I'll tackle the spousal benefits question. I believe Social Security was intitally intended to forge a link and should always keep a link between contributions and benefits. Perhaps it can even be said that Social Security's financial problems started with the addition of spousal benefits a few years after the program started.
I firmly believe that Personal Retirement Accounts which the worker owns and where the worker has the right, at retirement, to create a joint and survivor annuity with whomever is the most honest way to deal with retirement. I presume, in the case of legally recognized marriages, there could be some provision to require that the working spouse purchase a joint and survivor annuity- That is the case with private pension plans.
I think women need to be more cognizant of the issues they will face in retirement simply because they live longer. The Personal Retirement Account will force them to learn some basics of how investment is managed and they will become more aware of what benefits their account will provide. Permit me to harp back to Colorado's Public Employees Retirement Act (PERA). Their money is invested in the private sector. They can retire younger with more money than is possible with Social Security. They know it is their money and they pay attention to what is in their accounts and they see the money grow. They don't pick individual stocks but they choose the management style, i.e. aggressive, moderate or conservative. I belive ALL workers who are smart enough to get a job can deal with those issues.
Social Security was never designed to be a welfare program. Welfare issues should be separate where provision for individuals who are truly unable to work can be dealt with.
