Does Social Security pay too many people? (1 Viewer)

[ghostguy123]

This actually seems like a crisis when you are currently in your 30s

 

[elbowrm]

People actually complain about other people getting social security that paid in their whole life just because they are well off? Thats actually a thing?

Takes a real piece of crap to do that. 

The really interesting aspect of this, which is called means testing, is that it's coming from the right and not the left.  

 

[parasaurolophus]

I think you take the cap off of it (SS stops collecting on income somewhere above 117K or so, not exactly sure where the line is today).  That would instantly solve any issues.

PS: It's not in danger of becoming insolvent for like 30+ years, there isn't a huge crisis as some would lead you to believe.

So your solution is to just tax wealthy people more? Never heard that one before.

 

[lod001]

I think you take the cap off of it (SS stops collecting on income somewhere above 117K or so, not exactly sure where the line is today).  That would instantly solve any issues.

PS: It's not in danger of becoming insolvent for like 30+ years, there isn't a huge crisis as some would lead you to believe.

Should have been done along time ago.

So your solution is to just tax wealthy people more? Never heard that one before.

You mean they pay the same % (of their pay) into SS as everyone else? oh, the nerve. Anyone who makes more than the stupid cap, instantly gets what could be referred to as a cut in taxes.

But EVERYONE who pays in, should get what the current % is. You can't draw some line saying oh you already make x amount in retirement or the govt, will just drop the level to just above poverty for everyone. Hell, they will probably set it to poverty levels. For me, it's going to be about 30% of my retirement but I want every gawd damn dollar I'm owed.

 

[Sand]

It all comes from the same fund, right? 

No, SS and SSDI come from different funds.  That said Congress recently stole from SS to keep SSDI afloat.

Just raise the retirement age to 150, and it will be fine.

Obviously this isn't the answer. 

When SS first started the average age of death was about 3 years after SS kicked in.  Now it's ~20.  The way to handle this is to index the damn thing.  Set SS to the average age of death - X, where X keeps the SS fund afloat.  This is logical and obvious, so I'm sure Congress has never thought about it.

Asking 30 or 40 percent of the population to be responsible is a stretch.  There are haves and have nots, the thing is we have to at least acknowledge the have nots so they aren't breaking into ny crib every night and selling their grandchildren for Hot Pockets.  Social Security is the safety net for those people, for normal people who can't balance a checkbook, and as a buffer for those who are responsible and paid into the system.  I have no issue with rich folks getting back what they paid in, I also don't have an issue with all of us supporting those who can't work because of a mental or physical disability. 

30-40 percent is way high.  People, in general (and backed up by studies) are pretty horrible with money.  I'd put it at 10-20.

 

[Pipes]

Should have been done along time ago.

You mean they pay the same % (of their pay) into SS as everyone else? oh, the nerve. Anyone who makes more than the stupid cap, instantly gets what could be referred to as a cut in taxes.

But EVERYONE who pays in, should get what the current % is. You can't draw some line saying oh you already make x amount in retirement or the govt, will just drop the level to just above poverty for everyone. Hell, they will probably set it to poverty levels. For me, it's going to be about 30% of my retirement but I want every gawd damn dollar I'm owed.

So you think there should be a flat tax then?  I mean why should a guy who makes 200K have to pay over 28% federal rate on over half of his income while a guy makes 50K pays 15% or lower on 2/3's of his income.  Using this argument shouldn't they be paying the same percentage?  The guy over 200K also starts losing deductions and certain tax credits like the child tax credit. lol at the concept of a tax cut because of the SS wage base limit.

 

[cstu]

When SS first started the average age of death was about 3 years after SS kicked in.  Now it's ~20.  The way to handle this is to index the damn thing.  Set SS to the average age of death - X, where X keeps the SS fund afloat.  This is logical and obvious, so I'm sure Congress has never thought about it.

And half the people never lived to collect a penny.

