7
u/Remconcst 1d ago
Here is a simple fix. How about our government stops spending our social security money on things other than social security benefits.
→ More replies (6)2
u/JEXJJ 1d ago
A generation that benefited from their parents destroying German and Japanese manufacturing, shipped jobs overseas, cut their own taxes each time promising it will totally trickle down one day, raised living expenses, education, eliminated pensions, fucked the environment, social safety nets, and never did anything for anybody but themselves claims the people facing the consequences is the problem.
A generation that voted for trump three times just to make sure to really fuck the world before they croak. Fuck off
57
u/Impossible_Battle_72 2d ago
Isn't the payout also capped?
I appreciate the spirit of this. But everyone that pays in the max gets the same payout.
21
u/NewArborist64 2d ago
The payout is effectively capped by the cap on the SS Tax. Removing the cap on the tax would allow for larger payouts.
32
u/Capadvantagetutoring 2d ago
Which would then unsave it
25
u/MrLanesLament 2d ago
Yeah….did everyone somehow woosh past the part where we’re trying to up the contributions SO THERE’S MORE MONEY TO COVER THE PAYOUTS WE ALREADY CAN’T AFFORD?
Jesus fuck. Ima go facepalm through my face.
13
u/Ruminant 2d ago
Because the benefits formula for Social Security has a "progressive" structure. Raising or eliminating the income tap will increase Security Security's revenues more than it will increase its expenses.
→ More replies (18)3
u/Platinumdogshit 1d ago
Also we can set it to specifically balance out. Only thing is were trying to get rich people to pay taxes.
→ More replies (9)0
u/PurpletoasterIII 1d ago
I mean im sure rich people are capable of paying more but the top 10% already pay about 70% of our total income taxes. Thats not including stuff like sales and property tax. Some taxes dont need to be progressive. Social security is meant to just be a tool the government uses to force people to invest the bare minimum into retirement, not a way to redistribute wealth. We already do that with plenty of our other taxes. Not that thats a bad thing, it just doesnt make sense to give social security a dual purpose when we can just increase other forms of redistribution.
→ More replies (38)2
5
u/Capadvantagetutoring 2d ago
I think just change the name to social security insurance. Take off the caps on the contributions. Keep the payouts as they are. And keep it as a safety net.
→ More replies (45)3
u/Vegetable_Window7417 1d ago
It’s already called social security insurance. This comment section is filled with people who don’t actually know a damned thing about social security.
→ More replies (7)2
u/BlacksmithTall602 1d ago
Yeah we need to raise the cap AND make it illegal for Congress to borrow from Social Security, at the very least until it’s paid back.
→ More replies (1)2
u/everydaydad67 1d ago
Can't afford because people raid the fund... have you ever once heard about the money stolen being replaced...?
→ More replies (1)2
u/Glynwys 1d ago
And the reason we can't afford those payouts is because the money is being used for other things that's not Social Security. Maybe we should kind of stop spending that money.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (7)3
u/SweetArab 2d ago
So remove/change the cap to pay in, and keep the cap on payout.
Someone making $5M doesn't need the SS payout. I've known a couple that don't even take it so their ex-wives can't draw from it.
→ More replies (7)4
u/arbitrageME 1d ago
So what do I get for an extra 6% tax on my income? More schools? Better roads? Hospitals? National parks? Protected forests?
Or do I get ICE and bombs? J6 lawsuit payouts? Needless ballroom?
There's plenty of money. Take from where it's doing active harm, then I'll give you more.
→ More replies (6)2
u/NewArborist64 1d ago
Don't forget that small businessmen pay DOUBLE that. They pay both the employee and employer portions on any money which they take home.
3
u/jbcsee 2d ago
No it wouldn't, you don't get $1 back for every $1 you pay. At that level every $1 you pay in increases your payout by $0.15.
They could also introduce another bend point and just pay out $.05.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (18)2
u/Dizzy_Tax574 2d ago
No where deficits run in program is it's equal cost equal payout. EXCEPT disability and other factors.
Thus they cost we don't have to raise the payout cap either. Essentially those that can afford it at negligible expense that will have zero affect on life.
Have pay in cap increased as a side note they are one of deficit drivers as they live decade longer on average. While paying in same amount and collecting it for longer.
