The only way to actually shore up Social Security...

[WCGreen]

is to raise the income cap to what ever level it takes to balance it out.

That would be the stick....

The other side would be to cut the contribution level for those making minimum wage to 5% from the current 6.2%. This would get money, granted a small amount, into the hands of people who would spend it. A stimulus. This would also cut the cost of hiring people on minimum wage.

Perhaps after earnings hit $250k, the contribution level would drop to 5%, then at $300k that level would drop to 4% until at some point it becomes a flat 2%.

I would also get rid of the double taxation of benefits.

When a retiree hits `taxable income of $34k, their Social Security benefits are taxed at 85%.

This is not fair, pure and simple.

Only half of their benefit should be taxed no matter how much other income they are receiving. They paid tax on their half of the contribution already when it was deducted from their pay check. No one should be forced to pay tax on income twice.

All of this, would be the carrot...

If this was changed, I feel it would bring a whole lot of people to the side of real reform.

I have no idea how to realistically fund medicare because of the huge increases in the costs built into our increasingly archaic medical system. I am positive that it is artificially high so that the negotiations between providers and insurance companies reach a 'fair" medium.

Until that is changed, I fear for the worse.

[Xenotime]

1. What about higher taxes on the wealthy? When does that go into place?

[WCGreen]

2. I am talking about making SS and SSI self sufficient....

I am all for higher income taxes to fund all the stuff that benefits the wealthy.

The people who benefit most from the stability of our country are the wealthy and so they should pay more of their income as tax.

The 85% for people earning over $34k and receiving SS benefits is about recognizing taxable income. I am in favor of raising the tax rate but not in favor of changing the rules of the game.

Consistency breeds consensus.

[obxhead]

3. Not raise, flat out remove.

Why should the super wealthy get a reward for having so much more than the common folk?

[NorthCarolina]

4. Moot point since a commission has been formed to privatize it. eom

[Art_from_Ark]

31. A commission that includes at least one of Deadeye Dick's buddies

former senator Alan Simpson of Wyoming

[avaistheone1]

5. We have a millennium generation coming along which is larger than the boomer generation

to help bail out the system down the line.

However I do agree with raising the cap now. Obama said he advocated that during his campaign. Although I don't hear anything about that from him any more ???

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/10/28/obama_proposes_increasing_social_security_tax_on_wealthy/

[NYC_SKP]

6. With enough popular pressure, this will happen. It can't NOT happen.

Unless the sheeple just sit back.

This is something that will help 95% of the voters, and if enough people are involved and loud about it, and support the congress critters who support it in large numbers, it will happen.

Only the tea bag mentality would vote against their own self interest.

It may just be raising the cap at first, but I think once that much has been done, it will be easier to keep raising it as required.

I'm 53, this is important, and I think even younger people will not want to spare the wealthy at the expense of the older generations.

Recommended.

:patriot:

[WatchWhatISay]

7. There should be no cap at all, ever

Not only that, but all unearned income should also be subject to FICA

People who exceed the cap already have a much higher percentage of discretionary income than people who pay FICA on every dollar they earn.

[Enthusiast]

17. +1

I like it.

[bvar22]

8. Another element that would help "save" social security is

More and better JOBS!!!

There is plenty of room in America for MORE WORKERS.
Stop sending what few jobs we have overseas, and institute a massive More and Better JOBS 10 year program, like FDR on steroids.
THEN. liberalize and facilitate immigration to fill those JOBS.
As more people go to WORK at their JOBS, MORE revenue is generated for Social Security.

The More and Better Jobs Program would also need to be accompanied by a Universal Free Education and Training Program open to anyone who wants it.

Break Up the Big Boxes, and jump start local economies by supporting locally owned businesses through BIG tax breaks and Federal support.
Junk the "Free Trade" deals that rob Americans of JOBS.
Institute Tax rebates to reward people for Buying Locally and reducing their Carbon Footprint.
Pass "Fair Competition" legislation that lets Mom & Pop compete with large corporations on a level playing field.

Return to a Consumer Based Economy by helping Consumers get More and Better JOBS.

There is no such thing as a "Free Market".
There is no such thing as "Free Trade".
There is NO Giant "Invisible Hand of the Free Market."
Those are LIES created by the Rich (Corporate Owners) and sold to a gullible America.

If you Work for a Living, don't support politicians who profess a belief in the "Free Market". They are NOT your friends.

Save Social Security by INCREASING the number of WORKERS,
NOT by decreasing benefits!

[WCGreen]

9. Just cutting back that little bit on the contribution from muinimum wage

earners would inject a whole lot of money into the system that would be spent...

[ljm2002]

10. Very sensible proposals...

...therefore we should not expect anything like this to emerge from the committee appointed to study the "problem".

