[smokeman]

Since the benefit cuts that are inevitably going to come, are not mentioned in your response, I am not sure your calculations are considering all the variables. However assuming you are correct, this is why I also support changing SS to getting out what you put in, plus the standard 1.2% rate of return that comes naturally. This whole idea of indexing based on either inflation or wages is ridiculous and is part of the insolvency problem. What bank in America would say, "Hey, well bump your balance simply because the dollar can't buy what it used to or the average wage is greater than it used to be!". The answer is simple, none. I get what I put in, plus some minor interest. Also, at least with private accounts if I croak at 66, I can pass it on. Plus in the long term, it could lead to a point where we privatize the entire system and eliminate the issue of indexing altogether and eliminate a huge entitlement. You gotta start somewhere, I say, sign me up.

[Torie]

Slashing benefits will square the circle without higher taxes. No doubt about it. Why don't you run for office?

[Racehorse]

Since the benefit cuts that are inevitably going to come . . .

Not everyone believes benefit cuts are inevitable.  Why should they be?  Most of us do believe some intervention must be done to turn SS into a solvent program.

The [personal] accounts are backed up by a safety net guaranteeing that workers would receive at least as much as Social Security promises under current law.

From The Ryan-Sununu Social Security Personal Savings Guarantee and Prosperity Act