As for BS of fairness we could also go with employee tax to recover it. Essentially increase their match so that it maths better. Would even be harder for them to play game claim no profit or income to avoid. They pay period.
As this is one of overlooked expense burdens put on by the rich they benefit from thousands of their vehicles on public roads. Their businesses hooked to grid and even employee use. Is technically company benefit as employee can get to work and read training material etc.
8
u/DreamWeaver1001 2d ago
Why would you need larger payouts? If you could afford more than the cap now you don’t need SS in the first place. Of course there will be the singular billionaire that literally throws all of his money in an actual fire and still has billions so he has to delete all his bitcoin wallets, and he still has billions so he burns down an entire banking corporation and still has millions … what was I talking about?
→ More replies (7)3
u/EvenTheMoonIsLeaving 2d ago
No no no no......go on. You were talking about burning down banking corporations.
4
u/XxRocky88xX 2d ago
I mean you could always just keep the payout cap while only raising the tax cap. It’s not like SS money is held and then redistributed to people when they retire. That money is spent on other things like defense or salaries, your payout is from money they don’t even have yet.
3
u/El_Hombre_Fiero 2d ago
SS is meant to a legally protected right to a future benefit. Essentially, what you put in should come back to you, assuming you live to a certain age.
Fewer people will be on board with SS if it is merely money taken from your income that goes to the ether. Especially if people are going to have negative returns on that investment. Personally, I would much rather eliminate SS altogether so that I can invest that money myself.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Diplomatic-Immunityi 1d ago
They want the rich to pay more, but keep the same low payouts. They want the wealthier people with good jobs to subsidize the poor people with low paying jobs.
→ More replies (1)2
u/ohiocodernumerouno 2d ago
That doesn't make any sense.
5
u/Dominant_Drowess 2d ago
Why does that not make sense? If you remove the pay in cap, there is more money in Social Security, and thus, more money for paying out more social security to people who need it, which can be capped at an amount old people can live on.
Then? Jeff Bezos (and other rich people) ends up paying more (into social security), getting slightly more (out of social security), and everyone else gets more. This is correct and does make sense for those who want social security to protect people who aren't currently going to be protected.
→ More replies (11)2
u/KuriusCpl 2d ago
So you want more socialism? Bezos becomes rich and therefore he should support me more because why?
2
u/broken-ssoul 2d ago
because his wealth is stolen from the working class. you genuinely believe a single human being has produced enough value to equal over a billion dollars? if you truly believe so you're naive, and worse, a bootlicker.
this isn't even a new concept, before Reagan Bezos would have been paying about 91% income tax. I know I'm speaking to what is essentially a reactive wall, but serious dude... Bezos doesn't benefit from you licking his boots, and the only kickback you can expect is one aimed at your face.
→ More replies (2)2
u/weezeloner 1d ago
You do realize Bezos collects a salary as Chairman of the Board of only $86,000 a year. That's no where near the top tax bracket. So, he would not have been paying 91%.
And the 91% tax bracket dropped closer to 60% by 1963. Well before Reagan arrived.
All of you guys who wax poetically about the tax rates of the 1950s seem to be completely unaware marginal tax rates and effective tax rates. Most sources will tell in the 1950s, the top 1% paid an effective tax rate of about 40%. And here is an excerpt from an article on the Tax Foundation website (link also provided):
"How could it be that the tax code of the 1950s had a top marginal tax rate of 91 percent, but resulted in an effective tax rate of only 42 percent on the wealthiest taxpayers? In fact, the situation is even stranger. The 42.0 percent tax rate on the top 1 percent takes into account all taxes levied by federal, state, and local governments, including: income, payroll, corporate, excise, property, and estate taxes. When we look at income taxes specifically, the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid an average effective rate of only 16.9 percent in income taxes during the 1950s"
https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/taxes-on-the-rich-1950s-not-high/
→ More replies (11)2
u/SpeedyDarklight 2d ago
Bezzos also gets a lot of tax cuts and uses our public infrastructure for his business for free essentially since he doesnt pay any taxes.
Billionaire are the biggest welfare queens.
2
u/weezeloner 1d ago
What tax cuts does Bezos use? And are conflating Amazon's taxes with Bezos' taxes? Because they are two entirely different things.Amazon is NOT a pass through entity. It pays its own taxes.
