Edit: I took a second look at your other recent comments and they didn't seem quite as bad as this, so I've restored your account. If you want to keep posting to HN, please take more care to stay on the right side of https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. What you posted here was particularly bad, and has been a problem before (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29868531).

-- original comment --

We've banned this account for breaking the site guidelines. You can't post like this here, and you've done it many times before.

If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

The money you paid for social security was lost pretty much the moment you paid it.

There is little left to lose, it's a redistribution scheme rather than a savings scheme.

FWIW I think we need both? Agree that the latter is severely lacking in the US.

And maybe in some distant future post-scarcity society we would not have a need for a savings scheme.

Any pension scheme is a redistribution scheme.

Isn’t that part of mandatory spending (that DOGE can’t touch)? Anyways, the social security administration (even under Biden) has made clear that they have to cut the payments in the future. We simply have too much spending overall to fund and sustain it. But by cutting elsewhere maybe it can be saved.