If we are going to keep some kind of cap on contributions to Social Security, why don’t we triple it from where it currently stands to 480K. Let’s face it, anybody that’s making that much would not see this increase as a burden the way the rest of us would if we don’t get our full benefits in 15 years or so.
And while we’re at it, why don’t we just double the benefits for anyone over 72 and/or make sure that institutionalized care is at no cost to the elderly, their families, or the family trust.
Why is there a CAP? The richest among Americans can afford the social security tax much more than the majority of the Americans making less than $160,000. 🤔
Once Upon A Time, Big Business and the Very Wealthy used to pay a 91% tax rate (1961) -- and surprisingly, they didn't cry and carry on like they do now when anyone even suggests raising their rate above the 37% rate (before taking advantage of umpteen tax loopholes) by even a fraction of 1%. And what a shocker: their pawns in Congress kept lowering the top tax rate and the National Debt kept growing by leaps and bounds at the same time. Can anyone here say, "Cause & Effect"?
I am retired from working at SSA and totally agree that the funding solution lies in greatly raising (or eliminating) the payroll tax (FICA) cap over a certain amount, such as the $400,000 you suggest.
I think the people that can actually ensure that Social Security benefits survive don’t really care about making sure that happens because they will always have the money to survive.
I absolutely agree there should be no cap. The top 1% have never paid their fair share yet they have gobbled up the benefits of our "booming" economy while the 99% are drowning, particularly since the pandemic. No cap = No problem!
Apr 25, 2023·edited Apr 26, 2023Liked by Robert Reich
“Put simply, a big part of the American working population is earning less than the Social Security trustees (including me) anticipated decades ago — and therefore paying less in Social Security payroll tax.”
It’d be easier politically to raise the cap if we’d stop calling it what is ISN’T: a tax.
Taxes are collected by governments which then use them to fund other things, from powering streetlights to operating a military. But the money collected by the Social Security Administration is directed toward an entirely different purpose: RETURNING IT to the people who paid into it — every. Single. Penny. of it, and more, if the payer lives past 77 years old.
The great British economist John Maynard Keynes, on whose work most reputable economic theory is based, once wrote that “expenditures rise to meet income,” meaning that, left to his or her own devices, the average salaried individual will spend everything he or she earns — and often more, which is why and how people get into debt.
Republicans love to call Social Security and Medicare “entitlements,” making it seem as though the government is giving a gift to recipients. Unfortunately, Democrats and the press don’t dispute that characterization, which they should, stridently. The fact is that the two programs are nothing but DEFERRED SALARY, guaranteeing that when people retire and their earning days are over, they won’t be left with nothing. That’s how Franklin Roosevelt and a Democratic Congress conceived Social Security in the mid-1930s, and Lyndon Johnson and a Democratic Congress conceived of Medicare in the mid-1960s (granted, if someone pays into them all his or her working life and then drops dead the days he or she turns 65, it’s a bad deal, but fewer and fewer people die at that age. Most people do end up collecting more than they paid in).
Irrespective of the individual issue, all politics is ultimately about one thing, and one thing only: money. This issue IS actually about money, and so, for once, should not be about politics.
Wasn't a huge amount borrowed by the government years ago? We shouldn't have to suffer as a result. I am disabled and worked for a living before an accident happened. I live on less than $900/mo now and it's not living at all, barely surviving. I'm only 58 and am scared about my future. There should be no cap. If you earn it, pay it.
Income equality certainly plays a role in sustainable base level funding.
Moving forward we may want to look at Switzerland, which has a model fairly similar to the U.S. system.
- No cap on contributions but a decreasing rate for high earners.
- No contributions required by VERY low earners.
- Eqivalent of social security is seen as part of a three pillars model - Social security, private savings, and employment- or self-employment-based plans.
Changing demographics are a given in any society and any pension plan must be routinely adapted to meet the new challenges.
