Here’s how you “fix” Social Security: Make rich folks pay more Social Security tax. The end.

[kpete]

Five Long Years I Thought You Were My Man
By mistermix April 5th, 2013

Is there some reverse-backflip-flying-fuck-ten-dimensional-super-secret-decoder-ring-holder-only-negotiating-ninja reason that it’s smart to put chained CPI, which normal people will call “a cut in Social Security”, in Obama’s budget? Or is it as stupid as it looks? Because Democrats cutting Social Security is, in my narrow mind, always fucking stupid, not just because it makes old people eat generic instead of Alpo, but also because, come election time, Republicans will be yelling “you cut Social Security” while Democrats will be making wonky mouth noises in the style of an hour-long Powerpoint presentation demonstrating the effect of chained CPI on the fourth and fifth deciles of future recipients in inflation-adjusted outlier years.

Here’s how you “fix” Social Security: Make rich folks pay more Social Security tax. The end.

Is that so goddam hard?



Update: Just to be perfectly clear, it is, given the current state of Congress, not just hard, but probably impossible to enact tax hike into law. If you are really the “Party of Social Security” and you want to show it, it should not be hard at all to put a proposed tax hike into your budget, especially if it’s structured to kick in at $300K or $400K or some other big number, leaving a gap between the current limit ($113K or so) and the new “Social Security tax on the rich”.

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2013/04/05/five-long-years-i-thought-you-were-my-man/

[Scuba]

1. Brilliant! Wait 'til Congress hears this plan!

[HereSince1628]

3. I can just see them in front of the mirror practicing negotiating it away.

[YoungDemCA]

2. There's only one problem...

Rich folks control both parties. Most of the elected officials in Congress are wealthy. The President is wealthy.

Democratic or Republican? Doesn't seem to matter as much for the 1%, who are entrenched in the donor base and leadership of both parties.

[Lurker Deluxe]

7. Actually

There is only one problem. These rich that you speak of make the majority of their earnings by capital gains, SS tax does not apply to that type of income. It is far past time to treat all income the same when it comes to taxation.

Simplify the tax code and get all these crazy deductions out of there. Simple, if you make less than X you can deduct Y, if you make more than X you have no deductions ... calculate your earnings and pay Z% depending on your earnings. All income from all sources is treated the same way, period.

That would help more than anything else, until the issue of cap gain is addressed nothing else matters.

[L0oniX]

4. Eliminating the SS cap is eliminating "welfare for the rich". n/t

[Fumesucker]

5. Clearly not a Serious Person n/t

[Capt. Obvious]

6. But someday I could be rich

and therefore I oppose this idea.

It's the American dream

[Stuart G]

8. Yep,,,that is it.make everyone pay social security.....simple...nt

[El Supremo]

9. $113,700 is rich?

It's not bad, but I wouldn't call it rich. Why have a cap at all? Why cap benefits? Those are now $2,513/month for somebody retiring at age 66 in 2012.

Oh, I never call it a tax. It is an insurance premium.

[DinahMoeHum]

10. Sorry, but $113K is NOT rich. . .

Make it over $500K, then we'll talk.

[DearHeart]

21. $113K might be rich to ALOT of people. Most people, are making way less than that.

[DinahMoeHum]

23. It's NOT considered rich in my neck of the woods. . .

which is in the Northeast, in a "blue state". At best, it's "upper middle class".

Plus, for the services we have, which many in the red states do NOT have, we have higher taxes than they do.

[SoCalNative]

11. Also, disqualify rich folks from being able to collect

Social Security.

If you're Mitt Romney wealthy, you don't need to collect it. But you should still be required to contribute towards it.

[meow2u3]

12. DQing rich folks from collecting SS is the only cut I can get behind

Make the rich pay the lion's share of the taxes and don't let them enjoy the benefits. Now we're talking!

The selfish wealthy have more than enough to live on. They don't need Social Security, but we do.

[airplaneman]

13. Here is even a better way to fix Social Security.

Raise the minimum Wage to $12.00 an hour and tax the hell out of any company exporting jobs overseas. MULTIPLE PROBLEMS SOLVED.
-Airplane

[Capn Sunshine]

16. ^^^ THIS

we still have tax breaks for those that export jobs. That has to end.

[angrychair]

19. I agree we need a higher

Minimum wage, at least 12-14 dollars an hour. More importantly, we should never mistake an entry-level, often unskilled to minimum skilled position as the final destination for most people. Most people take these type of jobs and live with these jobs because that is all that is available or the person has no marketable skill-set. I'm not saying that their goal should be college either. the standard college path isn't for everyone. People learn differently. There needs to be a far more robust trades program in our country. A skilled welder or hvac tech makes better than minimum wage. We need a robust and valid apprentice program in everything from repairing and working with industrial controls to being an LPN in a hospital. A program that pays the person as they learn and as they make progress through the program their pay and responsibilities increase. With all due respect, I hate when people get stuck on the "minimum wage/living wage" argument and don't realize that is the micro-issue but there is a larger, big picture macro-issue that needs to be addressed to give the people that want it, a path to a better way of life.

[nineteen50]

14. How about

letting those that "f" the economy pay for the bailout. Transaction tax on WAll Street sales. I pay sales tax why not wall street.

[angrychair]

15. I don't disagree

I am 100% behind increasing the rate on higher income levels. For me, first on the list, I'd like to see a competent and worthwhile jobs effort. How do we ensure SS for the future? By ensuring as many people that can work, are working and at decent paying jobs. More people working, for a decent wage, fixes A LOT of funding issues. A larger, better funded tax base will create a fully-funded SS and Medicare/Medicaid system. More jobs paying fair wages, creates more disposable income, creates more spending, which creates more jobs, which create more saving and spending, which creates more jobs...and so on. Not sure why this concept escapes so many. The first order of business is fair paying jobs.

[DearHeart]

22. Exactly! But for some reason, like you said, "this concept escapes so many."

[WillyT]

17. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

[Stuart G]

20. K and R..nt

[spedtr90]

18. That's what Obama said in September....

"You know, I do think that looking at changing the cap is an important aspect of putting Social Security on a more stable footing," Obama said, via satellite feed. "And what I've said is, is that I'm willing to work with Republicans and examine all their ideas, but what I'm not going to do, as a matter of principle, is to slash benefits or privatize Social Security”.


Their ideas must have been shinier than the raising the cap idea....

[forestpath]

24. Notice how he framed that as a REPUBLICAN idea. How bizarre.