re: 'You earned it, you keep it act' bill would eliminate taxes on Social Security

quote:

---

earnings >$250K
---
Nope...not all. Depends on the source of the income - W2 verses pass-through businesses.

---

Correct. Bad habit. I carelessly use earnings and earned income interchangeably. Easier to type the one word until more specificity is needed.

That, and I have real aversion to the term "unearned income"

quote:

---

I get this sentiment, but how is it going bankrupt then?

---

Pure speculation on my part here but I'd say 3 things for certain:

1. Demographic changes -- we have a lot less workers today funding the program and people, on average, are living longer than when the program started.

2. Mismanagement of Funds -- Congress has raided these "trust fund" for decades to pay for other stupid shite and close shortfalls.

3. Fraudulent "Disability" Claims -- I have no data but I'd imagine you have tons of people on Social Security "disability" with some bullshite condition that are draining funds that they never contributed to.

quote:

---

If it's how you claim - you're just getting what you paid in - then why does it matter if I pay? Your generation's pot of money should pay for you.

---

The program was intended to be "insurance" in the sense that the founders of the program didn't want old ladies whose husband's died to end up homeless and destitute.

The program has since evolved over time to be a de facto "retirement" program for the lower classes.

If you look at it as an insurance program it may make a little more sense.

quote:

---

The reality is that workers surviving to retirement age has increased, extending survivor benefits for those that die before/after retirement, and people living to be older than the program intended are what is draining it. Politics prevents the above from being corrected.

---

Agreed. I'm not simping for Social Security. haha. Just trying to offer some pushback on the board. SS has plenty of problems and needs reform ASAP.

quote:

---

Having more "workers" paying to cover the current beneficiaries only masks the problem; a sort of pyramid scheme. At some point you can't keep growing workers/population at which point that generation would be screwed.

---

Sure....the SS program always has had ponzi scheme characteristics in that it always need more people and new money to sustain itself.

quote:

---

Lastly, imo, SS is one of the easier problems to fix relative to the slew of government problems.

---

Absolutely. It is a math problem at the root. As with most things, there is zero policital will to reform it and the politicians don't win elections by telling grandma and grandpa they are going to cut their "earned benefits" so the can is kicked down the road.

Younger people don't vote. Older folks, who this directly impacts, vote much more and thus have more political sway and impact.

Unless and until young people (40 and under) start voting en masse and getting politicians in office to fight for their concerns and issues nothing will change.

As with most collapses, the SS program's demise will be slowly and then all at once.

quote:

---

Yes. I was just repeating wording in the OP source. FYI, the actual bill frames it in terms of an employment/wage tax.

---

I wasn't trying to challenge you, I saw what you were quoting. You are right, thanks for posting.

But the bill also details that the limit would essentially be phased out. It also says you will get very little benefit for those contributions over 250k. So this absolutely reads as additional tax for high earners moving forward. They are coming for those S corp earnings

quote:

---

#2. I haven’t done a slew of research but I believe this isn’t true. SS must purchase treasuries with excess funds.

---

You are absolutely right. Excess funds in the trust are invested in Treasuries. So the money is "loaned" not "raided".

quote:

---

DaveyJones12

---

You'll keep paying SS and I'll enjoy spending your money.. Thanks!