Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Sam Seder: How the Establishment Wants to Destroy Social Security (Original Post) limpyhobbler Nov 2012 OP
The more people like this foment and pontificate about SS the more low info voters believe there is xtraxritical Nov 2012 #1
I never seem to get any support here for one of my pet ideas customerserviceguy Nov 2012 #2
I support your idea completely but there is no way this would get thru even a Democratic Congress. xtraxritical Nov 2012 #3
If it won't customerserviceguy Nov 2012 #4
 

xtraxritical

(3,576 posts)
1. The more people like this foment and pontificate about SS the more low info voters believe there is
Mon Nov 12, 2012, 06:11 PM
Nov 2012

a problem with Social Security. There is no problem with SS it is actuarially able to meet all it's obligations for the next twenty-five years. If SS needs additional funding in the future all that is required is to raise the ceiling on earned income subject to SS withholding. Most people never reach this income level and would not even notice the change. People that do reach this income level would probably not notice the change either. There is NO reason to raise the retirement age, in fact, it should be lowered so that more people retire faster, this will help spur employment and would be a real boost for the economy. Yes, automatic cost of living adjustments should be in place. Go to the Social Security website and find out.

customerserviceguy

(25,183 posts)
2. I never seem to get any support here for one of my pet ideas
Mon Nov 12, 2012, 06:29 PM
Nov 2012

While raising the cap on what employees pay raises the maximum benefit, it wouldn't necessarily be that way if we simply removed entirely the cap on the employer's share of FICA. If a megabank wants to pay some scum-sucker $10 million to run the thing into the ground, shouldn't they be forced to pay 6.2% on the whole thing?

No, it wouldn't raise a terrific amount of money, but it's one of several steps in the right direction.

customerserviceguy

(25,183 posts)
4. If it won't
Wed Nov 14, 2012, 08:15 AM
Nov 2012

then you really can't expect anything other than a very modest increase in the cap. Ten years of 60's or 70's style inflation (or stagflation, as we used to call it during the Jerry Ford years) will put most middle income workers above the current cap, anyway.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Video & Multimedia»Sam Seder: How the Establ...