“The new bill would seek to lessen the strain on people collecting Social Security by boosting each recipient’s monthly check by $200 — an annual increase of $2,400. “Many, many seniors rely on Social Security for the majority, if not all, of their income,” said Martha Shedden, president of the National Association of Registered Social Security Analysts. “$200 a month can make a significant difference for many people.“
“With half of older Americans having no retirement savings, and millions living in poverty, it’s far past time to address the future of Social Security,” Rep. Steve Cohen, D.-Tennessee, a cosponsor of the bill, said in a statement. In a tweet, he called the $147,000 cap on Social Security taxes “indefensible.”
Why in the world do senior citizens – already consuming most federal spending via Social Security and Medicare – deserve more?
Didn’t we have thirty or forty years to plan for retirement? Aren’t there scores of tax laws to help with that planning? Why do politicians feel it necessary to paint all of a group with one brush? People living life-long in or near poverty are one thing, the rest of us are something quite different. We have no right to keep taking.
Whose fault is it if “half” of older Americans have no retirement savings – a questionable fact for sure.
Of course the $147,000 taxable wage cap is indefensible, but not for the fair share reasons Cohen pushes. It’s indefensible because it should have been raised more than it has, along with the tax percentage, to keep the Trust solvent and to preserve the basic principles for funding Social Security. Earnings above the taxable wage cap receive no credit toward the benefit paid.
Regardless of total income, everyone is treated the same. Cohen and friends want to change that.
Workers and employers have been paying into Social Security for eighty five years.
Social Security taxes were first collected in January 1937 with workers and employers each paying one percent of the first $3,000 in wages and salary. While not so simple, applying inflation to the 2% combined tax, today it would be 39%.
What is simple is the fact that Congress has made numerous changes to Social Security over the years and failed to adequately fund them. It is also true that the demographics of the population has changed.
In 1945 the ratio of workers to beneficiaries was 41.9, in 1980 it was 3.2 and by 2010 2.9. Now there are currently 2.7 covered workers per each Social Security beneficiary. By 2035, there will be 2.3 covered workers for each beneficiary. In addition the life expectancy at age 65 has increased by over six years. Fewer people paying taxes, more people collecting benefits.
Not regularly adjusting taxes for such changes is what is truly indefensible‼️‼️‼️
Taxing higher earners on earnings not used in the benefit formula is indefensible. It changes the very principles behind Social Security and for political expedience makes it more and more a welfare program.