- Sep 30, 2003
- 26,907
- 173
- 106
More and more I'm seeing talk of raising the retirement age for SS.
This angers me. Why?
For one thing I see it as more of the same where the government puts a fee/tax on something and then uses that money elsewhere for some pet project (or whatever, hell they don't even know). See below.
For another, if they do raise the age it's only gonna apply to younger people (they've already done that once). Our problem has been that so far the people on SS retirement paid in a pittance but reap big benefits. Further, it's the coming Baby Boomers who are about to retire and slam SS, unless they raise the age requirement for them it's not gonna help, merely 'punish' younger people who are paying more than fair share. I.e., a rape job.
More to my point above:
So the part of SS that is for retirement benefits (OSADI) is hauling it's own freight - the revenues support the expense (so far). But Medicare does NOT.
So why the hell would we raise the retirement age for SS to just use that money to help support Medicare?
I say cut Medicare spending or raise Medicare taxes until it supports itself.
I think if we actually charged people for the true costs of Medicare we'd have a better debate about the subject. And I always think it's better to show the true costs for things rather than switch money all around in a cup-n-pea game of illusions where the price paid != the cost. The fed gov needs to stop this game of one program subsidizing another etc.
Fern
This angers me. Why?
For one thing I see it as more of the same where the government puts a fee/tax on something and then uses that money elsewhere for some pet project (or whatever, hell they don't even know). See below.
For another, if they do raise the age it's only gonna apply to younger people (they've already done that once). Our problem has been that so far the people on SS retirement paid in a pittance but reap big benefits. Further, it's the coming Baby Boomers who are about to retire and slam SS, unless they raise the age requirement for them it's not gonna help, merely 'punish' younger people who are paying more than fair share. I.e., a rape job.
More to my point above:
How Is Social Security Funded?:
Social Security is funded through payroll taxes. Through 2017, Social Security collects more in tax revenues than it pays out in benefits because there are 3.3 workers for every beneficiary. However, as Baby Boomers start to retire and draw down these benefits, there will be fewer workers to support them. By 2040, the Social Security Trust Fund will be depleted and 100% of benefits will be paid from that years payroll and general tax revenues.
How Is Medicare Funded?:
Unlike Social Security, Medicare payroll taxes and premiums cover only 57% of current benefits. The remaining 43% is financed from general revenues. Because of rising health care costs, general revenues will have to pay for 62% of Medicare costs by 2030.
So the part of SS that is for retirement benefits (OSADI) is hauling it's own freight - the revenues support the expense (so far). But Medicare does NOT.
So why the hell would we raise the retirement age for SS to just use that money to help support Medicare?
I say cut Medicare spending or raise Medicare taxes until it supports itself.
I think if we actually charged people for the true costs of Medicare we'd have a better debate about the subject. And I always think it's better to show the true costs for things rather than switch money all around in a cup-n-pea game of illusions where the price paid != the cost. The fed gov needs to stop this game of one program subsidizing another etc.
Fern