Republicans will be ripped from their bedrooms and offices if they fuck with everyone’s retirement savings.

Will not be touched, even Likely given a big COL.

Will be coming for you , and it won’t be pretty …
😐




✌🏻

Please, be my guest.

The end is near
The end is near
They've been crying this wolf for 80 years

Note that 'insolvency' does not mean that it will pay out nothing.

'Insolvency' means it will not meet its financial obligations. And that part is true, once the trust fund is exhausted and it has to rely on current revenues.

I'd note that currently to collect full benefits depends on your year of birth. For decades it was a flat age 65 that met that requirement. I'd have to wait until 66 years 10 months, and if I don't wait then I will never (according to the way the law behind the entitlement reads) collect the fully amount.

That was also when the expectancy of life at 65 was far lower and far fewer of us made it to 65. Altering the benefits schedule was part of retaining solvency for this long.

Sorry it was not in the beginning designed to behave like an inflation-hedged annuity. It was support, for all, in old age for rent, medical bills, heat, food. We are way beyond that.

It was designed in an era of progressive taxes and a not very progressive income scale. We are way beyond that.

In the early years, all the young supported all the old, who hadn't paid in a lot because it was a new program. Now the uber wealthy don't want to support the less well-heeled. We are way beyond that.

Of course, since the Republicans will decide now, the poor will support the rich through reduced payments, and the billionaires will buy yachts to provide jobs for the young.

in droves. The Hands Off protest was unusual in that many senior citizens who are GOP constituents showed up and they are pissed off. Usually senior GOP voters don't care about most issues, like abortion, gun control, climate change, etc but now that THEIR Social Security and Healthcare are in jeopardy they decide it's time to protest and voice their concerns.

Was not looked at favorably at the time.

the share of total income for fifty years has decreased for the lower four quintiles and increased for the top quintile. The wealthy have been skimming off more and more, while the maximum income limit remains and has crept up only slowly. It's no wonder that Social Security needs adjusting. But what needs adjusting is the cap on contributions.



https://www.statista.com/statistics/203247/shares-of-household-income-of-quintiles-in-the-us/

America's sacred cow- the billionaire class.

They've know this is coming for decades, and did nothing.

And they're going to continue to do nothing, because there isn't a popular way to fix the problem.

So, they're just going to let the surplus in the trust fund run out, and blame it on past administrations, then they'll have to decide how the benefit reductions will be implemented. I'm guessing there will be some sort of means test.

It started running at a deficit in 1975.

That's why changes were made to the program under Presidents Carter and Reagan.

Even after the reforms to the program in 1983, it was known that the program would once again be running at a deficit when enough of the baby boomers retired. The hope was, that when the program once again started running at a deficit that we'd have built up a big enough surplus to last until about 2060. Unfortunately, for various reasons, it hasn't worked out that way. The program ran at a surplus only until 2020. It has been running at a deficit since 2021. Unfortunately, and unless there are some drastic changes made, the surplus will be gone around 2032-2034.

When that happens, if nothing is changed, by law, the amount of social security benefits that are paid out may not exceed
the amount that is paid into the program. The estimate is that when the surplus is gone, the total benefits paid out annually will be reduced by about 20%.

This reduction does not have to be voted on. Not a single lawmaker has to propose a change to the program for these benefit reductions to happen. All that has to happen for benefits to be reduced is for our lawmakers to do nothing.

But most estimates that I've seen indicate that if we completely eliminated the cap today, it would only make up for about half of the projected shortfall.

More needs to be done if we want to avoid any reduction in benefits.