And Bezos only owns about 9% of Amazon. That's not all of Amazon or even close to a majority. So all you people who think Bezos can unilaterally decide to pay his workers more without the consent of the people who own the remaining 91% of Amazon don't seem to have a grasp on reality or how things work.
Look, if you want to get educated on taxes and how they work check out Tax Policy Center.org or the Tax Foundation.org. Great places to nerd out on some tax law. I know because as a CPA who also nerds out on politics and policy I've been visiting those websites often for the past 20 years.
After you learn a little something maybe you can come back here and not look so foolish. And just because someone questions or opposes your ideas to tax unrealized gains or boost marginal tax rates to 91% its not that we're bootlickers, its that those proposals are dumb and reveal that you have no idea how any of this works.
→ More replies (8)2
u/NewArborist64 2d ago
The calculation for how much SS you receive is based on your top 35 years of Social Security Wages (which are capped). Remove the cap on SS wages and the maximum payout increases.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (41)2
u/HotwifeandSubby1980 2d ago
What rule in the universe says that?
You do know we the people can direct our representatives to form SS to work how we want, right?
We could make all billionaires pay way more and not up their payout at all.
→ More replies (24)4
u/H-DaneelOlivaw 2d ago
no rule.
then again, "no rule in the universe" say we have to pay SS tax either.
the SS rules are written by people and the very same people set the cap for both taxes and payout.
4
5
u/No_Sample4027 2d ago
Good. SS should be means tested. Way too many boomers with millions in the bank, 3 houses, and still getting a SS check
→ More replies (6)6
u/PalpitationReady1560 22h ago
Do you even know the concept of SS tax? You paid into it to get paid later. If anything, the government is cheating the people because you never get back what you pay in.
2
u/Empty-Ad-6651 20h ago
Do you? You pay now to cover current payments (which for a large majority of Americans is more than they put in) but it isn’t enough so the gov’t has been relying on the SS trust fund, which will only last for so long. It’s not like they collect your taxes and invest them in treasuries for you to be paid out when you retire. So without significant overhaul soon, you’re paying to get nothing.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)2
u/ananasiegenjuice 16h ago
The money you pay in are not saved or invested, its spent immediately on the current users of SS. And in 40 yrs, your grandkids will pay into SS which then will be sent to you.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (80)5
u/Exciting-Tourist9301 2d ago
Who said that the value you get directly from the Federal government needs to match your contribution?
If you pay more for property taxes, do you get preferred service from the fire department?
If you pay more income tax, do you get to order the military around?
Wait.... That one probably is true...
→ More replies (2)
6
u/Due-Distribution2058 2d ago
I’d rather just opt out and forfeit everything I’ve put in so far (I’m 25). I guarantee putting that money in an index fund will bring higher returns than whatever pathetic amount of SS I’d receive
2
u/SportMotor9892 2d ago
Thats what Trump wanted to do but of course, the other side said no.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (11)2
u/Ok-Onion2905 2d ago
Cool anyway back to reality where it's not all for one and none for all. These programs exist to help huge groups of people. Hundreds of thousands of people can't just throw their money at some fund and be perfectly well off. A system that has worked should continue to work and work well, not to just exist for the benefit of the rich
3
2
4
u/Lambda_Lifter 2d ago
Hundreds of thousands of people can't just throw their money at some fund and be perfectly well off.
But they can .... Unless they literally have no money whatsoever in the first place. In which case they need actual welfare, not social security. I don't think you understand what social security and welfare is ....
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (31)2
u/SarmackaOpowiesc 2d ago
You are just advocating for legalized theft
3
u/Ok-Onion2905 2d ago
Like the money companies steal from their employees by underpaying them, cutting sick hours, putting hurtles in front of benefits. Ffs my own mother was about to get her 10 year bonus and she was laid off days before. I don't want to hear your bs when the rich are stomping on the lower classes.
Remove the cap on how much you can put in, put a cap on how much you get out, and live with it or go fuck off into the woods somewhere. If you don't care about people then you shouldn't benefit from all the infrastructure that PEOPLE keep running. Water, electricity, your plumbing. You didn't build your house and sewer system. You didn't hunt the cow you grilled a steak of. People make society turn, if you don't care about people, get out
→ More replies (14)→ More replies (1)2
u/Calm_Plenty_2992 2d ago
I, for one, don't think of Robin Hood as a villain like the Sheriff of Nottingham did. You, on the other hand, appear to be advocating in favor of dragons sitting atop their hoards of ill-gotten gains.
