Social Security

5% of American workers should save Social Security‼️


What do you think of the above? Do you agree? Do you think it makes sense or if it is feasible?

First, about those fifty years. The standard measure for Social Security is seventy-five years. You can manipulate any result you want by changing the time frame. In addition, what you are reading is merely pushing the problem down on the next generation when it will be worse. The goal should  full solvency and sustainability. 

When you eliminate the taxable wage cap, you solve only 76% of the 75-year solvency problem. You don’t leave room for improvements in Social Security. And you don’t make SS sustainable.

“Force wealthier Americans?” Just be be clear, there are government employees and union workers who, with overtime, bonuses, etc. hit $118,000 in a given year. And that level of income in many areas of the country is not wealthy. The truly wealthy don’t earn their wealth from weekly wages subject to the Social Security tax. 

Between 5-6% of all Americans have incomes of more than $100,000 a year. Are we saying it is this small slice of Americans who should carry future generations in their retirement? 

In 2016 the problem is clear both for Social Security (and Medicare) and with Americans saving and planning for retirement. We are looking at the Social Security problem as if nothing will change in the next fifty years; that the next generation will also rely substantially or entirely on Social Security or that it will want to retire at 65. 

That is a big mistake. Why perpetuate a flawed system for future generations? We need to rethink the big,  long-term picture. 

We should be striving to make Social Security less significant (because workers are better prepared themselves) in the future or we should tax all workers now at a level that makes SS sustainable and provides a fully livable income thus relieving workers of the need to save as much for retirement. 

All we are doing now is playing stupid political games and screwing future generations while seeking to make Social Security another welfare program. 


1 reply »

  1. Why would anyone think this system would still work? It’s a system designed with an enrollment cutoff of 65 years old, at a time when life expectancy was also 65 years old. It is destined to fail now that it has an enrollment cutoff of 62 in a world where the life expectancy has risen to 80, and is still rising.

    The amount of tax diversion from other projects that would be necessary to prop this up would be massive.


What's your opinion on this post? Readers would like your point of view.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s