We were forced into this program when we received our first paycheck (unless you are a government type exempt from the little people laws). I was to get this piss poor return on my money when I retired at 65. Then they passed a law, retroactive in relation to my earnings to force me to wait until 66.5 to receive my full check. That is an illegal ex post facto law and it should be struck down.
The SS number was also supposed to be used for "benefits" only and illegal to require it for other purposes. Well the bastards changed that law in the middle of the game also.
Ex post facto is most typically used to refer to a law that applies retroactively. Two clauses in the US Constitution prohibit ex post facto laws: Art 1, § 9 and Art. 1 § 10. see, e.g. Collins v. Youngblood 497 US 37 (1990) and California Dep't of Corrections v. Morales 514 US 499 (1995).
One guy on this thread advocates just what you describe. He wants to raise the retirement age to attain what he calls "actuarial balance" or some such nonsense. He actually thinks it's an insurance policy! And he also actually believes that it's OK for government to go back on it's word. And I'm sure he claims to be a conservative.
Bizarre site sometimes.