4 ms·

Yes, very much talking about things like means testing to prevent thing like this, while maintaining financial solvency.

• mikewarot 3y ago
  So, basically you want to renege on the social contract that's been in place since the 1930s, and replace it with layers of bureaucrats? This results in people who are in their declining years having to supplicate themselves if they want to avoid ruin. That's inhumane. Means testing is a way to throw away massive amounts of money on administration, instead of sending it where it needs to go, in order to help the citizens.
  • scoofy 3y ago
    Supposing the system is unsustainable (it is), how would you propose dealing with a system that can’t pay for itself long term? Especially given the fact that those paying in now will necessarily get back less, even though they will need to pay more to maintain the status quo?
    • mikewarot 3y ago
      The system is said to be solvent for at least one more generation, perhaps 2, even at current demographics, but for one small change... removing the cap on paying into the system as your income rises.
      • scoofy 3y ago
        Again, you’re changing the deal as much as I am. Asking some people to pay in more than they will get out is just means testing on the front end, and it means tests the young to pay the old.
        • mikewarot 3y ago
          Removing an artificial cap on contributions isn't a means test. It's removing a give away to the rich. Means testing shouldn't be required to receive benefits when you retire.