Yes. I'm in favor of reducing benefits, especially for those that have put less money into the system. There should be some link between "effort" and reward (effort being the actual work that provided the funds that were put into the system). Increasing the retirement age for benefits MUST happen. I think that the retirement age could be ratcheted up 2 or 3 months every year until 70 or 72 is the new 65, and 67 or so is the new 62. People live longer now - that is a fact. Eliminating non-retirees would do a lot as well.
I was in favor of dropping the "surviving spouse" scheme, given that the spouse presumably didn't contribute or didn't contribute at a level supporting the benefit that they would receive. Instead, I think that a spousal program could be established at the time of retirement that would allow a reduced benefit in exchange for allowing the benefit to cover the surviving spouse. This would have to be based on actuary tables, taking into account the spouses' age. Obviously, a 70 year old retiree with a 21 year old spouse (I wish) would have to have a lower benefit than a retiree with a spouse closer in age. Otherwise, the 21 year old would be getting an enormous lifetime windfall.
If the social security benefit were viewed as an annuity comprised of the accumulated payments made into the system on the retiree's behalf (would it be too much to ask for interest accrued on the bonds presumably purchased with these funds?), then an equitable benefit amount could be established for the retiree based on their age, marital status (surviving spouse) and what they actually put into the system (or what was taken on their behalf).
“Increasing the retirement age for benefits MUST happen. I think that the retirement age could be ratcheted up 2 or 3 months every year until 70 or 72 is the new 65, and 67 or so is the new 62. People live longer now - that is a fact.”
It may be a “fact” that people live longer, but that doesn’t mean that they remain “in shape” to WORK longer. This applies particularly to people who have had to do manual labor for their entire lives. What do YOU do for a living? (Yes, that’s a direct question — I run RR engines).
Fearless prediction:
No matter _what_ is done to fix Social Security, or if absolutely nothing more is done, the retirement age isn’t going to be raised much higher than it is now. It’s already at 67 for the youngest. I predict it won’t be raised higher.
You want to see a real rebellion amongst Americans? Tell them they’ll have to work ‘till 70 or 72?
You want to see the ‘rats get offered an opportunity to CLOBBER Republicans and conservatives in both the polls and public opinion? Tell them they can’t retire until their early 70’s.
Raising the retirement age may get “put on the table” briefly, but I assure you, it won’t REMAIN on that table for very long....