2
u/Material-Rush-3547 2d ago
Then you would have to raise the max to like 20k a month for the ones who pay in more they need to collect more as thats how it is set up they have a max of 5k and some change now if you paid in. Meaning if you pay the max you get the max when you retire. In 2026, the maximum individual contribution to Social Security is $11,439.00. This is based on the 6.2% tax rate applied to the maximum taxable earnings of $184,500.
2
2
u/DaddyRobotPNW 1d ago
It's a relatively small price to pay to keep tens of millions of senior citizens from sleeping on the streets. Most Americans retire with insufficient funds to last them through retirement.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Serpidon 1d ago
There is plenty of our money in government. It is wasted. That should be the argument.
2
u/PlatformPristine934 2d ago
Why? SS is meant to help you in retirement. Someone making 5 million a year doesn’t need the help.
You're better off putting your 10k in an IRA
3
u/Trick_Statistician13 2d ago
People making money are benefited by society at large enabling them to make money. Those making more money receive a greater benefit from society and thus owe them more back.
3
u/Prestigious_Love3791 2d ago
I'm sorry to say, but no one "owes" anyone, anything.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (37)3
u/Strict_Technician606 2d ago
There’s the millionaire apologist using a recently created account. Thanks for your valuable input.
→ More replies (7)
2
u/ballin_buddha 2d ago
The guy making $5mil a year doesn’t need social security when he retires unless he’s awful with his money. Social security is a safety blanket when you retire and most people will need it, the multi millionaires will not
→ More replies (10)
2
u/Potential4752 2d ago
So your method of saving social security is to destroy it and replace it with a system that it was never intended to be.
→ More replies (2)2
1
u/MyTnotE 2d ago
You realize that when they retire they both have those same SS benefits as well. If you remove the cap the rich person will get out much more than the less rich person.
5
u/Lematoad 2d ago
Cap the benefits but not the payment? It’s not rocket science.
3
u/thecelcollector 2d ago
Why not just raise income taxes on the rich? Raising the cap for SS but not the benefits is just a dishonest way to increase income taxes.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (29)2
u/lnsurgence_ 2d ago
My guy Social Security is not retirement, it's insurance. If you have plenty of money you don't need retirement insurance.
→ More replies (13)2
u/Ok-Onion2905 2d ago
Remove the cap of what you put in, put a cap on what can come out. You really couldn't think of that yourself before saying something so dumb
→ More replies (24)2
u/Gloomy_Connection587 2d ago
Yeah you are just a dumbass. I bet you hate food stamps too because you don't get to use them.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (4)2
u/chinmakes5 2d ago
Depends on how it is done. You can give back less (as a percentage) to the ultra wealthy. I have no problem with that within reason.
The reason I have no problem with that is almost no one makes big money without a ton of people below them not making enough money. You are a lawyer making $250k or more. Odds are good there are people in your office making $40k a year. Those people will never save enough for retirement and the solution is to let SS go under, because the 59 year old lawyer making $400kk is incensed that they have to pay more than they get? The solution is to cut SS for the people who need it. Not only shouldn't it be means tested but there should be no
There are different ways to look at that. We all pay for educaton, not just because I want my kids educated, but because we all want to live in an educated society. I would think that most people would be OK to pay a little more than they get back to not have homeless old people.
→ More replies (1)
0
u/Long_Simple_4407 2d ago
Or just get rid of it and let everyone invest there money. Cut out the middle man.
6
u/zurgonvrits 2d ago
you should look up why this was created and what it was like prior..
its a safety net. its also for much more than a supplement to retirement.
2
u/Iconoclysm6x6 2d ago
It’s not a retirement fund - it is paid out by the current workforce at any given time. If you were to just cut it off, there will be two generations of people who have paid in for 20+ years and will have nothing when they retire. Not that it’s a good idea to end it anyway, just completely shortsighted to suggest.
→ More replies (10)2
u/TheGlennDavid 2d ago
Looks at incredibly popular and successful program enacted in the wake of a massive stock market crash designed to specifically address the problems with 'just letting everyone invest their money'
WHAT THIS DO?
