Thank goodness these boomers are getting more money. They never had the opportunity to plan for their retirement like the newer generations!
this post was submitted on 05 Jan 2025
246 points (98.4% liked)
politics
19283 readers
1837 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Thank goodness these boomers are getting more money.
My mother-in-law worked 20 years as a teacher, then got her pension plundered by the state of Texas. She moved to another job, but because she was enrolled in the teacher's pension, SS wouldn't fully recognize her contributions for the rest of her career. I'm actually really happy she's getting full SS benefits now, because it means she's not suddenly bankrupt in her 70s or 80s and fully reliant on our family for her financial survival.
Just in time to not even realize Biden did it and vote Republican again because they made my check get moar
And younger generations are swimming in cash so they’re happy to pay for the boomers.
Anyone who believes a country that spends $1.4T/year on national security is strapped for cash is lying to themselves. Anyone who believes their paycheck is what's making or breaking the SST in a $30T/year economy is beyond foolish.
Younger generations are paying lower tax rates than at any point in the last century. What they're absorbing now, more than ever, is the cost of private debts and private profit-seeking.
I actually donate extra to social security since I'm so grateful for the world the boomers made for us!
So if a government is going to print money, might as well print it for the citizens who are going to pay more in taxes. And wildly and sadly, citizens receiving social security will pay more in taxes if they have more to spend (and also get taxed on it as income, oddly enough). Modern Monetary Theory states this, giving tax breaks to corporations increases inflation further and only puts the burden on the workers
While some Republicans supported the legislation, others argued it was unsustainable and would hasten the program’s insolvency.
There is a very simple solution to the so-called "insolvency", but the qons will fight it tooth and nail, thanks to the owner-donors.
Yup. Raise the income cap. That's all you have to do.
The last time Social Security was majorly reformed was back in the 1980s. They did it specifically to handle the pressures the Baby Boomers would be putting on the system. They set it on a path then, that while not as progressive as anyone on the left would like, was financially sustainable. But when planning something like that, it's a big demographic puzzle. When trying to plan a system for decades into the future, you have to assume a certain population pyramid and income distribution. They set the income cap then at a level where 90% of the income earned in the country would be subject to Social Security tax. We've had similar economic growth to what they estimated; we're not poorer, in terms of raw GDP, than we should be. What's changed is the income distribution. More of the nation's income is earned by those at the top. So now only 80% of the income or so earned is subject to the tax. In reality, we should just eliminate it entirely. Let all income be subject to it. If that ends up with billionaires paying a fortune in to Social Security and receiving a relative pittance of benefit in return, so be it.
To paraphrase Bernie, let them survive on mere billions.
Billionaires - especially ones like Elon - should be thankful that they were permitted to accrue so much wealth on the backs of so many others. Paying it forward by paying their fair share into SS is the very least they could do.
Social Security has (a) no debt and (b) a perpetual source of revenue. Therefore, it can never go bankrupt or become insolvent.
The only question is if it will be forced to reduce its expenses by up to 30%.
It also has a perpetual source of expenses and it's growing faster than the source of income.
But unlike debtors, Social Security can unilaterally reduce its expenses at any time. That's precisely why it cannot go bankrupt or become insolvent.
Are you saying by “reducing” you mean pay out less?
Yes. It's projected that if nothing else changes, in 2033 they will reduce payouts by 23% and thus continue operating for the foreseeable future.
it’s growing faster than the source of income
Not since COVID.
Meanwhile, the qons:
"SS is going to go bankrupt at some point in the future! I can think of no other option but to dismantle the whole thing!"