The present day Social Security System is experiencing solvency issues because past presidents used the sleeping funds as an endless source of free money. Ronald Reagan and George Bush "illegally" withdrew funds from the people's retirement accounts to the tune of 3 trillion dollars during their terms as President. Their proposed federal budgets would never have been approved if they had asked congress for the monies they actually intended to spend so they dummied their proposed budgets and then as they needed more and more money they just wrote checks and withdrew the funds from the Social Security System. With each massive withdrawal they weakened a system put in place to help retiring Americans. I asked the head of the Republican party in Texas about this illegal pilfering, her answer was chilling. She calmly said "they weren't the only ones that did it." Our past presidents stole the very money we put away to help us through the years when we would be too old to work. It seems our security had no future. You may not believe what I just told you, but I saw copies of the forms used to take our money from the fund. They were obtained through the "Freedom of Information Act" and anyone can get copies if they are still available. The illegal withdrawal of our money by our own Presidents is why the present day Social Security System is in such a depleted condition. A sad testament to the very government we trusted with our future.
Social Security taxes should be on all income, even for the very rich, so people will have a stake in it when they need it. That should include capital gains and all the income that usually slips through loopholes for the very rich. It's about time they contribute fully to our nation's program to support disabled and older people. And, members of Congress and all federal officials should be on Social Security and Medicare too, no special medical and retirement programs that will keep them from experiencing Social Security and the Medicare challenges, like everyone else in this country who has retired.
The Alliance of Retired Americans (ARA) has also been advocating for eliminating this CAP among other things for retirees. Like me, become a member with no dues if a union retiree while all others are asked to donate what they can afford. Google to find a local ARA chapter or contact your union rep.
I am a retired firefighter-paramedic with a pension and a small SS benefit. I find ARA is more helpful and active with this than AARP.
Assuming you still have American democracy in 2024, I imagine that you would need a majority of Democrats in both houses to push through such a reform as it would mean taxing he wealthy - but the same applies to gun control, ending gerrymandering, and putting human rights, civil liberties and public accountability on a firmer footing.
Republicans (all) are a cancer on the nation and a clear threat to our democracy, politics & govt function, economy & middle class, common sense & decency, public health & safety, the planet, and truth. There's not a single thing they lobby for that doesn't harm 99% of us. There's not a single beneficial law/proposal from Dems that they don't fight tooth & nail against. I wish it weren't so ... but they're dangerous & fascistic and we can't fix it if we don't call it out.
It troubles me that not many people know about the SS tax cap. Why is it that we are so dumb and keep supporting these people that are actively harming us?
If we are going to keep some kind of cap on contributions to Social Security, why don’t we triple it from where it currently stands to 480K. Let’s face it, anybody that’s making that much would not see this increase as a burden the way the rest of us would if we don’t get our full benefits in 15 years or so.
And while we’re at it, why don’t we just double the benefits for anyone over 72 and/or make sure that institutionalized care is at no cost to the elderly, their families, or the family trust.
Why is there a CAP? The richest among Americans can afford the social security tax much more than the majority of the Americans making less than $160,000. 🤔
Once Upon A Time, Big Business and the Very Wealthy used to pay a 91% tax rate (1961) -- and surprisingly, they didn't cry and carry on like they do now when anyone even suggests raising their rate above the 37% rate (before taking advantage of umpteen tax loopholes) by even a fraction of 1%. And what a shocker: their pawns in Congress kept lowering the top tax rate and the National Debt kept growing by leaps and bounds at the same time. Can anyone here say, "Cause & Effect"?
I am retired from working at SSA and totally agree that the funding solution lies in greatly raising (or eliminating) the payroll tax (FICA) cap over a certain amount, such as the $400,000 you suggest.
I think the people that can actually ensure that Social Security benefits survive don’t really care about making sure that happens because they will always have the money to survive.
For the rest of us, they simply don’t care.
I absolutely agree there should be no cap. The top 1% have never paid their fair share yet they have gobbled up the benefits of our "booming" economy while the 99% are drowning, particularly since the pandemic. No cap = No problem!
“Put simply, a big part of the American working population is earning less than the Social Security trustees (including me) anticipated decades ago — and therefore paying less in Social Security payroll tax.”
It’d be easier politically to raise the cap if we’d stop calling it what is ISN’T: a tax.
Taxes are collected by governments which then use them to fund other things, from powering streetlights to operating a military. But the money collected by the Social Security Administration is directed toward an entirely different purpose: RETURNING IT to the people who paid into it — every. Single. Penny. of it, and more, if the payer lives past 77 years old.
The great British economist John Maynard Keynes, on whose work most reputable economic theory is based, once wrote that “expenditures rise to meet income,” meaning that, left to his or her own devices, the average salaried individual will spend everything he or she earns — and often more, which is why and how people get into debt.
