The Demise Of Social Security – Is It Inevitable?
By Lucy Warner, November 1, 2014


If the Social Security system ever does fall apart as Republicans keep saying it's going to, but HUD housing is still being financed, HUD rents will become smaller and a citizen will become eligible for food stamps, emergency cash and Medicaid. The main probable cause that would result in the Social Security system going broke would be if the Republicans were to succeed in allowing those currently working and contributing through their payroll taxes, to withdraw from the Social Security system and set up retirement funds separately instead. That would eliminate the SS income source, and cause havoc. So much for Republican ideas. Their sole goal is to reduce taxes on the rich and the size of our government, even if poor people literally starve. To me that's a very purist, very philosophical goal which would benefit only the rich. I've always been pragmatic instead of idealistic, and generous rather than miserly. Even on my small monthly income I give a few dollars to several organizations each month, just because they need help. That's because I want to, and because I think that's what I should do.

Republicans recently have started calling our Social Security system a Ponzi scheme, but it works as long as people have free access to jobs, because payroll taxes are the only source of income for the SS fund. Joblessness, especially if it continues to grow due to automation and businesses shipping their jobs overseas, is a huge problem which could cripple SS. Of course, many of the wealthy don't have to pay into Social Security even if they do have income from a business because of the ridiculous tax cap, and their income taxes also are lower now due to George W. Bush's tax cut for the wealthy. They can afford to pay more – not less – and there's no good reason for people with incomes over $117,000 to have what is now a very low income cutoff for payroll taxes, considering the amount that many of them actually make – CEOs especially. An article a few months ago on the amount that too many CEOs make, as opposed to their employees, was really shocking. I hate to sound like a real socialist, but that should be illegal.

There are moves in Congress by Democrats now to raise or even eliminate this “cap” on SS taxes enjoyed by CEOs or others including self-employed individuals who are subject to SS taxes. If that happens, the highly paid doctors, lawyers, CEOs and market managers will cry foul, but the Social Security system will have a sizable increase in its funding, so the unfortunately very numerous “boomers” will not have their benefits cut as much. That change would make our system much more fair. The Social Security system is a Ponzi scheme that works well as long as everybody pays into it. It's fair. to my way of looking at it, to require the rich to pay a share, because they will then be eligible to receive benefits upon retirement, though their benefits are “means tested.” See this Fortune article on that subject – “http://fortune.com/2012/02/29/cut-social-security-for-the-rich-we-already-have/” .

John Q Public, even if he does belong to the Tea Party philosophy, does not generally have enough income to set up a retirement plan for himself that will be sufficient to last until he dies, especially if he encounters heavy medical expenses or a tornado destroys his huge house. When those individual retirement plans run out, the retiree will be bankrupt, as medical bills and housing costs come along. The Republicans would say that is just okay, because if the worker had scrimped and saved even more all his life – and of course made sufficient investments in stocks, real estate, or new business development – he would have ended up with enough to retire wealthy. I disagree on that assumption, too, because most people don't know enough about business to really get rich on stocks, etc. It's another form of gambling, and many lose their shirts on the stock market. Many of them invest in some new business venture and then go bankrupt because the business fails.

The market inevitably punishes wrong doers with dire poverty, without a social safety net, even if they have made an honest effort to succeed. And that's just okay to many Republicans, as long as they are not numbered among the failures. To me, it is a mark of an ethical government that the basic needs of all citizens will be met. Of course who defines “basic” has to be negotiated. To lots of Republicans, anyone who is unable to manage his finances in such a way that he becomes rich, deserves to die of malnutrition and live in squalor.

Our social safety net which includes the Social Security system does give guaranteed income with no punishment for factors like drug addiction, with no “work houses” as a requirement to receive their money, though there have been Republicans who advocate welfare payments be based on work. I don't know how they plan to do that unless they would set up a system of government jobs like Roosevelt did with the Work Projects Administration; WPA. Too many of those who don't work today have tried endlessly to find work, and have been unable to do so.

Our current Welfare system includes programs of several kinds for the very poor which takes over before they are at retirement age, though the money is not distributed with a lavish hand. Since Bill Clinton those who receive Welfare and who are physically and mentally able to work, are required to sign up for work after taking job training programs. The number of people who actually are hired will depend on the market, of course.

Any one who politically challenges that basically low guaranteed income called welfare, deserves to be voted out of office, and I will continue to try my best to do that. And those who would eliminate the graduated Income Tax, as some Republicans do tout, who would give ever increasing budgets to the military, work to prevent business regulations to reduce the CO2 in our atmosphere, and other such cynical and uncaring moves, are equally unethical and hopefully will be voted out of office.

Our social safety net which includes the Social Security system does give guaranteed income with no punishment for factors like drug addiction, with no “work houses” as a requirement to receive the money – or a reinstatement of indentured labor as one Tea Partier recently suggested -- though there have been Republicans who advocate welfare payments be based on work. I don't know how they plan to do that unless they would set up a system of government jobs like Roosevelt did with the Work Projects Administration; WPA. Our current Welfare system includes programs of several kinds for the very poor which take over before they are at retirement age, though the money is not distributed with a lavish hand. Since Bill Clinton those who receive Welfare and who are physically and mentally able to work, are required to sign up for work after taking job training programs. The number of people who actually are hired will depend on the market, of course.

Any one who politically challenges that basically low guaranteed income deserves to be voted out of office, and I will continue to try my best to do that. And those who would eliminate the graduated Income Tax, as some Republicans do tout, who would give ever increasing budgets to the military, work to prevent business regulations to reduce the CO2 in our atmosphere, and other such cynical and uncaring moves, are equally unethical and hopefully will be voted out of office.

See the following website for information on the Social Security tax Cap that prevents the wealthy from having to pay into the payroll tax system, even though they have huge salaries or pay themselves a salary from their own prosperous businesses, on which they should have to pay taxes for the Social Security retirement program. If the cap were removed the SS system would last longer. Several Democrats are working toward that goal at this time.


http://www.ssa.gov/planners/maxtax.htm

Benefits Planner: Maximum Taxable Earnings (1937 - 2015)

When you have wages or self-employment income that is covered by Social Security, you pay Social Security taxes each year up to a maximum amount that is set by law. That amount has changed frequently over the years.

For 2014, the maximum amount of taxable earnings was $117,00. In 2015, the maximum amount of taxable earnings is $118,500.

The maximum earnings for each year since Social Security taxes were first collected in 1937 are shown below. If you:

earned more than the maximum in any year but had only one job, the amount we use will be just the maximum amount.
had more than one job, the total that is recorded may be more than the maximum. However, we only use the maximum amount to calculate your benefit estimates.

Note: When you have more than one job in a year, each of your employers must withhold Social Security taxes from your wages without regard to what the other employers may have withheld. You may then end up with total Social Security taxes withheld that exceed the maximum.