Social Security 2100 Act: Reform in 2019!?! | Devin Carroll

This shows us that the Democrats are not shy about governing or coming up with real, serious plans for the Social Security crisis. I like this plan very much.

Here is the outline, for details please consult the video:
#1 Benefit Increase
#2 Switch to CPI-E
#3 Increase Minimum Benefit
#4 Decrease Social Security Taxes
#5 Increase Maximum Wage Base
#6 Increase Payroll Taxes

Social Security 2100 Act: Reform in 2019!?! | Devin Carroll
dur:7:33

 

#4 Decrease Social Security Taxes
#6 Increase Payroll Taxes


Whut?

 

#4 @ 4:44
If your income is below $100,000 (married filing jointly) you're not going to be taxed on your benefits.

#6 @ 6:23
The FICA tax is going up to 14.8% from 12.40%, that means the employee and employer both pay 7.4% each, up from 6.2%.

 

#4 Is a non starter there is no way they should exclude $100,000 in income from taxation for a single or a couple.
The wage base should go to unlimited.

 

The way I see it number four means that the benefits that you are receiving, at the end of your life, will be taxed or not is the case may be.

 

And someone in my situation would pay the full 14.8%, because I don't have a kindly employer to share the burden.

 

Actually I'm in the same boat as you.

 

Kill Social Security altogether. Throw it straight in the dumpster. Pay out whatever got paid in with 5% interest and be done with that welfare program.

It was originally called 'social supplement'. Stupid Americans think it's a retirement plan.

 

In general I support conservatives when it comes to taxes, but in the case of social security I agree with the left - remove the tax base ceiling. Some people have a monthly social security under $1000. That’s ridiculous, even if the retiree is a long life loser, I don’t want to see retirees starving

 

And once the 401K was introduced in the late 1970's within the Reagan aDMINISTRATION YEARS OVER 100,000 PRIVATE PENSION PLANS WERE CANCELLED AND THE MONIES WHICH USED TO FUND THEM WAS DIVVIED UP BETWEEN ceo'S,eXECUTIVES AND bOARDS which helped create the giant chasm between executive pay and rank and file employee pay.

 

Social security is a ponzi scheme. Now, it's got a government behind it which can just print money anyway, but that doesnt make the problem go away.

An ageing population will be catestrophic for social security. As the ratio of working age to retirees increases the young have to pay more taxes to cover the old. This can become a positive feedback loop as young people are even more unable to afford children.

So we need to import hoardes of foreigners who get it on like rabbits.

Until their countries develop and their birth rates drop below replacement too.

Then the house of cards falls and someone is in some deep ****.

 

Two ways to fix social security: 1: Remove the income cap on the tax to get the rich to contribute too. 2: Raise the minimum age for recieving benefits to 72. 3: Add a wealth tax on the fortunes of the rich to fund the program too.

Now the program is saved and we can even greatly increase benefits.

 

That sounded like 3 ways to a cluster. Just wind the thing down and be done with it.

Adding taxes is not magic fairy dust. What you are describing is yet another form of socialism. Mr. Lenin would approve.

 

If you end social security, then you screw over the retirees who have paid into the program and now are getting nothing for it. Raising the tax limit for social security will make the program viable and only impact people who are already doing very well. Its a win win.

 

I don't agree with number 2. If you worked in the trades your whole life your body is shot by your sixties

 

Expand it to a true pension program

 

When social security started the minimum age was 65 and life expectancy was 63. The number of tax payers to retirees was 42 to 1, and in 1950 it was 16 to 1. Now it is 2.5 to 1 and soon to be 2 to 1. To make the program viable you have to increase the ratio of payers to retirees.

 

I said wind it down and pay everything out what was paid in plus 5% year over year ROI.

You also have to realize that social security is just a tax without a guarantee of payback.

 

Problem is then you are screwing me because I am going to have to pay for those in social security and all the current workers who have been paying in thousands every year since they started working. And you are expecting me to get nothing for it. I'm not voting for that. Sorry.

 

I dont agree. Increase benefits and turn it into a true pension program. Tax corporations more.

The death of pensions is criminal

 

I'd instead tax the rich more and make social security solely responsible retirement not pensions.

 

That's what I mean

 

Oh here it is.....let's screw the rich! I am sick and tired of jealous, envious people who promote socialism for their own greedy interests.

 

My position isn't based on envy but based on that our economy is made to benefit the rich, while workers see slow wage growth. Since the wealthy are doing so well, they can afford to contribute to programs that help people retire.

 

Here is the problem. In social security, current taxpayers pay current retirees. If current taxpayer fully fund current retirees, then now current taxpayers will be owed a lot of money, which future taxpayers will have to pay. Those people paying out everyone will be future taxpayers and will need to be paid themselves. So it never ends. Or, any new workers don't pay social security, but that results in a dwindling pool of payers and a growing number of people retiring, which doesn't work.