4 ms·
>I already noted that this is a political impossibility, Considering your argument is based on your belief 21% equals 100%, I should hope so!
by staticman2 2y ago
>I already noted that this is a political impossibility,
Considering your argument is based on your belief 21% equals 100%, I should hope so!
- anonym29 2y agoI don't believe I've posed the arguement that 21% and 100% are the same thing, just that an automatic 21% reduction is where we are headed if nothing changes, as the way the program is currently structured and funded is unsustainable and is going to deplete the trust fund by 2033, which is a projection from the SSA themselves.
- staticman2 2y agoI'm sure you actually understand reduction of 21% does not mean you will "not see a penny" (i.e. a 100% reduction) yet that's what you wrote, so here we are.
- anonym29 2y agoThe people who are expecting benefits in 2033 and the people under 40 are two entirely separate generations. The latter will not inherit a Social Security system that is more fiscally stable than the former, only worse.