“the transition will be tricky: current and near-future retirees will have to accept a cut in benefits, while several generations will have to contribute payroll taxes to fund those reduced benefits without any return on investment — all while saving for their own retirement.”
Tricky indeed. This is precisely why you just end it. The government need not be involved in creating asset-based retirement plans, in fact, they ought NOT be involved.
Once you start shifting the sacrifice to the future, it will never stop. “I get mine now, and folks who can’t vote pay but don’t get a thing” is a winning political strategy every time. “conservatives” here would vote for it.
End it, deal with the social welfare ramifications now, and don’t pretend that the party can roll on. It can’t and it won’t.
You’re right that it is politically impossible - right up until it’s fiscally impossible to pay another dime. Then and only then will folks understand.
I won't disagree with that, but it's not likely to happen.
You’re right that it is politically impossible - right up until it’s fiscally impossible to pay another dime. Then and only then will folks understand.
That won't happen. The worst that will happen is benefits will be cut to what can be sustained with the current payroll taxes. That's about 79% of currently legislated benefits with the current payroll taxes, around 2034. Of course, the date and percentage will likely be different by then -- it's been getting worse year by year.
Just a couple of points...as I see it, one reason we do not have enough workers contributing is that we have aborted generations of potential contributors in the name of “Woman’s right to chose”. Secondly, how does pegging the SS benefit to about what one could make flipping burgers help the elderly stay out of poverty? Do we not see many of these fast food workers demonstrating for a “living wage”?