Hacker News Reader

Comment by WheelsAtLarge | Hacker News Reader

BS, watch how they somehow get the funding. Old people vote and they will make their unhappiness known to every elected official even if the official can't do anything about it.

The coming generations are the ones that will feel the pain. It's likely that SS will switch to a partial stock market funding. Where some of the money the government deducts will be invested in the stock market.

View on HN

It could easily be funded by raising the payroll tax cap and leaving the benefits cap in place. High income earners would be subsidizing the program, sounds fair to me after society enabled them to become high income earners.

> raising the payroll tax cap

I hope a capital-gains tax is considered as part of the mix.

Sure, that would be a great way to fund Social Security and Medicaid. I proposed raising the payroll tax cap simply because it works within the existing framework, but targeting wealth to fund social programs is a good idea too.

I did more digging. You'd have to tap payroll taxes, too. Total taxable capital gains in America are something like 2x the projected annual deficit.

Tax the fuck out of people and do they stop working, or quiet-quit reduce hours/effort?

There are many highly paid essential jobs that society needs. Good luck finding a doctor. How long would transportation or infrastructure last without engineers?

Obviously wouldn't matter for deadwood or bullshit jobs: but we struggle to identify those. You might think Hollywood is unnecessary, but how much of your economy depends on foreign income from unnecessary shit?

No more startups - why bother if there's no reward.

Make Britain great again, by making the US suck!

> after society enabled

You've got causality reversed. Society depends on businesses and workers.

I can't understand how anyone looks at complex systems and thinks "let's just fuck $X". Is it just ignorance?

High income earners already subsidize the program. But more importantly, why would you target high income earners instead of targeting the wealthy?

The coming generations have no skin in this game. As more Boomers die the youth will be forced to rewrite the rules.

Nice of the elders to wipe the slate clean on their way out dismantling what they benefited from.

Thomas Jefferson wrote that Constitutions must be rewritten every 19 years to be updated with modern thought. Or else the next generations are ruled by fiat decree.

So it's for the best. Would be preferred if such was done intentionally and not made a necessity due to malfeasance of the dying generation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com