Posted on 02/03/2019 7:09:40 PM PST by Theoria
After years of Republican-led debate over how to pare back Social Security’s rising costs, Democrats are flipping the script with an ambitious plan to expand the New Deal-era social insurance program while making gradual changes to keep it solvent for the rest of the century.
The Social Security 2100 Act, which was introduced this past week in the House and the Senate, represents a sea change after decades dominated by concern that aging baby boomers would bankrupt the government as they begin drawing benefits from Social Security and other entitlement programs. It would be the first major expansion of Social Security since 1972 and the most significant change in the program since 1983, when Congress stepped in to avert a financial crisis by raising taxes and the eligibility age for Social Security.
The bill would provide an across-the-board benefit increase equivalent to about 2 percent of the average Social Security benefit. It would raise the annual cost-of-living adjustment to reflect the fact that older Americans tend to use more of some services like health care. And it would increase the minimum benefit to ensure that workers with many years of low earnings do not retire into poverty.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
+1
I’m not a socialist.
Dude, you're a socialist.
The biggest mistake of SS is the failure to tax ALL earned income instead of just $128,400.
Hope we get our share before it goes bankrupt...could use another little raise or two as we enjoy retirement.
There is no employee/employer split which is just a myth. The entire tax is born by the employee.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It’s not a myth. It is a fact. As an employer for 40 years I remember writing the check to the IRS hundreds of times.. Same as when I write a check to the Unemployment Fund. The employee doesn’t pay for a penny of that.
“The bill would cut federal income taxes on Social Security benefits for about 12 million middle-income people while raising taxes elsewhere. The payroll tax rate would rise to 14.8 percent over the next 24 years, from 12.4 percent, and the payroll tax would be imposed on earnings over $400,000 a year.”
As I've said before I don't like tax and spend democrats but I really hate cut taxes and spend republicans. And, unlike many conservatives, I think Social Security is a great program that has kept millions of Americans over many generations out of poverty, and should be kept.
I do believe that it should have been created with a constitutional amendment instead of using the 16th Amendment and sneaking it in as a tax. But it is what it is.
And I have no problem increasing taxes on the 1% because most of them are either raging liberals or free trade pukes that could give a rat's ass less about the average American.
If the ‘Rats are carrying coals to Newcastle that can’t be good for the Dems.
Looks like they’re worried about losing the geezer vote.
Let’s hope geezers can add, eh? Or at least refuse to be bought.
As long as someone else is paying the bill, you're good with it, right?
As long as someone is paying the bill, I’m good with it. I think the number one threat to this country is our deficit and debt. I want it at least payed down. Conservatives only answer seems to be to cut taxes, and every time we’ve tried it our deficit/debt has increased.
Hell, if you would create a maximum benefit amount to this idea you might actually go along way to reducing the deficit.
So I am a fiscal conservative in that I want a surplus budget and a decrease in our debt. I don’t care if this is done through cutting spending, or raising revenue or a combination of the two.
Exactly.
Socialist Insecurity was a Ponzi scheme from the beginning. We should switch to a Chilean style system, over time.
With any luck, people already in the system would not be hurt.
The problem is so few in the U.S. government have a sense of responsibility. The leftists are perfectly happy to ruin us and run.
The same thing has happened when we raised taxes and raised spending.
You cannot simply raise taxes to cut the deficit, because people will find ways to take their money elsewhere, or, they will stop working and producing.
At some point, you have to cut spending.
The politicians have been unable to do that.
Wonderful.
So you are good with cutting give-aways and raising taxes on, as you put it, the "average American," and letting them pay their own way?
I am too.
The plan calls for raising to 14.8% the amount taken out and removing the cap so earnings over 400K are included.
Thank you for correcting. I worked 35 years for that money since i was 17. I waited didnt start collecting at 62. I waited. Now i get it every month and no party is taking it away from me. I dont expect increases but i expect it til I die.
You have to have worked 10 years.
The reason you never hear about the system as it works in Chile is BECAUSE it works!
A successful privatized Social Security system is not allowed to be publicized because it goes against the Deep State Narrative!
Rather than try to summarize the system, interested FReepers can check out these two web sites: https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v68n2/v68n2p69.html and http://freedomandprosperity.org/2018/blog/the-overwhelming-case-for-chiles-private-social-security-system/.
SS in America is a scam; a giant Ponzi scheme, and it needs to be privatized! NOW!
“The Social Security 2100 Act, which was introduced this past week in the House and the Senate, represents a sea change after decades dominated by concern that aging baby boomers would bankrupt the government as they begin drawing benefits from Social Security and other entitlement programs.”
It’s not the baby boomers who have put social security at risk.
You left out the last line. I said people should give more to others privately. Please, if you’re going to copy and paste someone’s post, don’t distort the whole meaning like that.
The key word is IF. Insurance only pays when there is an incident. So it doesn’t transfer your money your money to someone else. Your money is invested by the insurance company. It goes nowhere unless there is a claim which is paid from the investment pool.
Social Securtiy is welfare. It takes from today’s worker and gives to today’s recipient. There is no risk coverage since everyone gets it. It is not insurance.
Funded by 401ks .
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.