I would tend to agree that this seems like the simplest approach and would probably be the best bang (helping people) for the (regulatory) buck. It essentially

I would tend to agree that this seems like the simplest approach and would probably be the best bang (helping people) for the (regulatory) buck. It essentially becomes UBI for older folks. Personally (and I realize this goes against a lot of the HN values here), I'd like to see some form of reduced benefit paid out if people are already earning income. If social security guaranteed a minimum monthly income, but didn't pay out what you were already making in other income, it would both help to maintain solvency of the program, and also encourage older folks to retire and make more room for younger people to move up in the workforce. The big problem with that approach is I imagine it would probably cost more to police than it would save, and there are likely some unforeseen consequences to the way it would encourage people to act.