Unfortunately what the powers that be see as the "problem", is people receiving Social Security insurance payments in their old age.

[A Simple Game]

11. I'm all for raising the cap, but

please do not contribute to the meme that Social Security is broke.

Social Security is not broke, it just needs the money returned that has been borrowed from it.

That was Ronald Rayguns greatest trick, lowering the taxes on the rich and raising the Social Security
rate on the poor then using it to replace the lost income taxes.

on edit: replaced and with then

[WCGreen]

14. I never said it was broken....

I said to shore it up which means give it a little funding boost. It will need one down the road about twenty years but then swing back up to complete solvency if they don't fuck it up...

I don't how you were able to conflate shore up to broke...

[A Simple Game]

21. You're right you didn't say it was broken, nor did I.

By saying Social Security needs shoring up, or a little funding boost,
you imply that Social Security is taking in less money than it needs.
If I was taking in less money than I needed, I would soon be broke.
That is if I didn't have any savings to use to fill the gap.

Social Security has a lot of money saved to fill the gap,
Ronny Rayguns saw to that by raising the Social Security rates.
Unfortunately he also saw to it that the government found a different
use for the money by using it to replace his tax cuts for the rich.
Now when Social Security needs the money, the government just doesn't want, or isn't able,
to pay back what it owes.

So the problem isn't that Social Security is broke,
or in need of shoring up, it just needs the money that is owed to it.
The problem isn't with Social Security, it's with the government that owes it money.

"I have no idea how to realistically fund medicare"
Medicare covers the most undesirable high cost customers, one's that the insurance companies don't want anyway.
This is probably why Medicare was allowed to be put in place to begin with.
The fix is to add younger low cost customers, or in other words, single payer health care.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

12. I am happy to recommend...

And I only wish the powers that be were listening to your good proposals...

[Hannah Bell]

13. US GDP per person in 1960: $16,730 (inflation-adjusted 2000 dollars). In 2000: $34,599. There is

no Social Security crisis.

There's simply a transfer of more & more income to the top tiers of wealth.


The design of the social security program isn't the problem.

[dflprincess]

15. Or pay all the money that was "borrowed" from the SS trust fund back

just stopping the policy of endless war would do that.

[Mimosa]

16. K&R for a great thread n/t

[joe_sixpack]

18. What about means testing?

Do the elderly with wealth or high income really need the small amount that SS provides?

[Fumesucker]

20. Means testing will kill SS utterly dead..

Because then it will be painted by opponents as "welfare for the poor"..

[Johonny]

23. well that and opponents would means test

everyone out of the program. Like they try to do every other social program.

[WCGreen]

26. There can be no means test....

This goes back to my proposal to get rid of the 85% recognition of income people who have other income over $34k have to include. that is a means test There should be no means test period.

[joe_sixpack]

28. Wasn't Social Security designed for the poor?

If you're going to raise the cap on income levels, then those people affected are going to pay more for the same amount of benefits. In essence, that is going to be construed as a tax to subsidize lower income levels anyway. I don't see the problem with viewing Social Security as an insurance policy against the risk of being destitute in your elderly years. Realistically it doesn't work well viewed as a retirement plan that you pay into, and then receive benefits when you retire. Those funds aren't set aside and held until you reach 62. We all know what they're used for.

[Fumesucker]

30. Ah, but as we have been told many, many times in the HIR debate..

Social Security has been modified and improved a lot.

Implying of course that HIR would be modified and improved.

Everyone laughed at Al Gore's lockbox, not so many are laughing any more I think.

[bullwinkle428]

19. Obama was talking about "making the tough decisions" this morning

at the G20. While I would absolutely LOVE to see him make this particular "tough decision", I'm afraid this will be another case of the middle class getting fucked over yet again.

[L0oniX]

22. NO CAP!

[Greyhound]

24. Remove the cap altogether and cut the contribution.

I know, it benefits too many at the expense of the very few that have no use for it and therefore, discussion will not be allowed.
:kick: & R

[sufrommich]

25. It's either that or Soylent Green. nt

[suston96]

27. The only way to shore up Social Security is.....JOBS JOBS JOBS.....

Get the unemployment rate down to 5% and that gap that exists between inputs and outputs in Social Security and Medicare will become positive instead of negative.

Face it. The economy must be fixed so that tax collections and Social Security and Medicare contributions by workers are restored sooner than later.

Giving up on the economy and restored jobs as well as new jobs cannot be tolerated. Social Security and Medicare will be the least of our worries if this economy doesn't upsurge very, very soon.

[WCGreen]

32. Cutting the contribution and the tax on the FICA for people working

for minimum wage will inject several billion dollars into the economy. That's a start...

[librechik]

29. don't ask why this country is impervious to common sense solutions like this

that's like Toto pulling the curtain back to reveal an old jaded humbug at the levers of power in the US.