Why is social security dependent on the younger generation?

Asked by JLeslie (65447) October 12th, 2016 from iPhone

It’s a horrible set up. Is that how it’s set up? That’s the way it’s been presented to me. I am all for having a social security program, but I want the bulk of my money that I get when I retire to be from what I paid in, not some 25 year old working to support me. That set up demands that we keep growing our population, and there are reasons why that might not always be the best idea.

I was trying to think about the math. Let’s say I made $40k on average for 30 years. Lets assume on average I paid in 12%. $4,800 a year X 30 years = $144,000. $144,000 / 20 years (ages 65–85) is $7200 a year, or just $600 a month. That’s low, but some people don’t live until 85, so those fund are in the pot. Also, I didn’t account for any of the interest over time, which would increase the amount contributed quite a bit.

What do think? Are you ok with being so dependent on the younger population to pay for the older population?