JoeTheEconomist
VIP Member
- Sep 4, 2015
- 531
- 62
- 80
- Thread starter
- #381
Who is " paying for someone else's benefit"?
You fancy yourself as some sort of "economist". You're not. You're clueless, dude.
If wages are flat for three decades, so are contributions.
You simply cannot ignore that fact when the solvency of the entire system is based on those contributions.
You're just another self-deluded pontificator.
Who is " paying for someone else's benefit"?
I am going to pass on this at this point. I don't sense you have a strong background on the mechanics of the system.
If wages are flat for three decades, so are contributions.
The SSA says that they aren't. Here are average wages :
National Average Wage Index
If wages are flat for three decades, so are contributions. You simply cannot ignore that fact when the solvency of the entire system is based on those contributions.
No because contributions are a function of number of workers as well. Even if you were correct about wages (and you aren't), contributions would rise because of the rising number of workers. Moreover, benefits are indexed to wages. So as wages rise there is nothing that stops the system from distributing the increase in the form of higher benefits.
You're just another self-deluded pontificator.
I just get my data from the SSA. Maybe they are deluded as well.