If they make the argument about cutting, then there is no discussion of raising more money to keep it solvent.
And of course by default a stalemate result in exactly the boomers getting theirs and X and below getting screwed.
1 Like
It is increasing for 2023. Think it’s about 170 now
But how about this. Just make it no cap. I have to pay SS on every dollar I make. So can every other rich fuck
While we’re on the topic of the US Social Security plan, just a reminder that if you want to actually understand anything about the sustainability of the plan you really need to be fluent in the actuarial report for the plan.
A 275 page actuarial report is probably not on anybody’s bedside table as preferred reading (unless you want something to help you fall asleep) but Section II: Overview is only 30 pages long and is basically required reading for anyone that wants to assert an opinion on the financial strength of the program.
I also hung out with the chief actuary of the SSA who signs this report, he’s one of the coolest actuaries I’ve ever met (not a high bar, but still).
5 Likes
How about adding a FICA surcharge on capital gains rather than earned income?
But they won’t get a return on their extra money
But the poors already take out more than they put in
But they pay more taxes on their benefit. Many poors pay none.
But they’ll just get compensation in the forms of stock or other retirement match or whatever to avoid the extra fica
Blah blah blah
This is pretty interesting, thanks for sharing.
From the report, it seems like either an increase in payroll taxes or a decrease in benefits payouts (or a combination of both) are the only way to make the program solvent. Did I get that right?
To illustrate the magnitude of the 75-year actuarial deficit, consider that for the combined OASI and DI Trust Funds to remain fully solvent throughout the 75-year projection period ending in 2096: (1) revenue would have to increase by an amount equivalent to an immediate and permanent payroll tax rate increase of 3.24 percentage points1 to 15.64 percent beginning in January 2022; (2) scheduled benefits would have to be reduced by an amount equivalent to an immediate and permanent reduction of 20.3 percent applied to all current and future beneficiaries effective in January 2022, or 24.1 percent if the reductions were applied only to those who become initially eligible for benefits in 2022 or later; or (3) some combination of these approaches would have to be adopted.
If substantial actions are deferred for several years, the changes necessary to maintain Social Security solvency would be concentrated on fewer years and fewer generations. Significantly larger changes would be necessary if action is deferred until the combined trust fund reserves become depleted in 2035.
For example, maintaining 75-year solvency through 2096 with changes that begin in 2035 would require: (1) an increase in revenue by an amount equivalent to a permanent 4.07 percentage point payroll tax rate increase to 16.47 percent starting in 2035, (2) a reduction in scheduled benefits by an amount equivalent to a permanent 24.9 percent reduction in all benefits starting in 2035, or (3) some combination of these approaches.
Simply lift the earnings cap on FICA taxes?
Edit: like 10 people already said it.
Hey moron democrats, campaign on this shit you idiots.
Yes.
Well we could gamble with the money-stonks time!
Well, in the 1990s Canada had the same funding problem with our CPP (Canada’s social security plan) and we cranked up the contributions and invested the “extra” money in a fund run by the CPP investment board. We’ve now got $C 500 billion in the fund which helps alot with sustainability. Unfortunately this sustainable old age security system is SOCIALISM so the US shouldn’t do that.
It would actually be a world changing formation of investment capital if the US tried, because the US plan is so big.
But they would be campaigning on taxing themselves more
They don’t care about us
3 Likes
I confess I have difficulty counting above ten with my shoes on, but I’m fairly certain that 3/4 of the earth’s population did not illegally cross the border.
5 Likes
USA#1 in population!
1 Like
Fake sadly
Well the ones that aren’t “presumably good people” go back and forth multiple times ya know
Can you imagine the dunning Kruger levels in these trump strategy meetings.
this is exactly why i unfortunately think desantis is playing this perfectly
The bolding tilts me.
2 Likes
I don’t know. Those seem like good points to hit.