May I jump in? According to the Washington Post's Dan Froomkin:

By design, Social Security involves massive subsidies from the next generation of retirees to this one, from single workers to married couples, from two-earner couples to one-earner couples, from high-income earners to low, from the able-bodied to the disabled, and from those who die early to those who die late.

Subsidies to this generation of retired people are evident: retired people receive the checks and working people pay the tax.

"From single workers . ." There are spousal and survivor benefits in social security. Since everyone at the same level of wages pays the same Social Security tax, the unmarried and childless are subsidizing this benefit for parents and non-working spouses.

"From two earner couples . . ." Sure, they pay approximately double tax but do not receive nearly double benefits.

"From high-income earners . . ." Social security replaces a larger fraction of the income of low-wage earners than of high-wage earners. It's built into the calculation of benefits and is part of the social welfare purpose of Social Security.

"From the able-bodied . . ." The working able-bodied people pay the tax, some of which goes to the disabled. Social Security has a disability insurance component.

"From those who die early . . ." Putting aside the small death benefit in social security, people who die young lose all their benefits, leaving that money in the pot for those who live longer. This generally benefits people who live longer (women, whites and non-smokers, for examples) at the expense of other people (men, blacks and smokers, for examples).

Chips, who cannot change his race or sex, but does not have to smoke