive ideas were here and now ideas.) "The teaching of young children regarding the natural objects and phenom ena about them may be so conducted as to lead them to see that a knowledge of nature 102 THE FREEMAN • FEBRUARY 1995 may be of practical benefit. Their minds will be early trained to recognize the ultimate relation between the scientific and practical knowledge," to erase the past.48 Federalizing of curriculum led the Agri culture Department to centralize school dis tricts: "Progress is also being made in the movement for the consolidation of rural schools which has already resulted in im proved conditions in schools in Ohio and Massachusetts, Iowa and other states.' ,49 Such consolidation made it possible to in troduce nature study.

Conclusion This story of land control as mind control relates directly to today. All law works by precedent. All current legislative enact ments are based on law created in the distant past. Contemporary law does not spring forth without a grounding in something that already exists. The present day small-time drug busts that often lead to the total confiscation of a person's private property-well above the legal limits of the crime-and the massive property takeovers by the IRS for small income tax irregularities, base their legal justification on Reconstruction-era laws and methods. Reconstruction has not yet ended. Now, as then, the politically incorrect must be re-educated or face the consequences just as in the 1870s. D 1. The Congressional Globe, 37th Congress, 2nd Session (Washington, D.C.: Reprint Edition by United States Histor ical Documents Institute, Inc., 1970), p. 1690. 2. Annual Report of Commissioner of Agriculture, for the Year 1862, p. 22. The Annual Reports cited in this article were published by the Government Printing Office.

3. Annual Report of Commission of Agriculture, for the Year 1864, pages 4 and 11. 4. Annual Report of Commissioner of Agriculture, for the year 1862, p. 267. 5. Ibid., p. 19. 6. Ibid., p. 12 7. The Congressional Globe, 35th Congress, 2nd Session, p.714. 8. Ibid., p. 714. After Virginia's secession, Mason became a Confederate commissioner and gained fame for his capture during the "Trent" Affair. 9. Annual Report of Commissioner of Agriculture, for the Year 1868, p. 2. 10. The Congressional Globe, 40th Congress, 1st Session, p.467. 11. The Congressional Globe, 39th Congress, 1st Session, p. 1827. 12. Ibid., p. 3274. 13. The Congressional Globe, 40th Congress, 1st Session, p.50. 14. Annual Report of Commissioner of Agriculture, for the Year 1866, p. 6. 15. The Congressional Globe, 37th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 1074. 16. Annual Report of Commissioner of Agriculture, for the Year 1878, p. 4.