Skip to main content

View Diary: Insolvency, tax cuts, military spending and social security (188 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  how so? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    if they pay more in, they get more out.  Not as much as if they put it in an IRA, but it will still be there when they are 70.

    •  My understanding of proposals to raise the cap (0+ / 0-)

      is that such a move would not be coupled by further increasing benefits for the rich (or at least not commensurately), since that would not help to close the funding gap, and so what's the point?  

      •  No sane proposals are like that. (0+ / 0-)

        Amount of benefits in will equal benefits out, regardless of how many people those $ go to. Give or take a few million $ (since there is no way to gauge every single person's lifespan to the month) each year, and you're good to go.

        "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

        by bryduck on Tue Apr 24, 2012 at 05:02:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  But that is, in fact, how it works now. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          It isn't the case that a person who pays twice as much in social security taxes gets double the benefit. I'm not sure what you think I'm talking about, but that is the only fact relevant for my argument.

          The amount of benefits is fixed by a statutory formula. It does not depend on how much money goes into the system. That's the whole reason we need reform, which nobody is contesting (raising the cap is a reform that people here seem to favor).

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site