Do you agree with the United States Supreme Court that there is no promise to pay benefits?
The Supreme Court in Flemming v. Nestor, 363 U.S. 603, found that there is no contractual right to benefits, there is no accrued interest or accrued property right in old-age benefits, and congress can vote any “adjustment to ever-changing conditions which it demands and which Congress … had in mind when it expressly reserved the right to alter, amend or repeal any provision of the Act “.
The Supreme Court overturned a three judge appeal court that gave him his benefits. He could not get his benefits because he claimed to be communist.
Mr. Nestor was eligible for old-age benefits. But your government would not give them. You cannot say that you have an earned right to benefits, or use the word “entitlement”, anymore than Mr. Nestor.
“The noncontractual interest of an employee covered by the Act cannot be soundly analogized to that of the holder of an annuity, whose right to benefits are based on his contractual premium payments”.