That’s a hard pass for me. I’d rather opt out of social security. It’s a ponzi scam. If the government had put that into a private account, I’d have millions of dollars in there.

  • nxdefiant@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Gotta jack that corporate tax rate way up Morty. Get it way up there. Financial services, insurance and landlords are like 20% of the GDP alone. Tax the ever living fuck out of those leaches.

  • glimse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    If the government had put that into a private account, I’d have millions of dollars in there.

    I assumed you started working in 1977 for $120k/year (that’s $630k in today’s value btw) and retired today, contributing 6.2% monthly from the start and put it in a 6% monthly compounding savings account, you’d be just shy of millions ($1.9m).

    I did not account for raises because if you’ve made over $7m in your lifetime, you don’t need the cash payout from social security anyway. It’s a safety net for people who can’t afford to save for retirement - and they’ve been paying into it their whole lives, too.

    I’m not a fan of how social security has been handled (or that I’m not going to benefit as much as boomers have) but social security for everyone benefits the country.

    • Neuromancer@lemm.eeOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      6 months ago

      I started working in 1988. I haven’t made less than 100k since 2000. I’ve averaged since about 2010 over 400k a year.

      Increasing how much I pay into the system; doesn’t increase the amount I receive. That isn’t in the design.

      401k allows about double social security with the cap. I have about 5 million in my 401k which shows social would have done better in a private account.

      • glimse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah, so you’re wealthy. You don’t need any social security (but you still benefit from it)

        Moving it to a private account means a tiny group of millionares would make billions off our tax dollars. I am not on board with that.

          • glimse@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Yes, you do. A healthy country benefits all citizens.

            There’s a financial burden we all bare when people can’t afford to live. We’re spared part of that burden through the underprivileged receiving social security

            • Neuromancer@lemm.eeOPM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              15
              ·
              6 months ago

              No I don’t. It’s just a wealth transfer which doesn’t build wealth. It provides zero benefit to me.

              • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                18
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                You must really like crime, because what you’re advocating for is the worsening of economic outcomes for Americans and therefore crime.

              • glimse@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Yes, you do. Trickle down economics is a proven disaster that has eroded the middle class. It’s much better for the country to help bring the bottom up than to further increase wealth inequality by further funding the rich with our tax dollars.

                You’re against wealth transfer but you’re proposing another one…this time to the wealthiest people in the country. And you’re fine with that because you get some more scraps out of it.

                I’d be more sympathetic to your plight if you paid your fair share in taxes…but you richer you are, the less you contribute proportionally. You’re not the 1% but your attitude is why there’s so much anger toward the rich.

                • Neuromancer@lemm.eeOPM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  9
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  I am not suggesting a wealth transfer. Keeping my own money is not a transfer. Trickle down didn’t hurt the middle class. That’s some weird liberal re-write of history. If that was the issue then why didn’t the democrats fix it? NAFTA and other trades agreements are what destroyed the middle class. When companies could move jobs to China or Mexico , that removed the factory jobs many middle class people depended on.

  • skydivekingair@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 months ago

    The difference between Social Security and a Ponzi Scheme is the Ponzi lures people in with promises of high rate of return. Social Security is involuntary and promises flat returns (not even rate since deduction amounts are different based on earnings).

    • Neuromancer@lemm.eeOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      6 months ago

      Social security is no different. It’s claim much more than the average person puts in and the government isn’t generating any real interest to pay for it.

      It’s why the system is in trouble. It’s a ponzi design. I have no interest in it. It steals wealth from people.

  • Ekybio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Reasonable leftis get a bad rep when it comes to economics. When I read garbage like this, I am reminded that this is just a lie.

    When the first “real” argument is to think of the Government as a business, you miss the point entirely.

    The Government is not a business. And that is a good thing.

    Not sure I even want to read further in, because it is, like always, just down the hill from there.

    No wonder all the posts are downvoted so much, when this is the best that is offered.

    Edit: Read further in. And spelling.

    Do not recommend if you value critical analysis.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Currently, everyone earning less than $168,600 ALREADY pays social security tax on all their income.

    So… what? 90% of wage earners?

    • Neuromancer@lemm.eeOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      6 months ago

      If they increase the cap or remove it. It’s more of my wages stolen. You’re correct. It’s a small group but as I am part of that group, as such I don’t more of my wages stolen.

      We live in the same neck of the woods. Do you think our cost of living has went up over the past few years or stayed the same? I’ve seen drastic increases and would like to keep more of my money.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Removing the cap helps ensure SSI stability, so overall, that would be a good thing even if it means 10% of high wage earners have to pay the same rate as the other 90%.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                If social security collapses, millions of seniors will be destitute, and those of us who have been paying into it all our adult lives will get nothing and riot in the streets.

                You don’t fully comprehend the ramifications of what you’re calling for.