They say that a camel is a horse designed by a committee. Social Security is a retirement plan designed by politicians.

Here is a survey of the various ways that Social Security payouts are actuarially indefensible—and unjust.

#1. The drudge penalty.

Jennifer, a psychologist, earns $4 million (today’s money) over a career that starts at age 32 and ends at 67. Jane, a night shift nurse, makes the same $4 million but over 45 years of labor. They put the same $496,000 into the system. (Workers pay a 12.4% retirement tax, half that they can see in their paycheck stubs, the other half hidden in a reduced wage.)

If those $496,000 contributions were funding IRAs, Jane would get more out in retirement because her money has compounded longer.

But Jane, the long toiler, doesn’t get more. She gets less. Reason: The benefit formula counts only the best 35 years of a career.

What the politicians thought they were doing: helping workers by omitting weak earnings from the formula, more or less in the fashion of a teacher counting only the best homework grades in the semester average.

What the politicians in fact were doing: penalizing workers who put in more hours.

#2. The second-earner........

© Forbes