In the early 1980s, Alan Greenspan worked to secure Social Security's solvency until the 2050s not 2030s. Inequality straining the system.
  • LastYearsPumpkin@feddit.chEnglish
    191·
    9 months ago

    Man, things would be way better for everyone if we just listened to Bernie once in a while (read: always)

  • OpenPassageways@lemmy.zip
    5·
    9 months ago

    If Republicans were serious about cuts to entitlements, they would do it when they have power instead of cutting taxes. Of course, their voters depend on it, so they won’t.

  • eric@lemmy.world
    106·
    9 months ago

    I get what the title is trying to say, but it is pretty poorly written because low birthrates DO strain social security. However inequality causes lower birthrates which in turn strains social security

    • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
      17·
      9 months ago

      That isn’t what the title is saying.

      Basically the percentage of taxable income has dropped drastically. The wealthy’s income has spiked drastically compared to less monetarily-gifted citizens. So the population is putting less money into social security. That drop is hitting a lot harder than just have fewer workers.

    • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
      182·
      9 months ago

      I’m for reducing the birthrate to zero until inequality is fully addressed.

      You have to either be a monster or truly not care about anyone to bring a non-wealthy child into this work camp as our very habitat fails by our own sabotage. Why? Because misery loves company? Because the job creators want new capital batteries for their progeny to drain the life force of?

      Oh I know, because the owners promised 50 years ago that if we gave them ALL the money and power, and we did for some reason, one day they would emerge from their guarded towers to whip their cocks out and urinate golden showers of prosperity upon all of us, and though you won’t live to see it, surely your child will amirite!

  • Brawndo@kbin.social
    47·
    9 months ago

    Social Security is one of the greatest scams of all time.

    Generally speaking, this is how it works

    Lower Income families pay into it longer (didn’t go to college, have to get a job and start getting taxed at 18 vs. going to college and started to be taxed at say 22)

    Lower Income families receive benefits for less time (pretty much all statistics show that the wealthier you are, the longer you live)

    Lower income families pay a higher percentage of their income than wealthier families. (Social Security only on the first ~$130K in income. It’s a regressive tax)

    Lower income families are paid out less in benefits. You get paid out based on what you pay in.

    Wealthier families typically have other passive forms of income that are not subject to the Social Security tax, this means that if they get to keep this income stream going into retirement they are at a massive advantage over lower income families who if they have to work a job in retirement that again have to pay Social Security taxes on wages they earn.

    In addition to all of this, upon death of both the primary and spouse, all the money taken vanishes and cannot be passed down to their children or beneficiaries which only compounds wealth inequality.

    In short, Social Security is a regressive tax that unfairly penalizes the poor and provides a higher welfare pay out to families that are wealthier.

    • Willy@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      2·
      9 months ago

      maybe it could be better? maybe it has been perverted? scam is a hard word I appreciate insight