Dale Coberly presents another methodology to save Social Security without cutting benefits to the elderly. Any of these will work and does not involve taxing the rich which could result in a reversal with each new administration. It is incremental and small portions of a dollar or two on a weekly basis. And it still keeps SS as the third rail. Starting in 2026 with . . . Raising the payroll tax one half percent each for people and companies in 2026. This is half of what polls have said people prefer to any cuts. Too small for anyone, even employers. to really feel bad about. Starting the next year continue to raise the payroll tax two tenths of a percent per year. this is two dollars per week per year. again, too small to notice. Stop
Topics:
Angry Bear considers the following as important: dale Colberly, payroll tax, social security
This could be interesting, too:
Angry Bear writes EIGHT WAYS TO FIX SOCIAL SECURITY
Angry Bear writes 2024 SOCIAL SECURITY REPORT IS OUT THE MEDIA MISS THE POINT
Joel Eissenberg writes Social Security and Medicare updates
Bill Haskell writes Other Taxes on the Rich for Social Security? The Wrong Approach
Dale Coberly presents another methodology to save Social Security without cutting benefits to the elderly. Any of these will work and does not involve taxing the rich which could result in a reversal with each new administration. It is incremental and small portions of a dollar or two on a weekly basis. And it still keeps SS as the third rail.
Starting in 2026 with . . .
Raising the payroll tax one half percent each for people and companies in 2026. This is half of what polls have said people prefer to any cuts. Too small for anyone, even employers. to really feel bad about.
Starting the next year continue to raise the payroll tax two tenths of a percent per year. this is two dollars per week per year. again, too small to notice.
Stop raising the tax in in 2034 at 8.3% each. this is actually two years after SS has reached long term actuarial solvency. By then no one should notice. the extra two tenths of a percent will eliminate the moving window problem for a long time. maybe forever if current thinking among the actuaries turns out to be correct.
My guess is most people will love it, if the bad guys don’t convince them they can’t afford it. We need to remind them it is what it takes to feed themselves when they can no longer work. or don’t want to work and can afford to retire because they paid for it themselves . . . out of an income that should be about four times (real money) than they have today. I mean REALLY remind them. they don’t think clearly and the bad guys will be making them think their taxes are going up sixteen percent and they’ll never see a dime of it. and it will be a crushing burden on the young.
Anyway. i think it does what Mike said we need to do: show them something that makes a difference.
Btw: this also eliminates the short-range financial inadequacy immediately and permanently. While in its first year it moves the trust fund zero date about ten years into the future.
It’s aggressive, but it stops a “problem” that has been eating away at us since Bush2 told everyone that SS was “broke. flat busted” . . . or even before that, when Gingrich and Clinton agreed that raising the retirement age was “the obvious solution.”
And, did I say, it doesn’t cost the government a dime. does not increase the deficit/national debt . . . and the bigger TF will lend money to the country to help keep regular taxes down.