Yes. S.O.C.I.A.L. S.E.C.U.R.I.T.Y.
Look how well Americans will fight for and defend Social security benefits.
We really should just force an expansion of Social Security like most civilized countries.
2. Social Security isn't doing much better. It will be broke in ~15 years, paying out exactly as much as it takes in.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/05/politics/social-security-bene...
#2 - Social Security needs work, but it's not going to be "broke". It can't be "broke". It's a required expense by law. It will be funded from other sources. And, not all that long after it hits that break-even point, we'll start seeing the demographic adjustment--i.e., the Baby Boomers dying off in quantity--begin to adjust that back towards the other direction.
As usual, when one finds oneself repeating things said by people who want to destroy institutions, one should look deeper into them for truth.
Remove the income cap limit. ( https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/12/10/what-is-the-2018-m...)
All income over $128K is does not have a social security tax on it.
Remove the cap and there will be no problem.
This is how it works today; working people pay in, and our parents or grandparents get that money.
Any perceived financial trouble is because we've now got people living longer, and so we've got more retirees for the same number of workers. This... just means we need to raise taxes.
I mean, really, I think it's silly to say we have a special tax for social security; my understanding is that the money goes into the general fund anyhow (and it's been running a surplus for some time now)
We don't have a special tax for the army that you only have to pay on your first $128K/yr, why do we have that for social security?
To use the terminology of
https://www.reddit.com/r/mmt_economics/comments/7ciwqe/how_d...
if the "social security cookie jar" is empty and taxes marked for social security exceed payments, then it simply turns negative, as able to pay out as it was before.