Social Security (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 05:09:37 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Social Security (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Social Security  (Read 1781 times)
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


« on: March 29, 2012, 10:43:28 PM »

To liberals: With the baby boomers beginning to retire, do you think reforms need to be made to the public system? If so, how would you reform Social Security while protecting seniors?

The simplest thing to do would be to reform the payroll tax into a uncapped progressive tax
^^^^^^^
Take away the cap and the problem is solved. Easiest budgetary issue ever.
Logged
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2012, 08:39:28 AM »

Of course the payout should be the same for every retiree, regardless of what he made in his younger days.
Logged
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


« Reply #2 on: April 02, 2012, 06:49:07 PM »

Of course the payout should be the same for every retiree, regardless of what he made in his younger days.
That'd be a pretty fundamental transformation of the program. 
Not really. It's already rigged in that direction. Somebody who earned $100k/year in his working days doessn't get 4 times the benefit of the $25k/year worker. They may as well just even it out altogether. Ideally, I'd like to exclude those with high assets from receiving altogether, but that's never going to happen.
Logged
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


« Reply #3 on: April 03, 2012, 04:57:43 PM »

Of course the payout should be the same for every retiree, regardless of what he made in his younger days.
That'd be a pretty fundamental transformation of the program. 
Not really. It's already rigged in that direction. Somebody who earned $100k/year in his working days doessn't get 4 times the benefit of the $25k/year worker. They may as well just even it out altogether. Ideally, I'd like to exclude those with high assets from receiving altogether, but that's never going to happen.
What you are talking about is means-testing and giving up on the illusion that it is an investment rather than a form of welfare. Thus, a pretty fundamental transformation.
It obviously is welfare already. Even you just called viewing it as an investment an illusion. It's just unfortunately currently constructed so that Warren Buffet gets more in welfare than those who actually need it. That should change.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 12 queries.