 

[Spike]

I'm okay with those benefits. What sucks is all the fraud.

That's a smart, spot-on comment.

Hey, who stole McGarnicle's login info?

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

SSI payroll tax is currently capped at 120K annually (roughly). It seems like raising or eliminating the cap is reasonable.

When people pay into a system for 40 years, they should receive the benefits agreed upon.  

 

[nysfl2]

SSI payroll tax is currently capped at 120K annually (roughly). It seems like raising or eliminating the cap is reasonable.

When people pay into a system for 40 years, they should receive the benefits agreed upon.  

SS has never been a wealth redistribution program. It's always been a "put it in while you're working, get it back when you retire" program. 

Upping the cap is going to hit the middle class a lot harder than anyone else. The right answer is a very gradual increase in the age of collecting benefits, which starts kicking in in something like 20 years from now.

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

SS has never been a wealth redistribution program. It's always been a "put it in while you're working, get it back when you retire" program. 

Upping the cap is going to hit the middle class a lot harder than anyone else. The right answer is a very gradual increase in the age of collecting benefits, which starts kicking in in something like 20 years from now.

No one said it was a wealth redistribution program. What I said was if you pay in for 40 years, you should receive the benefits. People arguing that someone has too much money to receive the benefits that they contributed to for 40 years makes no sense.

I'm not sure how you define the middle class. I hit the SSI tax payroll cap sometime in September, usually. My October paycheck increases by a few dozens of dollars between October and December, as the SSI payroll tax cap has been met and that small portion is no longer being withheld. How is this hitting the middle class harder then everyone else, when the middle class is around $100K annual income (for argument's sake)?

Yes, they should very gradually increase the age, many folks pretty much agree with that as well.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Should have been done along time ago.

You mean they pay the same % (of their pay) into SS as everyone else? oh, the nerve. Anyone who makes more than the stupid cap, instantly gets what could be referred to as a cut in taxes.

You dont understand social security do you? 

 

[(HULK)]

So your solution is to just tax wealthy people more? Never heard that one before.

I'm above the cap and totally okay with removing it. 

 

[Sand]

And half the people never lived to collect a penny.

True, but obviously not true today.  Calculating backwards from average age of death is the most stable way of doing it - not sure why it isn't that way.  Pretty much like the minimum wage - we get all in a tizzy every decade or so as it lags behind historical because the dolts didn't tag it to a COLA increase.  They already have it for SSI, not sure why that wasn't in there - just set it at a historical norm of $9.25 and add a COLA.  Boom, done.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

I'm above the cap and totally okay with removing it. 

Same. I understand the hit is harder for self employed people who pay the full payroll tax load but I think there are ways we could deal with that. 

I may post more in this thread later but in general I think we need to merge Social Security with a BIG, so in answer to the question I think more people should be getting SS or something like it. 

 

[Leroy Hoard]

When people pay into a system for 40 years, they should receive the benefits agreed upon.  

 

[lod001]

You dont understand social security do you? 

I totally understand it. I know EXACTLY how much is coming my way.

I understand it better that the generals and the economists.

I also know certain people who know their #### about SS got ####ed over when the R's closed the file & suspend loophole that I planned on using. You probably had no idea what that even was.

I also know I will hold out and get close to max benefits rather than take it at 62 since I plan on living to my 90s like everyone in our family does. I won't need it at 62. But I'm taking as much as possible when I file.

 

[baymen]

Just curious on those saying that eliminating the cap are saying.  

Does that go for employer matching as well?  So if someone is making $500k a year it is a 12.4% increase in total taxes paid or close to a $50k increased tax resulting in a drastically tight fiscal policy.

Do the over the cap payers get to collect a proportionate higher amount more in retirement?

 

[BrutalPenguin]

My car insurance company pays too many people.  Why do they pay off those fat cats with plenty of their own money to fix their car when there are plenty of uninsured people they could be helping?

