> That is, when the argument is "the others are getting cash", some will oppose it. But if it's "we all get cash", the opposition is less.

But it's a sleight of hand. It's "you'll get it too (but I will take the same amount out of your pockets by increasing your taxes, ha!)", and then hoping that people will not realize it. That's quite the bet.

Social security is "slight of hand" too. If you make an average of just $1k/mo before retirement, your SS benefit is $900/month. But if you made 10x ($10k/mo), your SS benefit is only 3x as much [0], despite you paying 10x the taxes during your career.

While this is nowhere near as progressive a tax as regular income tax, it's still a wealth transfer from high earners to low earners.

0. https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/piaformula.html

Technically Social Security doesn't go to all Americans. You have to work a minimum amount (and therefore pay a minimum amount in) to qualify. It's also possible to opt-out of social security, although it's not trivial to do so (IIRC you do this by claiming a conscientious objector status or something like that).

I thought I read at some point that several decades in the past there was a period when you could opt out of Social Security and put retirement in one's own hands.

I always wanted to look up that history for when that forked path was allowed and when it was eliminated and why. The author of the piece I read mentioned how he earned much better returns with the money he otherwise would have had he put it into social security and was thankful he took the more "risky" route.

At least one way is to get a religious exemption.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/020315/there-any-wa...

Hang on is social security tied to the draft?

No, there's a religion-based opt-out for religions that object to government support. But it only applies to income from the church (such as to ministers).

There are a few other narrow cases as well, such as student workers and certain government jobs.