12 Ways to Fix Social Security

Reader Comments

Back to blog

Address the explosion in disability payments that are burdening a system that was not designed to be a source of funds for every faker with a bad back. The Democrats seem to believe that whenever someone can be added to the public support roles, they have gained a ballot for life. Encouraging this sense of entitlement is not only detrimental to a program meant for retirees, who have paid into it, but undermines our American way of life and leads to elimination of our freedoms.

Tom of CT 1:48PM May 23, 2012

Trust fund liabilities? Utter nonsense!

Contrary to popular belief, FICA does not pay for SS. The U.S., as a Monetarily Sovereign nation, which has the unlimited ability to create its sovereign dollars, neither needs nor uses dollars received from anyone.

The federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, has the unlimited ability to send instructions crediting SS beneficiaries' checking accounts. Even if FICA were $0, and SS benefits were tripled, the federal government still would not run short of instructions to increase checking accounts and pay SS benefits.

The federal government can pay any bill of any size at any time. It never can go bankrupt. Because the federal government can’t go bankrupt, none of its agencies can go bankrupt, and none ever has. No federal check ever has bounced.

bambi of FL 4:47AM May 13, 2012

They should have just stopped at the point "MODIFY the existing SS tax cap", except change the first word to "ELIMINATE." This is just one more example of the biggest welfare cheat system in this country, the "Welfare for the Wealthy" clause. Many years ago, I "topped out" on the cap when it was around $60,000 with several months left in the year, giving me a 6.2 percent (or whatever the rate was at that time) pay raise on all my income for the rest of the year. Then, like now, congress was always having to come up with funding for Social Security. I thought at the time,"I don't really need this income cap, and felt somewhat guilty because people making almost nothing would pay the same SS contribution rate as I was paying, but had the deduction taken out for the full year. The top 400 individuarl wage earners made an AVERAGE of $273 Million income for the year, and yet paid only $6,622 into Social Security. It wouldn't hurt anyone making above $106,800 per year if they continued to pay into the system. This article states that 95 percent of the deficit could be wiped out by eliminating the cap. This is the ONE FLAT income tax we have in the tax code, and the people who clamor constantly for a FLAT tax should not object to paying the rate that even the poorest American wage earners pay. If they willingly contributed their "fair" FLAT share, I would be more apt to consider their proposal of a flat income tax. But when the top 2 percent are able to contribute unlimited amounts to Super PAC's which send Lobbyists loaded with billions in campaign contributions to wave in a congressman or candidate's face, they can't resist taking the money. If they don't take it, the lobbyists will find another WATER BOY who will work in THEIR BEHALF, which is usually going to be against the interests of 98 percent of Americans. Lobbying needs to be done 100 percent in public view on C Span, with no direct contact with any elected representataives behind closed doors. Equal time needs to be allocated on TV for opposing views. And no congressman should ever be allowed to go to work for a lobbying firm or any company which does business with the government. All Federal elections should be conducted with public campaign financing, over the broadcast airwaves of radio and TV which are by law the property of the people of the United States Of America. The stations are licensed every two years for the sold purpose TO SERVE THE PUBLIC INTEREST. This has always been true, ahead of the station owners "profit motive." They can profit from selling commercial airtime, but that does not fulfill thier mission. And anyone who says, as Newt Gingrich said about 15 years ago that there "Is not nearly enough money spent on political campaigns" is never going to understand the links between "contributions" and BRIBERY. The biggest problem is that the American people are stuck with the payback costs of these Bribes. $5.00 gasoline is a prime example.

mac gardner of OK 8:57PM May 12, 2012

How about coming up with a plan to pay back the 2.5 trillion dollars borrowed from the Social Security trust fund and used to fund such things as the Bush tax cuts, which so far have cost about the same amount? Politicians only care about the next election. They don't lose a lot of sleep worrying about what might happen 25 years from now if the average person starts living to age 90. Predictions that far in the future are guesswork - But politicians want to roll back benefits, so that the SS trust fund will continue to run at a surplus that can be "borrowed" with no plan in place to pay it back.

Franklin of CA 6:49PM May 12, 2012

How about coming up with a plan to pay back the 2.5 trillion dollars borrowed from the Social Security trust fund and used to fund such things as the Bush tax cuts, which so far have cost about the same amount? Politicians only care about the next election. They don't lose a lot of sleep worrying about what might happen 25 years from now if the average person starts living to age 90. Predictions that far in the future are guesswork - But politicians want to roll back benefits, so that the SS trust fund will continue to run at a surplus that can be "borrowed" with no plan in place to pay it back.

Franklin of CA 6:47PM May 12, 2012

stop stealing from peter to pay paul.....

sheila of CA 10:48AM May 10, 2012

good point Mike F. from MI. Let's stop all the wasteful spending and there will be plenty of money. I do agree that businesses should also pay more into the fund since they use up there workers and then get rid of us whenever the CEO isn't getting enough of a bonus.

JP of NM 6:46PM May 09, 2012

my social security payments are not same as your article----Payments were calculated at 1500 at 62 or over 2000 at 65 and my income was nothing close to 106,000 a year but i worked since 18 and contributed for 42 years+++5 more years....i am expecting over 2000 a month and nothing less!!

marty of FL 8:16PM May 08, 2012

Social security may be meant as an insurance program, but it is not designed as one!

Insurance companies can take your premiums and invest them to hopefully earn a rate of return to pay beneficiaries and earn profits. That mechanism does not exist with social security. Social security must be simplified to survive. Please sign this petition:

Whttp://wh.gov/Pke

david of NY 2:20PM April 22, 2012

If the stinking congress and senate wouldn't have raided the funds several times , we would not have this problem . Take away their golden safety net and any other perks they get from us and maybe we can still have what is owed to us .

Mike F of MI 6:13PM April 15, 2012

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Back to blog

Planning to Retire

Planning to Retire

Associate editor Emily Brandon tells you how to get ready financially for retirement and to make your golden years the best they can be.

advertisement

EASY RETIREMENT CALCULATOR

Our retirement readiness calculator will provide a rough idea of how long your retirement savings and income will last.


Latest Video

advertisement