That’s the shit that gets me riled up. Maybe it’s a bad take, but if social security is shrinking and won’t be there for us when we reach retirement age, government should get their fuckin hands off my paychecks. Why do we have to fund billionaires and their toxic yacht tendencies? Why the fuck do they need a dollar more??
The only reason SS wouldn’t pay out is if you don’t qualify or it is repealed (or they break the operations so it doesn’t work). It will be there when you retire at a reduced rate. If we uncapped the SS contributions the that problem goes away.
That depends on when you’re retiring.
The money is running out, period. The fact that its running out in the 2030s isn’t news (the article even states this hit to SS only changes things by a year), and that payments will be reduced is true. But a 50 year old will get that radically reduced rate, but get something. A 20 year old really doesn’t have that guarantee, especially with how freely the rules can change by the time they hit retirement age.
We’re at the tipping point, so of course there’s a lot of upheaval about it, but there really hasn’t been a definitive plan (let alone a good one) on how to change this predicament so that resting on “you’ll get something” seems optimistic at best.
I did a quick Google search, and this is just a random sampling of the results. What you are saying is false. Period. I don’t know if you’re intentionally lying or not, but it’s frankly embarrassing to see someone try to argue against reality.
Social Security will still exist after 2035, according to the report. But without congressional action, retirees will only receive 83% of their full benefits.
Insolvent doesn’t mean it goes away, it means reduced payment.
Please don’t attack my intellect without comprehending your own sources.
Thats what I mean. Losing a quarter of what is inadequate to pay bills is going to be worse than the taxes on you job barely paying bills now being slightly lower.
Do I get to pay 24% less social security tax?
Hehe. You know the answer to that.
You need to be rich enough to qualify for the tax cuts I guess
That’s the shit that gets me riled up. Maybe it’s a bad take, but if social security is shrinking and won’t be there for us when we reach retirement age, government should get their fuckin hands off my paychecks. Why do we have to fund billionaires and their toxic yacht tendencies? Why the fuck do they need a dollar more??
The only reason SS wouldn’t pay out is if you don’t qualify or it is repealed (or they break the operations so it doesn’t work). It will be there when you retire at a reduced rate. If we uncapped the SS contributions the that problem goes away.
I wish that were true. But it’s getting sabotaged, one little bit at a time. Death by a thousand cuts.
That depends on when you’re retiring. The money is running out, period. The fact that its running out in the 2030s isn’t news (the article even states this hit to SS only changes things by a year), and that payments will be reduced is true. But a 50 year old will get that radically reduced rate, but get something. A 20 year old really doesn’t have that guarantee, especially with how freely the rules can change by the time they hit retirement age.
We’re at the tipping point, so of course there’s a lot of upheaval about it, but there really hasn’t been a definitive plan (let alone a good one) on how to change this predicament so that resting on “you’ll get something” seems optimistic at best.
The only way money is running out is if people stop paying into the system altogether. As long as people pay into SS there is money to distribute.
https://www.cnbc.com/select/will-social-security-run-out-heres-what-you-need-to-know/
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/social-security-fund-run-dry-sooner-previously-expected/story?
https://www.newsweek.com/social-security-running-out-money-trustees-report-2087749
I did a quick Google search, and this is just a random sampling of the results. What you are saying is false. Period. I don’t know if you’re intentionally lying or not, but it’s frankly embarrassing to see someone try to argue against reality.
From the first article:
Insolvent doesn’t mean it goes away, it means reduced payment.
Please don’t attack my intellect without comprehending your own sources.
Lol
Whatever dude
if you did would it allow you to cover expenses in retirement?
Retirement… HAH!
(That’ll never happen for me)
Thats what I mean. Losing a quarter of what is inadequate to pay bills is going to be worse than the taxes on you job barely paying bills now being slightly lower.
I’m not disagreeing. I was adding my anecdotal example as agreement, with a side order of snark