4 ms·

The first should be prioritized much more than the second anyways. There's no reason SS is age based and not means based

malandrew 4y ago
That’s not the contract though. I and many others here have been paying in for years with the expectation that I can withdraw at 65. Honestly we should allow people to opt out entirely if they can demonstrate that they are adequately funding their own retirement/disability on their own plan. Social Security as it exists now is a Ponzi scheme.
- klipklop 4y ago
  Yeah if given a chance I would 100% opt out. Even if it was post tax dollars. I would rather manage my own future.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    Social security is quasi-mandatory minimal insurance against you failing your personal retirement investments (quasi-mandatory because their are a narrow set of employers not required to participate, so you can opt-out by choosing to work for one of them.)
- throwaway6734 4y ago
  What contract? I'm in my early 30s and when I look at social security, healthcare costs, and housing costs I see the results of older generations shirking their load at the cost of future generations
- tunesmith 4y ago
  > Social Security as it exists now is a Ponzi scheme. Only if younger generations disappear Children-of-Men style.
jandrewrogers 4y ago
> There's no reason SS is age based and not means based Political support for Social Security has always been based on the proposition that it is universal and that the benefit reflects contribution. While not required by law -- Social Security taxes are an ordinary income tax per the US Supreme Court -- this has been the explicit contract the government has made and reaffirmed repeatedly with the people for generations. It is an embedded part of the institution of Social Security. Fundamentally changing the rules at this point would be viewed as a serious violation of trust between the people and the government, at a time when that trust is already at historic lows. Pragmatic politicians also understand that this would greatly erode support for Social Security taxes, since willingness to pay that 12.4% income surtax is strongly connected to the conception that this money will be returned to them in old age. Most politicians have the survival instinct to not even suggest this is not the case, legal technicalities aside.

malandrew 4y ago

That’s not the contract though. I and many others here have been paying in for years with the expectation that I can withdraw at 65. Honestly we should allow people to opt out entirely if they can demonstrate that they are adequately funding their own retirement/disability on their own plan. Social Security as it exists now is a Ponzi scheme.

klipklop 4y ago
Yeah if given a chance I would 100% opt out. Even if it was post tax dollars. I would rather manage my own future.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  Social security is quasi-mandatory minimal insurance against you failing your personal retirement investments (quasi-mandatory because their are a narrow set of employers not required to participate, so you can opt-out by choosing to work for one of them.)
throwaway6734 4y ago
What contract? I'm in my early 30s and when I look at social security, healthcare costs, and housing costs I see the results of older generations shirking their load at the cost of future generations
tunesmith 4y ago
> Social Security as it exists now is a Ponzi scheme. Only if younger generations disappear Children-of-Men style.

jandrewrogers 4y ago

> There's no reason SS is age based and not means based Political support for Social Security has always been based on the proposition that it is universal and that the benefit reflects contribution. While not required by law -- Social Security taxes are an ordinary income tax per the US Supreme Court -- this has been the explicit contract the government has made and reaffirmed repeatedly with the people for generations. It is an embedded part of the institution of Social Security. Fundamentally changing the rules at this point would be viewed as a serious violation of trust between the people and the government, at a time when that trust is already at historic lows. Pragmatic politicians also understand that this would greatly erode support for Social Security taxes, since willingness to pay that 12.4% income surtax is strongly connected to the conception that this money will be returned to them in old age. Most politicians have the survival instinct to not even suggest this is not the case, legal technicalities aside.