Comment: Yes it WAS set up that way. But it was SOLD to the people

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: That's not how it was (see in situ)

Yes it WAS set up that way. But it was SOLD to the people

as "insurance" or a "savings account."

At the same time they were arguing to the people that it was insurance or savings, they were arguing to the courts that it wasn't. That's because government run mandatory insurance or forced savings is unconstitutional.

There are other threads here on DP about this. Do a DP search for Helvering v. Davis.