Do you really think so?
And why shouldn't we? Look at the man's own statement:
"If you work 40 years putting money into Social Security and die at 68," he explained, "you have subsidized white males, have no ownership of your contributions and can't pass (them) on to your children and grandchildren."
1. "Subsidizing white males", is it? As opposed to the opposite that's been going on for three generations?
2. "...have no ownership of your contributions..." Show me where you and I have any ownership of the SS money that confiscatory taxation has wrested from us; and
3. ".and can't pass (them) on to your children and grandchildren..." I don't know of ANY instance where SS benefits are "passed on" to heirs, unless you don't report the relative as dead.