Homeless encampment sweeps in San Francisco this week bring renewed attention to Social Security policy. It is especially salient given the presidential election season.
Numbers of homeless seniors may seem dire or dramatized depending on one’s home city. Still, it is sensible to conclude that seniors are ending up homeless at far greater rates than they ought to. For a long time now, we have heard warnings that a Social Security dry-up is imminent. This news is not surprising, provocative, or, really, worrisome — it is the expected outcome. The program has been publicly in trouble for at least the last 50 years, yet reports of its worsening effects sound increasingly bleak .
There is more to the problem than debate over this or that tax on income. The fact is we are living longer, we are not saving enough, and gig-economy aspirations do not help any.
Policies should take these factors into account: We need measures that reflect reality. If we were truly concerned about the homeless, Social Security, and all that surrounds the matter, it would be wise to consider the basics. Sure, looking at root causes usually offers few practical returns. But given that the current administration is dead-set on them, the hermeneutic is worth a try.
For seniors finding themselves unhoused, most complications can be traced back to relationships. Someone without children or grandchildren is without the safety net built into the fabric of human existence. Someone who relies mostly on his spouse’s income is not going to receive much in the event of a sudden death. Someone who burns every relational bridge in the grips of addiction is on his own, no matter the material resources available to him.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Promoting family life is the clear answer. Marriage is the starting point. That there is such a thing to worry about as a marriage penalty does not bode well for those struggling to stay afloat. Civilization runs with the family as the basic political unit for a reason. Not only is it auspicious for the preservation of humanity, but society is intelligible in the context of the family: We want things to run well purely for the good of others. Within the family, this premise is more intuitive and easier to prioritize.
It is a sad thing to have to abandon the prospect of relying on one’s children in old age and instead rely on a young, anonymous taxpayer. It is even sadder when the work put into that system proves worse than insufficient.
Most Popular
Comments / 0