@MiriVinni Nobody signed a contract because nobody was given a choice. The payroll tax was mandatory for your entire working life, and the government sold the program for 90 years as an "earned benefit" you pay into.
@MiriVinni People reasonably built retirement plans around SS, and someone over 50 has very little runway left to make up a shortfall. Calling that "neurotic" ignores the real risk: SS is projected to run short in the early 30s, at which point ~20% cut kick in unless Congress acts.
@BroDudeManGuy11@SteveOnSpeed It’s a seriously easy fix, but it affects people with higher income and they’re the ones with power in Washington, which is why you don’t know about this
@BroDudeManGuy11@SteveOnSpeed And whether those who paid in more get anything extra from a lifted cap depends on the bill. Several Democratic proposals tax earnings above $400,000 but give little or no added benefit credit for them
@BroDudeManGuy11@SteveOnSpeed Benefits do rise with earnings, but the formula is deliberately weighted toward lower earners: it replaces 90% of the first slice of average earnings, then 32%, then just 15% of the top slice. So higher earners get more dollars but a much lower return on what they paid in.
@FrankLuntz Rich people don’t want you to know that SS would be fully funded if we just raised the annual $$ a person can contribute. You see, it’s capped. For those making a higher income, they stop paying SS tax at some point in the year. Just raise it a little bit and it will be fixed.
@pansareV Rich people don’t want you to know that SS would be fully funded if we just raised the annual $$ a person can contribute. You see, it’s capped. For those making a higher income, they stop paying SS tax at some point in the year. Just raise it a little bit and it will be fixed.
@AngelaBelcamino Who’s being asked to pay more? All we have to do is raise the maximum amount that a person can pay in per year. That only affects the upper 10% of people who make a lot of money. Would solve the problem. But rich people don’t want you to know that.
@MattH_4America The hyperbolic and reactionary. Social Security will be underfunded by 20%. Easily solvable by raising the max amount that could be contributed, which wouldn’t affect 90% of Americans. Just those who make the most money.
@MattWalshBlog For those who don’t know, as an example, I stop paying SS tax in August every year bc I hit the max. People like Elon pay the max in the first 2 seconds of the year. RAISE THE MAX ANNUAL CONTRIBUTION and the problem is solved. 90%+ of you wouldn’t be affected.
@MattWalshBlog Just raise the max amount someone contributes into the system per year. That taxes the rich, whom you apparently despise for their greed, doesn’t affect the average worker, and completely takes care of the problem. But that makes the rich cry innit?
@MattWalshBlog Today’s “older Americans” funded their parents' benefits the same way, which is how the system was designed. They paid into the system as well.
@MattWalshBlog MANY retirees have little beyond Social Security, and it's the main thing keeping millions of seniors out of poverty. Median wealth (or “average wealth”) statistics says nothing about those folks.
@brivael Correlation ≠ causation. Bolivia's left imploded over fuel shortages and infighting, Chile voted on crime, Argentina on inflation. Latin American voters don't need this bonkers USAID theory to explain their own choices.
@brivael USAID money often went the other way. Its democracy programs in Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua famously funded opposition to leftist governments.