"Yeah and social security is a pension scheme for widows and orphans which there wouldn't be any need for after the Great Depression is over."
Notice that you are arguing *outside* the scope of the actual law itself.
Why is that? Ask yourself, if your argument was really very strong, would you have to resort to arguing outside the actual law with hypotheticals?
It's a ten year law. This law authorizes $39.5 Billion per year.
If you can't make your point that this law is bad based upon the real numbers, then just what are you really arguing? And why...