How to : Double the current Social Security payout, and make it a true national retirement system.

[imurhuckleberry]

excerpts~

>the New America Foundation just released a study (which I authored) that proposes a different approach: doubling the current social security payout, and making it a true national retirement system. Creating a more robust system of "social security plus" would be good not onlyfor America's retirees, but also for the macro-economy at large. <

>Doubling social security's individual payout would cost about $650bn annually for the 51 million Americans who receive benefits. Here are some ways to pay for it.

First, lift social security's payroll cap that favours the wealthy. Presently, social security only taxes wages up to $106,800 a year, and any income earned above that is not taxed. The net result is that poor, middle-class, and even moderately upper middle-class, Americans are taxed 12.4% (split between employee and employer) on 100% of their income, but the wealthy pay a much lower percentage. Millionaire bankers effectively pay a paltry 1.2%.

Making all income levels pay the same percentage – that's how Medicare works – is popular with Americans and would raise about $377bn.

Second, with all Americans receiving social security plus, employer-based pensions would be redundant, so businesses would no longer need to receive the substantial federal deductions they currently accrue for providing employees' retirement plans. These deductions total a whopping $126bn annually.

Those two alone would provide three-fourths of the revenue needed to double social security's payout. Other possible revenue streams exist, such as reducing or eliminating other unfair deductions in the tax code that benefit higher income people. We could also implement this in stages, targeting first those who are most in need, or devoting an estate tax to it or cutting the bloated defence budget. We also could allow active seniors who have not yet reached full retirement age to take a half pension and work half-time without losing their right to a full pension upon retirement. <

Read entire article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/aug/25/social-security-pensions

[Dawgs]

1. K&R. Unfortunately, politicians don't have the balls to pass something even close to this.

:(

[Andy823]

4. Yes your are right

The majority of politicians are in the pockets of big corporations and cater to the rich, not the average citizen. Before something like this would even stand a chance, we would have to get public financing for congress and the president, and that is has to be done by the same members of congress who are already in the pockets of big money, so they would never vote for public financing of elections.

[Yupster]

10. The ones who will fight it the fiercest will be

public service workers unions, especially teachers.

Right now you want to do away with their Teacher Retirement systems to double their social security?

No thanks. Their own systems are way better than that thank you.

Just to give you an example, let's say I'm a teacher in Texas.

I had kids early so I started my career late at age 30. I'm going to end my career a little early at age 60. My final average three salaries are $ 68,000.

I'm scheduled to get $ 46,920 a year from TRS starting at age 60.

Or I could get no pension under your system and double my social security to $ 35,000 and get it ??.

Ooh - it's tempting.

[SammyWinstonJack]

2. K&R

[dkf]

3. Are you kidding me?

Stop private pension funds so we can all be completely dependent on a bankrupt social security system that is backed by a bankrupt government? You have got to be crazy.

[w4rma]

5. If you have a private retirement plan, then you had better hope this nation's government isn't

bankrupt, since it will flounder along with the money our nation prints.

[bluedave]

7. yep

Anyone with a working brain HAS to agree with you.

[dkf]

8. People I know are seriously contemplating the need to buy a farm.

Just in case this place collapses. But at least in a private pension we can take money out and try to find a way to hold its value. if it is part of the social security system you are going down with the ship.

[girl gone mad]

6. What's with the hyperbole?

SS and the government are in no danger of bankruptcy.

[JVS]

11. Private pensions still exist and aren't simply looted by their companies?

[dkf]

12. Some do. But what this looks like to me is another source of funds the government will spend

Like what Ronald Reagan did. No more overfunding the SS fund as a hidden tax.

[kentuck]

13. But we owe it to ourselves.

Which means it is more stable than our debt to foreign nations, right?

[dkf]

14. I would say we will be inflating our way out of this.

That makes it even more imperative that you have the ability to put funds where it won't get hit as hard. The other way to avoid paying out on those bonds is to cut benefits then the so called bonds won't ever be used. In the end the ability to pay social security benefits rests on the health of the economy. Look at Greece. They were forced to cut pensions, salaries, spending, everything. They had riots in the streets and protests but it still went through.

People understand that when there is no money there is no money.

[kentuck]

15. Oh, there is plenty of money...

But it is all at the top.

[dkf]

16. That does seem to be the fall back position by many here.

In the end get it from the rich and the savers.

I'm just not sure anybody should count on that.

[kentuck]

17. Who robbed whom??

Our savings are gone. They were "borrowed". Some folks got wealthy from those funds.

[dkf]

18. Yet what process is there to get those funds specifically from those that benefited?

You can't do it You always look at the last years income to determine taxes. The luckie duckies who benefited have gotten off already.

Or to use our favorite word, the rich are not monolithic. Some just got there some have fallen out others have died...

[JCMach1]

9. Damn socialism

:sarcasm: