Republicans have been trying to kill the program they label socialism and now they have the power to put it to death.

ARTICLE

On Day One, the new Congress launches an attack on Social Security
As one of its first orders of business upon convening Tuesday, the Republican House of Representatives approved a rule that will seriously undermine efforts to keep all of Social Security solvent.
It is hard to believe that there is any purpose to this unprecedented change to House rules other than to cut benefits for Americans who have worked hard all their lives.- Max Richtman, Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare
But it's especially urgent now, because the disability program's trust fund is expected to run dry as early as next year. At that point, disability benefits for 11 million beneficiaries would have to be cut 20%. Reallocating the income, however, would keep both the old-age and disability programs solvent until at least 2033, giving Congress plenty of time to assess the programs' needs and work out a long-term fix.
Read the entire article at, http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-on-day-onel-new-congress-launches-attack-on-social-security-20150106-column.html

In answer to the question is SS socialism, it was never set up to be that way. Every penny in that fund belongs to an individual who paid their own money into it for years. It was initially set up so we wouldn't have indigent elderly people with no money after retirement. The money left from those who died without receiving all the monies due him was supposed to go into a trust of sorts for each individual.
Obviously with the govt's fingers in the pie it got royally screwed up and mishandled. Hence we have the disaster we are seeing today. Is it socialism today - NO. That money still belongs to the individuals who paid into it. Has the govt. botched the job they were supposed to do with it? That is quite apparent.
I like the question posed below - show us the Republicans who are trying to end it!

It absolutely is a socialist program. It was politically sold as a retirement account but was never designed that way. Whether it is a good or bad program is a different question, but, it is socialism.
1) Nothing in the fund belongs to the individual except a promise in a ledger book of someday maybe being paid some back. A promise that, even in the ss law itself, says can be broken at the whim of congress.
2) With the advent of "tax credits" many are given credit for paying into ss, who, in real terms, do not pay anything in.
3) The payout is progressive in nature with those who contributes the least getting a larger percent of their contributions back.
4) The means of collection and the payout distribution, if their is any, is all controlled by the government using government police powers to enforce it all.

It may not be a bad program, but, being honest, it sounds like socialism to me.

It absolutely is a socialist program. It was politically sold as a retirement account but was never designed that way. Whether it is a good or bad program is a different question, but, it is socialism.
1) Nothing in the fund belongs to the individual except a promise in a ledger book of someday maybe being paid some back. A promise that, even in the ss law itself, says can be broken at the whim of congress.
2) With the advent of "tax credits" many are given credit for paying into ss, who, in real terms, do not pay anything in.
3) The payout is progressive in nature with those who contributes the least getting a larger percent of their contributions back.
4) The means of collection and the payout distribution, if their is any, is all controlled by the government using government police powers to enforce it all.

It may not be a bad program, but, being honest, it sounds like socialism to me.

It absolutely is a socialist program. It was politically sold as a retirement account but was never designed that way. Whether it is a good or bad program is a different question, but, it is socialism.
1) Nothing in the fund belongs to the individual except a promise in a ledger book of someday maybe being paid some back. A promise that, even in the ss law itself, says can be broken at the whim of congress.
2) With the advent of "tax credits" many are given credit for paying into ss, who, in real terms, do not pay anything in.
3) The payout is progressive in nature with those who contributes the least getting a larger percent of their contributions back.
4) The means of collection and the payout distribution, if their is any, is all controlled by the government using government police powers to enforce it all.

It may not be a bad program, but, being honest, it sounds like socialism to me.

It absolutely is a socialist program. It was politically sold as a retirement account but was never designed that way. Whether it is a good or bad program is a different question, but, it is socialism.
1) Nothing in the fund belongs to the individual except a promise in a ledger book of someday maybe being paid some back. A promise that, even in the ss law itself, says can be broken at the whim of congress.
2) With the advent of "tax credits" many are given credit for paying into ss, who, in real terms, do not pay anything in.
3) The payout is progressive in nature with those who contributes the least getting a larger percent of their contributions back.
4) The means of collection and the payout distribution, if their is any, is all controlled by the government using government police powers to enforce it all.

It may not be a bad program, but, being honest, it sounds like socialism to me.

It absolutely is a socialist program. It was politically sold as a retirement account but was never designed that way. Whether it is a good or bad program is a different question, but, it is socialism.
1) Nothing in the fund belongs to the individual except a promise in a ledger book of someday maybe being paid some back. A promise that, even in the ss law itself, says can be broken at the whim of congress.
2) With the advent of "tax credits" many are given credit for paying into ss, who, in real terms, do not pay anything in.
3) The payout is progressive in nature with those who contributes the least getting a larger percent of their contributions back.
4) The means of collection and the payout distribution, if their is any, is all controlled by the government using government police powers to enforce it all.

It may not be a bad program, but, being honest, it sounds like socialism to me.

It absolutely is a socialist program. It was politically sold as a retirement account but was never designed that way. Whether it is a good or bad program is a different question, but, it is socialism.
1) Nothing in the fund belongs to the individual except a promise in a ledger book of someday maybe being paid some back. A promise that, even in the ss law itself, says can be broken at the whim of congress.
2) With the advent of "tax credits" many are given credit for paying into ss, who, in real terms, do not pay anything in.
3) The payout is progressive in nature with those who contributes the least getting a larger percent of their contributions back.
4) The means of collection and the payout distribution, if their is any, is all controlled by the government using government police powers to enforce it all.

It may not be a bad program, but, being honest, it sounds like socialism to me.