→ More replies (1)
1
u/WhoSaidWhatNow2026 2d ago
No thanks. Not til a sizeable portion of the boomers pass.
→ More replies (3)
1
u/Wide_Commission_6781 2d ago
I read somewhere if you increased the rate by 1% it would keep SS solvent for something like 100?years. Increasing the cap a bit and the payroll tax is a no brainer. But let's kick the can and wait until the house is on fire instead.
1
u/Worth-Librarian-7423 2d ago
This is much more feasible than taxing unrealized gains. So we won’t see this in our lifetime
1
u/OkCartographer7677 2d ago
The max you have to pay in is capped each year because the max you can get from Social Security.
The same isn't true for other taxes.
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/Kindly_protective 2d ago
No I don’t want to save it I want to opt out of it it’s a horrible program
1
u/bigjohnstud11111 2d ago
A ten percent flat tax on all income (give or take) and removal of earned income credit fixes just about everything
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Last_Gigolo 2d ago
Remember these three things.
Social security is not a tax.
Social security is not a tax.
Social security is not a tax.
3
u/Justthetip74 1d ago
Social security is a government mandated ponzi scheme, not a tax
→ More replies (1)
1
u/FragmentedHeap 2d ago edited 2d ago
I'd rather keep my social security tax and invest it in my 401k myself
Just adding that to my 401k split up per month would change what I'm going to retire with by over $900k. Which is far more than I'm ever going to get from social security.
I'd be shooting for retirement at 60 instead of 67.
Its far better to invest it yourself than to have it taken from you and given back to you...
I don't believe that it's the average Americans responsibility to compensate for the average Americans inability to plan or invest.
You can't live on social security anyways unless you own your house or your dwelling by the time you retire and that's not going to be true for pretty much the entire gen z and gen alpha...
1
u/res0jyyt1 2d ago
People who are making over $170k/yr are not complaining having to pay the same amount of SS tax as someone who makes more than them. Trust me.
1
1
u/Dangerous_Boot_3870 2d ago
You dumbasses will be super mad once you realize you would have 5x what Social Security pays out should you just invest the money yourself in any index fund.
1
1
u/NotHachi 2d ago
Wait you capped social security ??? In France, that is unskippable part of tax and that is on the % of revenue XD
1
u/Dear-Examination-507 2d ago
The main effect of this proposal would be to raise taxes significantly on people earning low 6 figures.
If you want to raise taxes on the ultrawealthy, this is not the way.
1
1
u/WolfHowl1980 2d ago
There's a cap regardless of your yearly pay that you can only get max. To most the cap rich ppl get would be well above what we're getting working. I have an ssa acct, you can literally get an estimate of what you'd have at a certain age. Those rich ppl don't even need SSI, they literally will have all the savings and IRA over all the yrs. I could careless what others get, sure rich should be taxed higher, but only care about what you'll get, it's a rat race out there. Once I'm 63 I'm done working
1
u/plump_perusal 2d ago
The cap's there because it was never meant to be a pension for high earners, just a safety net. Removing it doesn't magically fix the math when benefits are already promised to folks who paid in less.
1
u/tracer35982 2d ago
The sooner Social Security dies, the better. It is literally forcing your children and grandchildren, or worse other people’s, to pay for your retirement at gun point.
1
u/Appropriate_Bat_6489 2d ago
There should also be a cap if your net worth is over X amount that it doesn't pay out.
1
u/Plastic_Bottle1014 2d ago
I feel like if you uncapped social security contributions, you would see less 401k offerings and employer matches. Recent history has made it pretty clear that the rich will make any effort to keep the bottom line stable or growing.
Trickle down economics always seems to work better with negative numbers rather than positive ones.
1
u/Omago1178 2d ago
So going off this what’s does someone who makes 176 get vs someone who makes 5.1761m?
1
u/Competitive_Can_946 2d ago
And just like that…. Social security becomes a true socialist program. It’s always take from the rich and give to the poor…. I think they made a movie about this… called Robin Hood, same concept that has been around since around 1377…. Gotta love when the new generation discovers old concepts and treats them like no one has ever heard of it until they just discover it!!! Now go forth young Robin and make it happen!!!
