On average, Boomers are getting paid more from Social Security than they “paid into it.” A lot more. Like double, and that’s counting inflation and interest. In raw dollars, they’ll get four to seven times what they paid in. So what about this compromise, to at least stave off insolvency and save billions: you get back what you paid in, but no more. Young families won’t be forced to finance a 250 percent return on your “investment.” That seems extremely reasonable, doesn’t it? It doesn’t go nearly as far as I would like. But it’s a very fair compromise. It completely negates any claim that you didn’t get the money back that you “paid in.” And yet I suspect that this comprise will not be satisfactory. Why is that? Because this debate actually has nothing to do with “getting back what you paid in.” The REAL demand is for a lot more than that.