3 ms·
That isn't enough to solve the problem. https://www.crfb.org/socialsecurityreformer/ https://www.crfb.org/socialsecurityreformer/
by Hammershaft 10mo ago
That isn't enough to solve the problem.
https://www.crfb.org/socialsecurityreformer/ https://www.crfb.org/socialsecurityreformer/
- whimsicalism 10mo ago? the OP proposed raising the contribution limit & also hinted at some means testing "and you can't afford to live" -- which combined would absolutely be enough to close the gap depending on how aggressive you are with these changes.
- bdangubic 10mo agoI would let government decide “you cant afford to live” as much as I would let OJ Simpson date my daughter. but that would be a hoot as two parties controlling the government change. while one is in power, 99.99% of retirees would qualify, the other - 0.000065% :)
- whimsicalism 10mo agovacuous anti-government take that doesn’t really do anything to contribute to the discussion, imo. essentially “keep the government out of my social security!”
- bdangubic 10mo agoyou have a comment to say what you don’t disagree with or just shooting the breeze?
- FreakLegion 10mo agoAccording to the site it is. Revenues -> Eliminate Tax Max without Benefit Credit (parent's #2) closes the gap by 68%. Benefit Formula -> Slow Benefit Growth for Top Half of Earners (closest option to parent's #3) closes the gap by 41%. Together these keep the program solvent indefinitely.