3 ms·

Isn't Social Security just age restricted basic income? It seems strange to have UBI and then give citizens another check after they hit retirement age.

by abannin 10y ago

maxerickson 10y ago
The retirement part of Social Security is conditional. The amount of the benefit is determined based on working salary and there is a (fairly minimal) amount of working years that must be recorded to receive it. https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10070.pdf https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10070.pdf The disability system is different (but also obviously conditional).
- abannin 10y ago
  It looks like I don't fully understand the system. I suspect there is a need based system that supplements Social Security benefits if the recipient is below the poverty line?
lumberjack 10y ago
What? No. People worked for that money. It's more like a mandated savings account or mandatory old age insurance or something like that.
- chimeracoder 10y ago
  > What? No. People worked for that money. It's more like a mandated savings account or mandatory old age insurance or something like that. Well, if you take an insurance model to Social Security, the only real 'risk' is the question of how long you'll live. And depending on how much you make, it's very possible to pay in more to Social Security before the age of 65 than you can expect to receive in benefits even for a reasonably long lifespan, making it a redistribution rather than a mandatory savings account. Put another way, even if you assume that Social Security will be around in 40 years[0], if you get a high-paying job straight out of college and keep getting paid at that rate (adjusted for inflation), Social Security is basically guaranteed to pay you less money than you would have if you just kept the withholdings yourself and stuck it in a regular savings account. Whether or not you think that's a good thing, it's very clearly a redistribution and not an insurance. [0] and also ignore the fact that the benefits being paid in 40 years will be based on the taxpayers 40 years from now, not the taxpayers today

Isn't Social Security just age restricted basic income? It seems strange to have UBI and then give citizens another check after they hit retirement age.

by abannin 10y ago

Isn't Social Security just age restricted basic income? It seems strange to have UBI and then give citizens another check after they hit retirement age.

maxerickson 10y ago

The retirement part of Social Security is conditional. The amount of the benefit is determined based on working salary and there is a (fairly minimal) amount of working years that must be recorded to receive it. https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10070.pdf https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10070.pdf The disability system is different (but also obviously conditional).

abannin 10y ago
It looks like I don't fully understand the system. I suspect there is a need based system that supplements Social Security benefits if the recipient is below the poverty line?

lumberjack 10y ago

What? No. People worked for that money. It's more like a mandated savings account or mandatory old age insurance or something like that.

chimeracoder 10y ago
> What? No. People worked for that money. It's more like a mandated savings account or mandatory old age insurance or something like that. Well, if you take an insurance model to Social Security, the only real 'risk' is the question of how long you'll live. And depending on how much you make, it's very possible to pay in more to Social Security before the age of 65 than you can expect to receive in benefits even for a reasonably long lifespan, making it a redistribution rather than a mandatory savings account. Put another way, even if you assume that Social Security will be around in 40 years[0], if you get a high-paying job straight out of college and keep getting paid at that rate (adjusted for inflation), Social Security is basically guaranteed to pay you less money than you would have if you just kept the withholdings yourself and stuck it in a regular savings account. Whether or not you think that's a good thing, it's very clearly a redistribution and not an insurance. [0] and also ignore the fact that the benefits being paid in 40 years will be based on the taxpayers 40 years from now, not the taxpayers today