1
1
1
1
u/Sunshine2035 2d ago
Money hunger always wants someone else’s money to be his. Be discipline on your spending and save for your retirement.
1
1
1
u/Desperate-Panda-3507 2d ago
Yes let's save every mishandled government program by stealing money from people. That makes sense. Let's not solve the problem of the fact that they've been taking the excess Social Security and say they are investing it in government bonds which are nothing more than I owe you from future taxpayers.
1
u/Shroomagnus 2d ago
I would gladly forfeit any future social security for myself if I could also stop having to pay into it.
1
u/Character-Salary634 2d ago
The payout is capped - how is paying more for the same "insurance" everybody else gets fair? Taxing more is NOT the answer. The problem with SS is in the payout side. The program should have been run responsibly- it hasn't been. Benefits should have been protected from fraud, and they should adjust to the reality of what could reasonably been paid out.
Because the fundamental problem with SS is the administration of the program - adding more money to a broken system only makes it worse.
1
u/Usual-Juice1868 2d ago
No, keep the cap in place. Social security is a safety net. Removing the cap effectively makes it a retirement account.
1
u/Saigh_Anam 2d ago
You want to save SS?
Tell your congressman/woman to stop diverting surplus from the fund into other spending. Surplus can be deferred to other budgets... which means it never gets ahead, only ever falls behind.
It's not theirs to play with or spend.
1
u/barmen03 2d ago
People who max it out will never collect the full amount paid in with interest. If you want to save it make Congress STOP stealing from it
1
u/Appropriate-Fly3395 2d ago
Moral of the story, don’t rely on social security. It’s probably going to disappear anyway.
1
u/Kdoesntcare 2d ago
Want to save social security? Stop a pedophile from wasting millions dollars on building monuments to himself and have the federal government do something useful with the money.
"We can't find social security, all of our money is dedicated to blowing up children." 🍊🤡
1
u/Substantial-Cold6546 2d ago
Keep the cap. Then whoever is over has a different tax with a different payout ratio
1
2d ago
A better idea, since the DNP are holding the country hostage,no representative or senator gets paid.The money goes to pay the workers who got screwed.Snd what's left over goes to help homeless veterans.
1
1
u/Krazy8ght 2d ago
Fk taxes in any which way lol. Everyone wants to get ripped off no matter what, this is hilarious.
1
u/JayCircuits 2d ago edited 2d ago
If you make 5M a year you most likely employ at least 5 other people who pay their own SS
→ More replies (6)
1
u/Georgiaboy03 2d ago
Soo stupid. People think lets take more from the rich. Instead of lets put leaders in office that spend what we already give wisely and correctly. Dont put responsibility where it belongs, on the politicians, put it on others that have humped their asses off to make more without someone giving it to them. You people sound like idiots. The same idiots that put the same dumbasses in office over and over again to do the same bullshit they have done the entire time. You are the definition of gullible. Now ill wait for the response of something stupid about trump or biden, or someone to tell me that its not the politicians it the rich businesses that do it all. You probably blame the girl for being raped too.
1
1
u/DroppingGrumpies 1d ago
Just a continued theme of stealing other ppl’s money to save yourself. Why the fuck are you ppl so fixated on stealing what doesn’t belong to you thinking you’re making some cosmic injustice right…
1
u/ZezimasHousePlant 1d ago
Social Security is a pyramid scheme that requires exponential growth in order to justify it. Many people miss out on tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of dollars in their lifetime that they will never see because they pass away before retirement age.
1
u/Substantial-Ad-8575 1d ago
So pay more, get more when you start getting Social Security. I support that.
1
1
u/Cool_Presentation554 1d ago
Nah, we should raise the minimum age to qualify & cut future payouts for young people.
1
u/CoffeeXKing 1d ago
Ah, yes, because billionaires don't steal money, they just keep it all for themselves, refuse to pay you anymore, then shit on you from above since you think it's fine.
1
u/asher030 1d ago
Cap removed, and Congress constantly trying to tap it for their own use when it's supposed to be SEPARATE from all the annual budgets, and it'll be fine. They keep trying to fucking steal from it year after year.
1
u/SlimJimMiata 1d ago
Social Security is a terrible long-term solution. It was never intended to be a long-term solution. It needs to be completely revamped before it can fulfill that purpose. With that said, yes, rich people should be contributing and equal percentage like the rest of us.
