PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
1. Once politicians learned that they could get away with ignoring the Constitution, many things changed, and not the least of them was the new relationship that the citizenry had with their government.
Which brings me to the current precipice on which Social Security hangs.
2. Social Security has a limited future….and was a bad idea from the start.
"The question here is not whether or not the intention of the SSA is beneficent, but whether or not its inception was properly vetted. The concept of a marketplace of ideas is based on the assumption that information is not buried or distorted, and all aspects of same are given access prior to acceptance of the plan."
Beck and Balfe, “Broke.”
When the 32nd President created Social Security:
No one considered that life expectancy would increase?
No one considered that the balance of workers and retirees might change?
No one calculated the long-term costs?
3. Roosevelt's bacon was pulled out of the fire by Ronald Reagan.
"Back in 1983, the Reagan administration addressed annual deficits with the Social Security program by passing a bipartisan piece of legislation (the Social Security Amendments of 1983) that tackled the program's problems from both sides of the political aisle.
The Amendments of 1983 are perhaps best known for the creation of the taxation of Social Security benefits, as well as passing along a gradual increase to the full retirement age – i.e., the age where you become eligible to receive 100% of your retirement benefit.
The taxation of Social Security benefits, which is something of a necessary evil, allowed the federal government to tax up to half of an individual's benefits. If one-half of an individual's Social Security benefits, plus his or her adjusted gross income, surpassed $25,000, his or her Social Security benefits became subject to taxation. For couples filing jointly, this figure was $32,000. The introduction of this tax was designed to raise additional revenue for the program, which is a path most often advocated for by Democrats on Capitol Hill.
...the Amendments of 1983 also passed along a gradual increase to the full retirement age. Set at age 65 back in 1983, the full retirement age will cap at age 67 by 2022 for those born in 1960 or later. This increase, which is something Republicans have long advocated for, takes into account increased longevity. It requires retirees to either wait longer to receive their full payout or to accept a steeper reduction in their payout by claiming early. Either way, it saves the program money over the long run.
These changes, along with an increase to the payroll tax on earned income, allowed Social Security to build up its aforementioned $2.9 trillion in asset reserves over the past 35 years."
4. "Thanks to COVID-19, Social Security’s day of reckoning may be even closer than we thought
Published: May 2, 2020 at 12:47 p.m. ET
A lot less money is coming in, and pretty soon, more will be going out
....Social Security is now dipping into its reserves—the so-called “trust fund”—to pay benefits. That’s because the system isn’t taking in enough cash from payroll taxes, which is how the gargantuan Social Security program—by far the single biggest source of federal spending—is financed."
"...there's no shortage of ways to fix Social Security and address its estimated $13.2 trillion cash shortfall between 2034 and 2092."
Could personal responsibility be one of the ways????
Which brings me to the current precipice on which Social Security hangs.
2. Social Security has a limited future….and was a bad idea from the start.
"The question here is not whether or not the intention of the SSA is beneficent, but whether or not its inception was properly vetted. The concept of a marketplace of ideas is based on the assumption that information is not buried or distorted, and all aspects of same are given access prior to acceptance of the plan."
Beck and Balfe, “Broke.”
When the 32nd President created Social Security:
No one considered that life expectancy would increase?
No one considered that the balance of workers and retirees might change?
No one calculated the long-term costs?
3. Roosevelt's bacon was pulled out of the fire by Ronald Reagan.
"Back in 1983, the Reagan administration addressed annual deficits with the Social Security program by passing a bipartisan piece of legislation (the Social Security Amendments of 1983) that tackled the program's problems from both sides of the political aisle.
The Amendments of 1983 are perhaps best known for the creation of the taxation of Social Security benefits, as well as passing along a gradual increase to the full retirement age – i.e., the age where you become eligible to receive 100% of your retirement benefit.
The taxation of Social Security benefits, which is something of a necessary evil, allowed the federal government to tax up to half of an individual's benefits. If one-half of an individual's Social Security benefits, plus his or her adjusted gross income, surpassed $25,000, his or her Social Security benefits became subject to taxation. For couples filing jointly, this figure was $32,000. The introduction of this tax was designed to raise additional revenue for the program, which is a path most often advocated for by Democrats on Capitol Hill.
...the Amendments of 1983 also passed along a gradual increase to the full retirement age. Set at age 65 back in 1983, the full retirement age will cap at age 67 by 2022 for those born in 1960 or later. This increase, which is something Republicans have long advocated for, takes into account increased longevity. It requires retirees to either wait longer to receive their full payout or to accept a steeper reduction in their payout by claiming early. Either way, it saves the program money over the long run.
These changes, along with an increase to the payroll tax on earned income, allowed Social Security to build up its aforementioned $2.9 trillion in asset reserves over the past 35 years."
The 1 Thing Nearly Everyone Forgets About Reagan's Social Security Reforms in 1983 | The Motley Fool
Though Reagan's bipartisan legislation extended the life of Social Security, it took a long time for lawmakers to finally act.
www.fool.com
4. "Thanks to COVID-19, Social Security’s day of reckoning may be even closer than we thought
Published: May 2, 2020 at 12:47 p.m. ET
A lot less money is coming in, and pretty soon, more will be going out
....Social Security is now dipping into its reserves—the so-called “trust fund”—to pay benefits. That’s because the system isn’t taking in enough cash from payroll taxes, which is how the gargantuan Social Security program—by far the single biggest source of federal spending—is financed."
Thanks to COVID-19, Social Security’s day of reckoning may be even closer than we thought
A lot less money is coming in, and pretty soon, more will be going out
www.marketwatch.com
"...there's no shortage of ways to fix Social Security and address its estimated $13.2 trillion cash shortfall between 2034 and 2092."
Could personal responsibility be one of the ways????