I don't understand why this thread is not locked. But, perhaps unwisely, I will chime in.My two cents. That's how I see it at least. SS is in trouble and like any other annuity there is a risk of failure and like everything else in life what can't go on won't go on. My guess would be the easiest path forward would be means testing so it won't be there for most of the people on this board, and advance the age when qualified to take SSN. Probably means testing gradually so you get 100% benefit if your income is X, 90% benefit if your income is under 1.2X and so on. Raising the Taxes necessary would be massive otherwise. Maybe boil the frog and raise taxes gradually? I don't think we should be confident it will be there in its current form and payments later.
While it will require increasing taxes and/or reducing benefits (probably for future (maybe far future) retirees), putting social security on a sound actuarial basis for the next 75 years is well within the realm of possibility - without wrecking the economy.
The actuarial status of social security: https://www.ssa.gov/policy/trust-funds-summary.html
Increase the portion of payroll subject to SS tax and/or decrease benefits for future retirees and the tax increase will be something less than 3.5% (1.75% from "employees" and 1.75% from "employers").The projected actuarial deficit for the combined trust funds over the next 75 years is 3.50 percent of taxable payroll, down from 3.61 percent reported last year.
Social Security is already means tested indirectly - via the tax on social security benefits.
More direct means testing is, in my view, a bad idea. Support for the social security program rests on the program being viewed as something you earn. To cut benefits for those who prepare carefully for retirement would seriously erode support for the program. And be a disincentive to save for retirement. Not to mention the complexity and added cost associated with means testing.
Statistics: Posted by ehh — Thu Aug 15, 2024 7:45 pm — Replies 38 — Views 2764