Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Brian Griffin
As for Social Security, there is a relatively minor problem that needs about a 6% correction. This will have to be dealt with, but we shouldn’t lose an election over an eventually unavoidable issue.

No, Social Security has a much bigger problem than that.

The only alternative evaluated by the SSA that actually solves the problem is an eventual 50% increase in payroll taxes.

Increase the payroll tax rate (currently 12.4 percent) to 15.2 percent in 2028-2057, and to 18.0 percent in years 2058 and later.

There are lesser alternatives that post the problem for a few years, but they will fail within a couple of generations -- and probably sooner because the SSA's "intermediate" assumptions have historically been too optimistic.

44 posted on 10/14/2015 9:42:49 AM PDT by justlurking (tagline removed, as demanded by Admin Moderators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: justlurking

“The only alternative evaluated by the SSA that actually solves the problem is an eventual 50% increase in payroll taxes.”

We will have to restore manufacturing in the USA, which will create jobs. The Chinese won’t keep sending us goodies in exchange for green and black paper.

We will have to break the zoning and other impediments to more housing industry jobs. Housing has become crushingly expensive for millions. Land should be residential by default (unless used commercially or industrially or owned by an adjacent industrial or commercial landowner), with 8,000 feet of residential space per acre as a minimum (under federal economic growth law).

We will have to get millions of deadbeats off the federal teat and into the work force.

My 6% estimate assumes prompt action such as 1% less increase annually for six years.


48 posted on 10/14/2015 9:56:28 AM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]

To: justlurking

“Primary Insurance Amount (PIA)”

“Increase the first PIA factor from 90 percent to 93 percent for all beneficiaries eligible as of January 2016 and for those newly eligible for benefits after 2016”

[Is that a 7% to 10% benefit cut?”]

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/provisions_tr2014/benefitlevel.html

Most massive tax increases are assuming benefit cuts are only applied for newly eligible people. Almost all SS trustee assumptions assume existing recipients will be spared any cuts - nice thinking, but too much of a burden on others.

A ~50% FICA tax hike won’t fly politically. Existing recipients probably will have to take a benefit cut of at least 6%, at no more than 1% a year.

Pain in my opinion has to be shared between existing recipients, new recipients and FICA payers.

Public pension recipients might be taxed to help out Social Security too. My otherwise lovely Democratic neighbors with about $60,000 in federal retirement income annually often complain about people who don’t want to share. After all, a very large part of Social Security payouts are used to pay property taxes to fund public employee pensions.


53 posted on 10/14/2015 10:26:21 AM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson