Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
But you get a 4 1/2 year increase to your total retirement window
Vastly improving healthcare is a major factor in people living longer
Also a decrease in smoking and auto fatalitiesThat's part of it.
However when you look at Average Life Expectancy, comparing 1935 when SS was implemented to the modern day, the bigger impact was the decline in infant mortality rates.
WW
You didn’t answer the moral question in either post.
You didn’t answer the moral question in either post.
Because there is no good answer.
It’s just a convenient “solution”.
IOW, change it as has been proposed and resisted all along. When Republicans propose changes to extend the life of SS, they get accused of pushing Granny off the cliff by lying democrats. Apparently they would prefer to see the whole thing crash and burn as long as it happens after they leave office.It is sustainable if you gradually increase the age to 70 and require payments up to $250,000 income
For now. It won't be long, however, before SS money goes from a general fund revenue source to an expense.The money is there
For now. It won't be long, however, before SS money goes from a general fund revenue source to an expense.
66 million Americans depend upon Social Security to feed themselves and make ends meet.I think it is without dispute that Social Security’s days are numbered, save for some massive tax increases the likes of which will be intolerable to some Americans.
Keep in mind that employers are required to match SS contributions. Thus, your employers are subsiding one-half of your SS income.
True enough. I was thinking of when the paper surplus ends and there are no more T-bills that the general fund has to pay for. At that point, the general fund is no longer liable for the SS deficit.It's been paying out more than it collects for a while now.
If you want big money, you go after defense and welfare or you tax the crap out of the middle class.66 million Americans depend upon Social Security to feed themselves and make ends meet.
Roughly 25% of our citizens.
Love it or not it (or some equivalent) is going to have to stick around in perpetuity.
The mass die off that would result from ending this program would not play well on TV.
The black, bloated corpses of grandmas and grandpas lining the stteets by the millions with maggots crawling in their eye sockets.
In "the most prosperous nation on earth?"
Naw. I don't think so.
The guv-ment is going to have to "find" the money somewhere.
Maybe cut defense spending.
We never hear about The Pentagon's budget being "insolvent."
Whatever The Pentagon says it needs, it (magically?) gets.
Maybe that's a good place to start.
66 million Americans depend upon Social Security to feed themselves and make ends meet.
Roughly 25% of our citizens.
Love it or not it (or some equivalent) is going to have to stick around in perpetuity.
The mass die off that would result from ending this program would not play well on TV.
The black, bloated corpses of grandmas and grandpas lining the stteets by the millions with maggots crawling in their eye sockets.
In "the most prosperous nation on earth?"
Naw. I don't think so.
The guv-ment is going to have to "find" the money somewhere.
Maybe cut defense spending.
We never hear about The Pentagon's budget being "insolvent."
Whatever The Pentagon says it needs, it (magically?) gets.
Maybe that's a good place to start.
66 million Americans depend upon Social Security to feed themselves and make ends meet.
Roughly 25% of our citizens.
Love it or not it (or some equivalent) is going to have to stick around in perpetuity.
The mass die off that would result from ending this program would not play well on TV.
The black, bloated corpses of grandmas and grandpas lining the stteets by the millions with maggots crawling in their eye sockets.
In "the most prosperous nation on earth?"
Naw. I don't think so.
The guv-ment is going to have to "find" the money somewhere.
Maybe cut defense spending.
We never hear about The Pentagon's budget being "insolvent."
Whatever The Pentagon says it needs, it (magically?) gets.
Maybe that's a good place to start.
I believe I was 23 when they raised the retirement age from 65 to 67.Way too long to follow
In a nutshell, the life expectancy in the US over the last 45 years has risen 4 1/2 years. That means you can expect to be retired an additional 4 1/2 years
So, asking someone who is 25 to work to 70 instead of 67 is not a decrease in benefits.
U.S. Life Expectancy 1950-2024
Chart and table of U.S. life expectancy from 1950 to 2024. United Nations projections are also included through the year 2100.www.macrotrends.net
That isn’t a moral reason. You said so yourself in the post.View attachment 763114
Sure I did, but because the answer doesn't fit the paradigm that you want it to fit you dismiss it.
WW
Common negotiation request promoted by industry, then dutifully offered to union members by corrupt union representatives. It's always fuck the new employees, pamper the veterans.I believe I was 23 when they raised the retirement age from 65 to 67.
An act to provide for the general welfare by establishing a system of Federal old-age benefits, and by enabling the several States to make more adequate provision for aged persons, blind persons, dependent and crippled children, maternal and child welfare, public health, and the administration of their unemployment compensation laws; to establish a Social Security Board; to raise revenue; and for other purposes.
That isn’t a moral reason. You said so yourself in the post.
You won’t answer because there is no morality in forcing the top to pay so much more.
Instead of building inequity into the system, perhaps some sort of progressive tax for all wage ranges rather than a flat tax would be more appropriate.
Making one good point beats making none.We never hear about The Pentagon's budget being "insolvent."
