Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

skilliard7 t1_jc20y2j wrote

All we need to do is raise the retirement age form 67 to 70 to adjust for increases in life expectancy and lower birth rates.

−12

ArrayGamer t1_jc29x6k wrote

Or get rid of the cap where you stop paying social security taxes on income over $160k. Seems preferable to making people work even longer in their later years

9

skilliard7 t1_jc2bde5 wrote

That would just make the problem worse because it would increase liabilities. The wealthy don't need social security.

The top marginal tax rate is already nearly 60% between federal and state. Higher taxes are not the answer.

−4

ArrayGamer t1_jc2fxw4 wrote

Higher average income earners get relatively less back (double your salary and taxes paid doesn't double your benefits) so it shouldn't make the problem worse. Optionally, the cap could be removed to extend solvency while changing benefits to not increase for those earning over the current cap.

If none of this is to your satisfaction, an alternative of increasing social security taxes by ~3.4% would extend full solvency of the program to around the year 2100.

Also, who pays 60% taxes in the US? IIRC, the highest income percentiles tend to pay around 20-25% in effective federal income tax rate after accounting for deductions and other creative accounting. I doubt between social security taxes (capped to no longer have income taxes after $160k), state taxes etc, almost anybody pays nearly 60%. Removing the cap would make it so social security is no longer a regressive tax where higher earners pay a lower percentage of their income.

5

jabonkagigi t1_jc2f33a wrote

Why don't we make the last day of work the day you die? That way we wouldn't even need SS. Why do the plebs even need rest and retirement? s/

6

agolec t1_jc3o8i1 wrote

We Logan's Run society now. Only instead of un-aliving you when you turn like, what it is? 28 or 30? They force you to stay alive x amount of years minimum.

2

warren_stupidity t1_jc2egeh wrote

Why not 90?

1

skilliard7 t1_jc2g636 wrote

When social security was first created, the retirement age was later than the life expectancy. It was insurance against outliving your retirement savings, not intended as a primary retirement plan

6

ktxhopem3276 t1_jc2hwnf wrote

But the tax rate used to be a lot lower due to that. We raised the tax rate form 3% to 12% bc people wanted longer retirements. Also, infant mortality plays a big role in increased life expectancy but doesn’t effect retirement

1

warren_stupidity t1_jc3f0gf wrote

I’m so glad we improved the program back when we thought government ought to serve the people.

1

skilliard7 t1_jc3g8gy wrote

Being robbed of 12.4% of my income for a ponzi scheme that will be insolvent in 10 years seems like it's really serving me /s

6