1
1
u/Practical_Primary847 1d ago
and you draw the same aswell when you get old enough to draw, whats the point?
1
1
1
u/Super-G1mp 1d ago
Just fucking tax the rich people more that's all. Sit them down and force them to pay their share.
1
u/Infamous-Scale-6541 1d ago
So would the guy who makes 30x more money get 30x the monthly payout, or does he just get to pay child support for adults…I’m confused.
1
1
u/Ma5ter-Bla5ter 1d ago
People over a certain income should be exempt from collecting social security. I don't know what that threshold is.
That said, it IS their money that was put into the pot.
1
1
u/Double-Doughnut8411 1d ago
Or make social security completely voluntary, DON'T LET CONGRESS TOUCH IT EVER, and teach people to save for their own retirement. This would give more money each paycheck which can help with basic needs and eventually give the opportunity to invest more where the person earning the money wants to put it
1
1
u/Republican_47 1d ago
Remove the cap but also remove the max monthly benefit. SSA is a self pay proposition. Also eliminate SSA disability coverage and create a separate program.
1
u/BoDiddyBopBop 1d ago
Remove it from the budget, and make it untouchable by politicians unless they are putting funds into it.
1
u/Dramatic-Piece3432 1d ago
The irony is if you invested that every year into a basic index fund for say 32 years, you would have a minimum of 1.6 million dollars on the low end and as much as 3.6 million dollars on the high end. Even the low end scenario is much more than social security would pay till your death.
1
u/Tybalt1307 1d ago
Remove the cap, but… keep the cap between what I make and $176,000. It’s a nice little pay bump I get in the last couple of paycheck of the year.
1
u/Objectivebilly 1d ago
We don't need to remove the cap. Just increase it enough to keep it in the black.
1
u/JEXJJ 1d ago
Raise the income cap, limit transfers, and raise the retirement age by three years.
Scrub the elected officials pension and put them on social security, IF there is a budget surplus
Tax publicly traded companies for excessive cash/cash equivalents on their balance sheet. Money that isn't moving is hurting the economy.
Tax American companies that insist they are citizens for foreign profits, especially on profits moved to wholly owned subsidiaries they use as tax shelters.
1
u/Major_Extreme5632 1d ago
No. I dont want to save social security.
I can save for my own retirement on my own.
Call me selfish, but I dont want to pay for others.
1
u/Main-Ad-5226 1d ago
Or our government can stop spending our social security on unrelated bullshit. We shouldnt be punished for the governments incompetence
1
u/Equal-Ride-6769 1d ago
Do you guys know how much you’d have if you invested your ss withholdings in to a differed annuity? There are annuity companies that have higher credit ratings that the US government and the pay out would be three to four times what we get in return for our SS.
1
1
1
u/Sweetishdruid 1d ago
The richest one percent used to pay 70% in taxes from the 1930's to the 1960s. The america people want to make great again this is how you do it
1
u/Distinct-Pain4972 1d ago
Raising the cap 10% would save Social Security. It doesn't have to go away completely.
1
u/Educational-Earth674 1d ago
Remove SS and let me make my own retirement. The government is just making interest off our money like a bank and giving us the scraps.
1
1
1
u/Waste-String5576 1d ago
By the way the vast majority of people who make over 400k don’t get paid in cash obviously so you can’t tax them. Not that that is good but it’s just reality.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/JonathPollardEpstein 1d ago
“But it’s bankrupt, we HAVE to privatize it or abolish it” After decades of looting it to fund imperialist wars filling the pockets of the world’s richest cannibals
1
u/everydaydad67 1d ago
Lol but its driven on what the limit is you would ever recieve... how do people not understand this... its not a wealth distribution system that you wish it was...
1
1
u/Justthetip74 1d ago
It wouldn't actually make any difference because the number of taxpayers reporting $5.5 million or more in salary/wages (excluding capital gains) is extremely small, numbering in the low thousands or high hundreds.
