26
Comments (12)
sorted by:
2
RS34ME [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

My liberal parents are trying to convince me that Trump’s payroll tax cut in response to Covid-19 is a step he’s taking to take money away from Social Security. I’m not buying it, but wanted to hear others’ opinions, too.

3
kono_hito_wa 3 points ago +4 / -1

Social Security isn't a fund. It's a ponzi scheme. The people that first collected didn't pay in much at all. Ever since, payouts have come from current payroll taxes. It's essentially elderly welfare.

Spez:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-floats-temporarily-eliminating-payroll-tax-boost-economy-amid-coronavirus-fears

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dems-condemn-trumps-payroll-tax-cut-after-supporting-obamas-payroll-tax-cut

2
RS34ME [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

So, after you retire are you more or less affected by this? I’ve never quite understood Social Security.

1
kono_hito_wa 1 point ago +2 / -1

It has a defined payout based upon how much you paid over your lifetime. And then regular cost of living adjustments (COLA) - i.e., regular raises.

2
RS34ME [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Thank you! 👍

2
Opinionated_Ocelot 2 points ago +3 / -1

It technically takes direct tax funds away from Social Security, but it's not going to go unfunded.

I have no reason to believe any politician would be crazy enough to end Social Security outright. The constituents that actually vote paid into it and a good portion of our population depends on that income. It's political suicide.

But we do need to cut through the vitriol and just propose a phase-out and replacement plan. Social Security has gone on for too long and is failing.

1
IntrepidBurger 1 point ago +1 / -0

Social Security is still getting funded, via debt.

The tradeoff with this proposal is to take on immediate debt in order to prevent the economy from stalling which keeps tax revenues higher than if you simply didn't cut those taxes and let the economy get to a point where it takes a long time to recover. That's the idea, anyhow. It's virtually impossible to predict the actual outcome because of the number of variables. This is the basic Keynesian economic argument though.

2
Opinionated_Ocelot 2 points ago +4 / -2

Social Security was never meant to be a permanent solution.

Now, it's been expanded far beyond its initial reach and it pays out more than what the working class puts in - and really, it's not much for the average American. Due to math, it will fail sooner or later. It just needs to not be catastrophic.

We need a phase-out plan to support the remaining population that already paid into it their entire lives while also hopefully ensuring our working class gets a new retirement plan/fund. Better 401K...Pensions... something. May as well do it while the markets are down - like ripping off a bandaid.

1
LigmaNutzCommies 1 point ago +1 / -0

AMEN! I can't stand the sight of how much of my paycheck goes to SS. I could invest that money myself and be exponentially better off at retirement!

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Tulkas71 1 point ago +1 / -0

This an admission that is a pyramid scheme?

0
WalkFastGoHome 0 points ago +1 / -1

I don't care if it does, I'm you g enough where I'm not getting what I paid into it anyway.