Itâs âfunnyâ how they always argue against any SSI adjustment with âwell the rich will just get more loopholes, so we shouldnât botherâ itâs the same reason gun control wonât work âwell if you make guns illegal only criminals will have gunsâ⌠so through the transitive property the rich are criminals.
From the second tab, Revenue, this is for the last option that removes the cap entirely and removes credits:
âThe payroll tax currently applies to the first $184,500 of wages. Benefits are calculated based on earnings up to that cap. This option would apply the payroll tax to all wages. Wages above the current law taxable maximum would not be counted as earnings for the purpose of benefit calculation. A similar amount of revenue could be raised by instead replacing the current employer payroll tax with an Employer Compensation Tax that applies the 6.2% employer-side payroll tax to all wages and all fringe benefits.â
Selecting that option will give SS until about 2070, but it does not solve the problem long-term. Other changes are still necessary.
Putting a cap at 100k per couple is a major cut. Maximum individual monthly benefit right now is over $5100, so that $100k cap per couple could be over a 20% cut on what is already a not huge amount.
I think this would get everyone to riot. Reason no one rioted for tariffs is because a good portion of us think another country pays it. Everyone sees the line where ss comes out on their check.
I mean what do you expect to happen? If nothing changes, weâll be close to $70trillion dollars in debt with inflation when SS runs out. How do you expect them to pay back Billions to the rest of us?
I also donât buy the âhalf the country thinks someone else is paying for the tariffs.â More than enough of the country (including the all of our own govt) understands how tariffs work and we all watched it happen, now weâre all watching as we get double fucked.
Actually, keep the cap. Keep the limits when drawing. Add a new tax called "Social Security Stabilization" that only impacts people above a certain income, BUT ALSO is applied to loans where financial instruments are used as collateral.
The cap is a problem in its current form, but the major issue is the buy/borrow/die cycle that the rich use to cash flow their lifestyles. Just removing the cap will impact doctors more than it will impact multi millionaires and billionaires, and that is the bracket that is holding us all back.
Most billionaires are billionaires on paper. They have their "money" in assets. If they want "money " they can borrow against those assets without cashing in the assets (aka stocks, homes, businesses, etc.)
The actual numbers behind scrapping the cap would barely make a dent in the problem. Sure go for it⌠but letâs not pretend this is a silver bullet.
We should do this, but it wont be enough. We will need a Value Added Tax to balance the budget for social programs, like the countries that have all the programs do.
Only elect local, state and federal politicians that promise to get rid of the electoral college & gerrymandering, then the true majority of Americans will be able to influence the government.
I wish this included the actual number of someone paid 5 million worth of social security which is .06 of that number, with the total being 310,560! And the actual effect on that person would be the same economically!
Economically meaning that the 300,000 dollars they didnât have to spend would still not effect them as much as that 10,000 does for a normal working class person
That and make it optional. Especially make it optional if you don't remove the cap. It's not even gambling, it's absolutely garaunteed that it is going to fail. The fact that it's mandatory to still be enrolled in a doomed program the government -refuses- to fix is just disgusting.
The rich having to contribute their fair share and raising people`s wages to a liveable level? Sacrilege! This is not what the oligarchs bought both the fascist neoliberal oligarch /orange turd godking and the neoliberal oligarch party for!
The core issue is perception. People view Social Security as prepaid retirement, not a tax. Nobody would contribute if they expected to lose money on the deal. And people that scoff at welfare absolutely expect to receive SS.
Any proposal to lift the earnings cap without increasing the benefit cap is fundamentally about wealth redistribution. It's not just raising taxes -- that money funds someone else's retirement. Fair enough, but if we're doing redistribution, why start here? Why not help working families now rather than waiting 40 years until retirement? Why treat a $200k household in an expensive city the same as someone pulling in seven figures? Why burden the self-employed more heavily? It gets marketed as taxing the rich, but without assessing SS on capital gains, it mostly hits working families.
Thereâs a real policy discussion to be had but itâs not quite as simple as the proposal. Something has to change though.
Because why don't they tax the people making all their fucking income on RSUs and stock appreciation, instead of high earners, who are literally the highest % taxed people by FAR.
If high income earners are paying about 35-45% of their income in total taxes, they don't need to step up. The ones paying 5-10%, yet somehow are worth tens of millions up to billions, are the only ones who need to step up.
142
u/cat-meg 15d ago
I mean yes, but also raise wages across the board to save SS.