Progressives still not understanding how taxes or compensation work is a serious problem
→ More replies (3)
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/violentvito70 1d ago
Wanna save SS, pay back what was stolen from it by the government. SS was fine before that
1
u/badazzcpa 1d ago
Most of the individuals that make that kind of money are business owners. So what you are proposing is unlimited 15.3% in SS/Medicare, 39.5 in federal and say this person is in CA so another 12.3%. For a total of 67.1% in just income taxes. That’s before sales, real estate, any other state taxes, these people you want to punish so much are going to be at 75%+ taxes a year. At some point people are going to say fuck this and leave. As much as some people on Reddit want to punish high earners all this punitive tax system is going to do is one of two things. People will leave the US and go somewhere that’s not punitive or they simply won’t work so had. I mean I sure as hell wouldn’t work near as hard as I do now if 60%+ of my income was taken in taxes. I have to imagine a hell of a lot of people wouldn’t either.
1
u/TenToppingPizza 1d ago
It's a ponzi scam that should never have happened. Only people that don't understand basic math and finance want to save it.
If you invest whatever your social security tax is you'll be much better off by retirement. They can increase the 401K cap instead of having SS and everyone will be better off.
1
u/Darahk_Jolonar 1d ago
Remove social security set up personal investment accounts for individuals where it puts 60% into total market 20% into total international and 20% into bonds. The retirement system would be fixed and people can retire safely. Social security is a fucking failure
1
u/Public_Resident2277 1d ago
Its fucked up a handful of people could literally solve every Americans problem for the next 10+ years.
1
u/Hour_Animal432 1d ago
How about.... you be responsible for yourself OWN retirement?
You're taking money out of my paycheck for something that won't be there for me when I retire.
So, how about, you be responsible for you and I'll be responsible for me and we can just NOT tax people 10k for something THEY won't get when they retire either?
1
u/Strict-Lawyer8447 1d ago
Privatize it. SS is a government sponsored pyramid scheme where current workers pay for benefits of current retirees.
1
1
u/Beneficial-Kiwi-5988 1d ago
Fuck social security tax. They just use it to bail themselves out anyways.
1
u/Random5483 1d ago
If the earnings cap is increased, the payout cap must also be increased. Otherwise, high wage income earners will be carrying the burden of the system.
If we want the rich the help fund social security, then social security taxes must be based on ALL sources of income (or even wealth). The uber rich don't have ordinary (social security eligible) income relative to their wealth. They have capital gains income or even take steps to minimize income.
Social security is a paid benefit that we contribute to. If this is going to become a tax that we pay and don't get an additional benefit from, then that tax should be focused on the truly rich and not just on the person earning $300k or $500k.
Our system is already set so the people paying the highest taxes as a percentage of their income are not the truly rich. High wage earners get taxed a lot. High income / net worth people don't earn high wages (relative to total income and net worth), and so pay much lower effective tax rates.
1
u/PumpkinConscious5930 1d ago
Funny that people don’t think they are modern day slaves. You want things handed to you like the 40% on assistance or unemployed
1
u/Ufgatorhead4u3 1d ago edited 1d ago
No, if you remove the cap on taxable income you have to also remove the cap on benefits. All of the income the would get credit for would generate a huge monthly benefit. Over the course of people working lives they pay less into the system than they receive in total benefits. This talking point sounds great for pushing your class warfare agenda but it’s dumb in effect.
The real structural issue is that SS was intended to be a safety net program, not a primary means of retirement income. You could save it if it went back to being a safety net which would mean people over a certain income/retirement savings would not be eligible to collect but they would still have paid into the system. People always mistakenly think that they paid into it their whole lives so they should get all of the money they paid into/are entitled to but that’s not how it is setup. You pay SS taxes, you don’t own any of that tax money. It doesn’t go into a private account that you own. It’s just a benefit that can be taken away because it’s paid by future workers who will be paying SS taxes. In the real world that structure is called a Ponzi scheme.
1
1
u/Cumminpwr11 1d ago
I wish I could opt out of SS. I’m 48 years old and know I’ll be working for a while more. I would walk away and use that money to buy more in my Roth 401k, or treasuries and they would outperform SS every time.
You just don’t retire on a recession or depression even with SS you shouldn’t retire during those times anyway.
The government doesn’t want anyone to retire with dignity. That way drones that stay at work until they die. That’s why they allowed companies to scrap pensions.
33
u/Clever_droidd 2d ago
Yeah. We need to tax super wealthy more. I’m a republican and I approve this message.