 

[nysfl2]

No one said it was a wealth redistribution program. What I said was if you pay in for 40 years, you should receive the benefits. People arguing that someone has too much money to receive the benefits that they contributed to for 40 years makes no sense.

I'm not sure how you define the middle class. I hit the SSI tax payroll cap sometime in September, usually. My October paycheck increases by a few dozens of dollars between October and December, as the SSI payroll tax cap has been met and that small portion is no longer being withheld. How is this hitting the middle class harder then everyone else, when the middle class is around $100K annual income (for argument's sake)?

Yes, they should very gradually increase the age, many folks pretty much agree with that as well.

The income limit is in place because there's a maximum amount in annual benefits that the system is going to pay out, no matter how much income you made. Upping the contribution limits during a person's working career without upping the corresponding payout rates means that these people are taking a net loss on the program, and helping to subsidize the lower income people to keep the system solvent.

And just upping the cap, say from $100K to $150K hits the middle class a lot harder than anyone else. Imagine a single income family making $150K - living comfortably, but not 'rich' in most areas. Upping the cap immediately puts an extra $3100 tax burden on them, with no benefit, plus makes them correspondingly more expensive to their employers and more at risk of being downsized when cuts come. That hits that middle class family a lot harder than someone making $2 million per year. Eliminating the cap altogether reduces this imbalance, but, again, turns it into even more of a wealth redistribution program. 

 

[lod001]

The income limit is in place because there's a maximum amount in annual benefits that the system is going to pay out, no matter how much income you made. Upping the contribution limits during a person's working career without upping the corresponding payout rates means that these people are taking a net loss on the program, and helping to subsidize the lower income people to keep the system solvent.

And just upping the cap, say from $100K to $150K hits the middle class a lot harder than anyone else. Imagine a single income family making $150K - living comfortably, but not 'rich' in most areas. Upping the cap immediately puts an extra $3100 tax burden on them, with no benefit, plus makes them correspondingly more expensive to their employers and more at risk of being downsized when cuts come. That hits that middle class family a lot harder than someone making $2 million per year. Eliminating the cap altogether reduces this imbalance, but, again, turns it into even more of a wealth redistribution program. 

As long as I am under it, I say raise it. Also raise the retirement age for those younger than I.<-- It's what Hillary would say.

 

[parasaurolophus]

I totally understand it. I know EXACTLY how much is coming my way.

I understand it better that the generals and the economists.

I also know certain people who know their #### about SS got ####ed over when the R's closed the file & suspend loophole that I planned on using. You probably had no idea what that even was.

I also know I will hold out and get close to max benefits rather than take it at 62 since I plan on living to my 90s like everyone in our family does. I won't need it at 62. But I'm taking as much as possible when I file.

You cant argue that you understand social security and then say that people above the cap arent paying the same as people below. 

Raising the cap is nothing more than a massive tax hike. Unless you are proposing raising the cap and raising maximum payouts as well(not usually what is being proposed). I dont really think that solves anything, it just buys time. 

 

[Gachi]

Raising the cap while raising maximum payouts would be pretty pointless, no? 

I could see the minimum age to collect being raised from 62 to 65 and the retirement age being raised to 67. 

 

[lod001]

You cant argue that you understand social security and then say that people above the cap arent paying the same as people below. 

Raising the cap is nothing more than a massive tax hike. Unless you are proposing raising the cap and raising maximum payouts as well(not usually what is being proposed). I dont really think that solves anything, it just buys time. 

I am. If you pay in more, you should get more. It's not a tax hike on them, It's paying the same % as everyone who doesn't get the benefit of non SS taxed income.

Fact is, a lot of those people who would be affected will end up dead or dying before they ever get all that $ back. So it will increase the $ in the system. Correct though, it won't solve the issue.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

We need to stop pretending Social Security is an account you put money into and take out of.  It should be used to redistribute money from rich people to poor old people, the way god intended.