You are correct. Just the first one, if it is raised to 400,000 would cover 60% of the shortfall.
Why raise it to only $400,000? Maybe it should be raised to ALL wages and employer paid compensation?
Will you be increasing the maximum benefit as well ?
I would raise the maximum benefits if billionaires have to pay the tax. SocSec is insuranceā¦ so how much does a person need in order to live at a spendy, faishionable level?
Iām all for giving a billionaire up to $500,000 a year in SocSec benefits. Honestly, if that insurance amount isnāt enough to fund them at a pretty good level, then they probably need some psych counseling, they have some obsessive disorder centered around money. Or maybe they are just greedy.
My understanding is the system is already progressiveā¦ those who pay in less get proportionately more. Itās not an investment, itās a social benefit. Before SeocSec, old people were literally dying of starvation on the streets.
Funny, I was just ready an email from one of my pastorsā¦ discussing worshiping God vs other thingsā¦ āif you worship money, you will feel like you never have enoughā. I think thatās whatās going on with some ultra wealthy people.
**citation needed
1 Like
āBefore Social Security, in 1934, roughly one half of seniors were estimated to be poor. Most had to rely on family or friends, or go to the poor house. As ever more seniors paid into Social Security and then received retirement benefits, the poverty rate among seniors steadily declined from circa 50 percent in the Great Depression to 35 percent in 1959, 25 percent in 1970, 15 percent in 1975, and around 10 percent in 2000, where it has hovered ever since. Today, were it not for Social Security, the senior poverty rate would be 43.5 percent, and just over half of elderly African Americans (51 percent) and Latinos (52 percent) would be poor.ā
Doesnāt say anything about āliterally dying of starvation on the streets.ā Just that they relied on family, friends, or the poor house. Much like what they do now.