Correct.
In Fleming vs. Nestor the Supreme Court ruled:
“... that workers have no legally binding contractual rights to their Social Security benefits, and that those benefits can be cut or even eliminated at any time.
To engraft upon the Social Security system a concept of accrued property rights would deprive it of the flexibility and boldness in adjustment to ever changing conditions which it demands. The Court went on to say, It is apparent that the non-contractual interest of an employee covered by the [Social Security] Act cannot be soundly analogized to that of the holder of an annuity, whose right to benefits is bottomed on his contractual premium payments.
In an earlier case Helvering vs. Davis (1937) the Court ruled:
“...Social Security was not a contributory insurance program, saying, The proceeds of both the employee and employer taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like any other internal revenue generally, and are not earmarked in any way.
In other words, Social Security is not an insurance program at all. It is simply a payroll tax on one side and a welfare program on the other. Your Social Security benefits are always subject to the whim of 535 politicians in Washington. Congress has cut Social Security benefits in the past and is likely to do so in the future. In fact, given Social Securitys financial crisis, benefit cuts are almost inevitable.
the politicians who cut benefits will be immediately voted out of office an replaced with Democrats who will simply print more money, no matter the consequence