I'm against means-testing and raising the payroll tax because they both undermine FDR's original intention that Social Security would be a plan for "all" Americans. But I support raising the retirement age since the program was supposed to help seniors who could no longer do the physical work of the Depression-era. There are very few ditch-diggers anymore and there's little reason why much-healthier senior citizens can't fill the low-impact jobs of the 21st century.
4 comments:
Means testing sounds good, but is actually bad.
Sure, I need SocSec payments more than Bill Gates. But he paid in about the same amount as I did, and retroactively altering the agreement does not seem right. Whether it is SSA saying "you don't need it so we'll keep it" or him saying "I don't need it so you keep it." Bill, take it and if you want to use it for others go ahead: the main homeless overnight shelter in my area needs a new roof, major plumbing upgrade, etc. and funding is low...
John A, you have it right. IT ISN'T the government's money. Changing the contract on the individuals that paid in is a non starter, a breach of contract. Too bad FDR set up a Ponzi scheme.
If the change is to be made, fine, make it on the new enrollees and give them the option to join or opt out.
This idea that government can do what it wants needs to be crushed.
No pensions for public employees sounds good to me - elected or professional. 401k's for everyone! (I think it is actually a 403b for public employees)
Social security could be brought solvent immediately if ALL the federal employees contributed and if their pension holdings were added to social security's "lock box".
Instead we have private workers paying in money which is used to cover yearly government spending--including federal pensions which average about triple social security benefits.
Changing the retirement age just adds insult to injury.
Post a Comment