4 ms·

A lot of solutions for budget shortfalls seem to be focused on increasing burdens and reducing services for the lower classes. Maybe some of these shortfalls co

A lot of solutions for budget shortfalls seem to be focused on increasing burdens and reducing services for the lower classes. Maybe some of these shortfalls could be made up for by bringing the tax rates on the wealthy and corporations back up to pre-Reagan era levels, and also recouping some of the trillions in tax avoidance money hiding in offshore shelters? This seems more preferable to me than nickle and diming the elderly.

anovikov 9y ago
Well, people are supposed to fund their own pensions. This is not a tool of redistribution. If they life longer, it is logical they have to either retire later, get lower pensions, or contribute more, or all of the above.
- mikeash 9y ago
  Or get paid more.
- gulbanana 9y ago
  Why are they "supposed to" do that? It's in the interest of society as a whole to make sure that everyone is looked after in their old age.
  - lr4444lr 9y ago
    Because their union negotiates benefits on behalf of only their members, not society at large. That's not meant to imply general social security is bad or should be done away with. But these funds are public charter corporations that operate on behalf of a single labor group of voluntary association by its members.
  - throwaway91111 9y ago
    And you really think a pension is the best way to provide for the elderly? Please.
  - verelo 9y ago
    The US has to pick model for right or wrong. Saying it's in everyone's best interests to look after people is totally true, but it's not really the design of the US social system. The US is free market, in a free market you look after yourself and in return are a little less regulated and/or taxed. Both work, but yeah...in the current model, it anticipates people looking after their own retirement plans. In my opinion, most people are incapable of planning for their future. I've probably done a great job in comparison to others, but I often wonder if it's going to be enough.
    - Retric 9y ago
      US pension model (Social Security) does do redistribution just from the middle class to the lower class and single people to married people.
      - lr4444lr 9y ago
        I doubt that's true, in fact, could be the reverse. SS is not enough in many cases for poor people to live on because they have less in savings, but if they earn too much working, they can't qualify for SS. They also have shorter lifespans. Middle class people in general live longer and can afford to retire earlier because SS complements their savings, which transfers to them the taxes on the wages of the poor.
        Retric 9y ago
        The gap is large enough it's really just math. TLDR; Some people get 70+% more per dollar put into the system. Further, there is no income cap on social security, you simply get deferred payments, but at 70 earnings stop counting. AKA if you take it at 62 and make enough money to get 1/2 as much from SS at 70 it's recalculated and you get more money than if you had started at 62. Anyway try some numbers: https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/quickcalc/index.html https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/quickcalc/index.html Date of birth: 6/15/1950 Current earnings: $40,000.00 Retirement month: 6/2020 = $1,564.00/month. Double earnings to 80k and keep other number the same and you get: $2,510.00 which is much less than 3,128 or 2x $1,564.00/month. Drop that to 20k and it's still $1,090.00.per month which 73.7% better ROI than someone making 80k per year. Now yes lifespan is critical, but not enough to make up the 73+% gap. Marriage on the other hand can provide more than a 50% benefit on it's own which shifts things even more dramatically.
- blindwatchmaker 9y ago
  I don't think it's axiomatic that individuals should be funding their own pensions. I feel a lot of these problems that keep popping up have the same fundamental root cause: governments (and the non-wealthy) have less resources, as more of those resources end up concentrated in fewer hands over time which has certainly been the case in first world countries over the last few decades. Proposed solutions of austerity and cutting and degrading services even further for the lower classes are exacerbating this tendency. I'm not sure what the endgame here is supposed to be.
  - orangecrush4000 9y ago
    Oh, so other people should fund their pensions?

anovikov 9y ago

Well, people are supposed to fund their own pensions. This is not a tool of redistribution. If they life longer, it is logical they have to either retire later, get lower pensions, or contribute more, or all of the above.

mikeash 9y ago
Or get paid more.
gulbanana 9y ago
Why are they "supposed to" do that? It's in the interest of society as a whole to make sure that everyone is looked after in their old age.
- lr4444lr 9y ago
  Because their union negotiates benefits on behalf of only their members, not society at large. That's not meant to imply general social security is bad or should be done away with. But these funds are public charter corporations that operate on behalf of a single labor group of voluntary association by its members.
- throwaway91111 9y ago
  And you really think a pension is the best way to provide for the elderly? Please.
- verelo 9y ago
  The US has to pick model for right or wrong. Saying it's in everyone's best interests to look after people is totally true, but it's not really the design of the US social system. The US is free market, in a free market you look after yourself and in return are a little less regulated and/or taxed. Both work, but yeah...in the current model, it anticipates people looking after their own retirement plans. In my opinion, most people are incapable of planning for their future. I've probably done a great job in comparison to others, but I often wonder if it's going to be enough.
  - Retric 9y ago
    US pension model (Social Security) does do redistribution just from the middle class to the lower class and single people to married people.
    - lr4444lr 9y ago
      I doubt that's true, in fact, could be the reverse. SS is not enough in many cases for poor people to live on because they have less in savings, but if they earn too much working, they can't qualify for SS. They also have shorter lifespans. Middle class people in general live longer and can afford to retire earlier because SS complements their savings, which transfers to them the taxes on the wages of the poor.
      - Retric 9y ago
        The gap is large enough it's really just math. TLDR; Some people get 70+% more per dollar put into the system. Further, there is no income cap on social security, you simply get deferred payments, but at 70 earnings stop counting. AKA if you take it at 62 and make enough money to get 1/2 as much from SS at 70 it's recalculated and you get more money than if you had started at 62. Anyway try some numbers: https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/quickcalc/index.html https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/quickcalc/index.html Date of birth: 6/15/1950 Current earnings: $40,000.00 Retirement month: 6/2020 = $1,564.00/month. Double earnings to 80k and keep other number the same and you get: $2,510.00 which is much less than 3,128 or 2x $1,564.00/month. Drop that to 20k and it's still $1,090.00.per month which 73.7% better ROI than someone making 80k per year. Now yes lifespan is critical, but not enough to make up the 73+% gap. Marriage on the other hand can provide more than a 50% benefit on it's own which shifts things even more dramatically.
blindwatchmaker 9y ago
I don't think it's axiomatic that individuals should be funding their own pensions. I feel a lot of these problems that keep popping up have the same fundamental root cause: governments (and the non-wealthy) have less resources, as more of those resources end up concentrated in fewer hands over time which has certainly been the case in first world countries over the last few decades. Proposed solutions of austerity and cutting and degrading services even further for the lower classes are exacerbating this tendency. I'm not sure what the endgame here is supposed to be.
- orangecrush4000 9y ago
  Oh, so other people should fund their pensions?