Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

warren_stupidity t1_jc2e3ky wrote

Reply to comment by bostwickenator in [OC] US Social Security Fund History by PM_Ur_Illiac_Furrows

sure, as it is a population model. The boomer bulge is entering its dearth slope not coincidentally at the same time it is peaking at retirement. The point is that it corrects. All on its own, But we should abolish the cap on FICA taxes, put the full retirement age back to 65, use a better CPI index, COLA the earnings threshold for taxation that was set back in 1984, and increase the minimum benefits. And medicare needs to be rolled into a comprehensive universal health insurance system.

7

bostwickenator t1_jc2fnii wrote

Agreed. My point is anything tied to an exponential factor will eat anything not defined against the same. I am no expert here but I'd think legislation which sets non population based caps or doesn't compensate for inflation will be a problem.

1

w4ffl3 t1_jc2hcx1 wrote

The US isn't expected to grow any further in population so SS and similar funds have to deal with the disproportionate size of boomers and generations after them, but after that it won't be an issue without a significant demographic change

2

TracyMorganFreeman t1_jc49480 wrote

Solvency dwindles if you're going to expand benefits and lower the retirement age.

>use a better CPI index.

Redundancy aside, I don't know what that means.

1