Republicans love to call Social Security and Medicare “entitlements,” making it seem as though the government is giving a gift to recipients. Unfortunately, Democrats and the press don’t dispute that characterization, which they should, stridently. The fact is that the two programs are nothing but DEFERRED SALARY, guaranteeing that when people retire and their earning days are over, they won’t be left with nothing. That’s how Franklin Roosevelt and a Democratic Congress conceived Social Security in the mid-1930s, and Lyndon Johnson and a Democratic Congress conceived of Medicare in the mid-1960s (granted, if someone pays into them all his or her working life and then drops dead the days he or she turns 65, it’s a bad deal, but fewer and fewer people die at that age. Most people do end up collecting more than they paid in).
Irrespective of the individual issue, all politics is ultimately about one thing, and one thing only: money. This issue IS actually about money, and so, for once, should not be about politics.
Wasn't a huge amount borrowed by the government years ago? We shouldn't have to suffer as a result. I am disabled and worked for a living before an accident happened. I live on less than $900/mo now and it's not living at all, barely surviving. I'm only 58 and am scared about my future. There should be no cap. If you earn it, pay it.
Income equality certainly plays a role in sustainable base level funding.
Moving forward we may want to look at Switzerland, which has a model fairly similar to the U.S. system.
- No cap on contributions but a decreasing rate for high earners.
- No contributions required by VERY low earners.
- Eqivalent of social security is seen as part of a three pillars model - Social security, private savings, and employment- or self-employment-based plans.
Changing demographics are a given in any society and any pension plan must be routinely adapted to meet the new challenges.
The present day Social Security System is experiencing solvency issues because past presidents used the sleeping funds as an endless source of free money. Ronald Reagan and George Bush "illegally" withdrew funds from the people's retirement accounts to the tune of 3 trillion dollars during their terms as President. Their proposed federal budgets would never have been approved if they had asked congress for the monies they actually intended to spend so they dummied their proposed budgets and then as they needed more and more money they just wrote checks and withdrew the funds from the Social Security System. With each massive withdrawal they weakened a system put in place to help retiring Americans. I asked the head of the Republican party in Texas about this illegal pilfering, her answer was chilling. She calmly said "they weren't the only ones that did it." Our past presidents stole the very money we put away to help us through the years when we would be too old to work. It seems our security had no future. You may not believe what I just told you, but I saw copies of the forms used to take our money from the fund. They were obtained through the "Freedom of Information Act" and anyone can get copies if they are still available. The illegal withdrawal of our money by our own Presidents is why the present day Social Security System is in such a depleted condition. A sad testament to the very government we trusted with our future.
Social Security taxes should be on all income, even for the very rich, so people will have a stake in it when they need it. That should include capital gains and all the income that usually slips through loopholes for the very rich. It's about time they contribute fully to our nation's program to support disabled and older people. And, members of Congress and all federal officials should be on Social Security and Medicare too, no special medical and retirement programs that will keep them from experiencing Social Security and the Medicare challenges, like everyone else in this country who has retired.
The Alliance of Retired Americans (ARA) has also been advocating for eliminating this CAP among other things for retirees. Like me, become a member with no dues if a union retiree while all others are asked to donate what they can afford. Google to find a local ARA chapter or contact your union rep.
I am a retired firefighter-paramedic with a pension and a small SS benefit. I find ARA is more helpful and active with this than AARP.
Assuming you still have American democracy in 2024, I imagine that you would need a majority of Democrats in both houses to push through such a reform as it would mean taxing he wealthy - but the same applies to gun control, ending gerrymandering, and putting human rights, civil liberties and public accountability on a firmer footing.
So good luck with all of that!
Republicans (all) are a cancer on the nation and a clear threat to our democracy, politics & govt function, economy & middle class, common sense & decency, public health & safety, the planet, and truth. There's not a single thing they lobby for that doesn't harm 99% of us. There's not a single beneficial law/proposal from Dems that they don't fight tooth & nail against. I wish it weren't so ... but they're dangerous & fascistic and we can't fix it if we don't call it out.
It troubles me that not many people know about the SS tax cap. Why is it that we are so dumb and keep supporting these people that are actively harming us?
As usual, your commentary is spot on I wish I could make every American read this morning's remarks.