Social Security Designation

    A Political Associate brought to my attention that direct deposit Social Security payments are referred to as Federal Benefits. He strongly opposes this latter designation. He says that Social Security is not a benefit. It is earned income. Not only did we all contribute to Social Security but our employers did too. He wants the federal government to discontinue referring to Social Security as a "benefit". He wants it referred to as "Earned Retirement Income".
    There is some merit to his claim, since the IRS taxes Social Security as "Earned Income".
    On the other hand, Snopes says that "Federal Benefit Payments" applies to a broad class of payments made to (or on behalf of) individuals under federal government programs — everything from Social Security Disability Insurance to Medicare to farm subsidies are considered "federal benefit payments." The fact that workers themselves contribute much of the money that goes into the Social Security retirement fund doesn't affect its classification as a benefit.
    In addition, various dictionaries indicate a benefit as a payment or gift made by an employer, the state, or an insurance company. Synonyms are indicated to be: social security, welfare, assistance, employment insurance, unemployment, food stamps;  charity,donations, gifts, financial assistance. Associated words are: hand, lift, pick-me-up; support, sustenance; blessing,godsend, windfall; recourse, refuge, resort, resource.
    However, we should also consider the legal term, "quid pro quo", which means something that is given to a person or done for a person in return for something he has given to or done in return. In other words, there is a fair exchange. In the case of a Social Security payment, it would qualify as a "quid pro quo", since a person would be receiving a payment on something for which he has previously paid. That could similarly apply to unemployment insurance payments, but not to food stamps, for which no previous payment was made by the recipient.
    In essence, we have been so entangled in socialistic concepts over the last hundred years or so that Snopes and even the dictionaries have decided to ignore the difference between "something for something" and "something for nothing".
    As a Constitutional Republic convert and a believer in private property rights, I am personally on the side of "something for something". That is, if I do a job under contract, I expect to get paid. On the other hand, I also recognize "something for nothing". That is, if I decide to send a friend a basket of fruit for Christmas, I can do so as a gift without any anticipation of being repaid.
    I think we have sunk so deeply into socialistic concepts that it is difficult to revert to the realism of differences. However, it is never too late. I agree with my Political Associate that Social Security payments should be designated as Earned Retirement Income and not generally dumped into the mixed category of "Federal Benefit Payments".
    I submit that recommendation to the appropriate Subcommittee Chairmen in the House and Senate, as follows:
    The House Ways And Means Committee, chaired by Dave Camp (MI) has seven subcommittees. The Social Security Subcommittee's jurisdiction includes legislation and issues related to Social Security's retirement. Sam Johnson (TX) is the Subcommittee Chairman.
    The Senate Committee on Finance, Chaired by Max Baucus (MT) has six subcommittees. The Social Security Subcommittee Chairman is Sherrod Brown (OH).