Begich to introduce Social Security changes w/o age raise or benefits cut

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Alaska Public

So, what do the experts here think of this?  This sounds far better than what Obama's proposed, but at the same time it looks like the wealthiest would get the better end of the deal, since those who pay more into the system would get more benefits.  At the same time, it says Social Security would pay proportionally larger benefits to low- and middle-income retirees, so how does this balance out if wealthier individuals contribute a greater share of their income?

[Marokai Backbeat]

Judging purely from what you've posted here, this looks like a hell of a lot better plan for Social Security than anything that's been proposed so far in the last several years, so good for Begich.

[Torie]

I don't like it. I don't like having a higher tax on earned income than unearned income, and lifting the cap is just an income tax, that has nothing to do with the benefits received. If you want to have general revenues subsidize SS, just do it by raising income taxes in general on a progressive basis.

A cost of living adjustment that gets into the cost of medical care, when most of it is subsidized for elderly, seems a mistake too. I prefer the chained CPI fix, counting as taxable income a higher percentage of the benefits, and maybe cutting them back on a means tested basis if necessary to make the program solvent.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Judging purely from what you've posted here, this looks like a hell of a lot better plan for Social Security than anything that's been proposed so far in the last several years, so good for Begich.

[TNF]

Sounds great.

[Blue3]

Not bad...

[DC Al Fine]

I don't like it. I don't like having a higher tax on earned income than unearned income, and lifting the cap is just an income tax, that has nothing to do with the benefits received. If you want to have general revenues subsidize SS, just do it by raising income taxes in general on a progressive basis.

A cost of living adjustment that gets into the cost of medical care, when most of it is subsidized for elderly, seems a mistake too. I prefer the chained CPI fix, counting as taxable income a higher percentage of the benefits, and maybe cutting them back on a means tested basis if necessary to make the program solvent.

What Torie said. This is basically a back door way to raise wages on the upper middle class without touching the super rich.

[後援会]

Eliminating SSWB and instituting a CPI-E more or less balance each other out.

Doesn't seem like it fixes anything besides Begich's reelection campaign.

[Mr.Phips]

Sign me up. 

[Benj]

I don't like it. I don't like having a higher tax on earned income than unearned income, and lifting the cap is just an income tax, that has nothing to do with the benefits received. If you want to have general revenues subsidize SS, just do it by raising income taxes in general on a progressive basis.

Apparently under Begich's plan the cap on benefits would also be removed (If I'm reading it correctly?). So the pay-in is still vaguely tied to benefits, though I'm not sure what value removing the cap adds if the cap on benefits is eliminated.

Agree that focusing on taxing earned income is problematic, though.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

So no one knows the answer to my question?

[Torie]

I don't like it. I don't like having a higher tax on earned income than unearned income, and lifting the cap is just an income tax, that has nothing to do with the benefits received. If you want to have general revenues subsidize SS, just do it by raising income taxes in general on a progressive basis.

Apparently under Begich's plan the cap on benefits would also be removed (If I'm reading it correctly?). So the pay-in is still vaguely tied to benefits, though I'm not sure what value removing the cap adds if the cap on benefits is eliminated.

Agree that focusing on taxing earned income is problematic, though.

So if one makes 10 million a year, for 30 years, you get 25K a month in benefits or something when you retire?  Makes sense to me!    And what is this supposed to accomplish?  Just masking what is effectively an income tax with a blizzard of money moving out of one pocket and into your other pocket over time, so you need an economist facile with present value calculations to figure out the effective tax rate? 

[Mr.Phips]

The best solution would simply be to eliminate the cap on the tax base, but continue to cap benefits at the level of someone who made $115,000 a year(indexed to inflation each year of course).  This would eliminate any shortfall in the system indefenately.

And in response to the Republican mantra that people should control their own retirement, Democrats should simply offer a separate, stand alone system much like the Thrift Savings Accounts to everybody to give people more chance to save for retirement.  And if Republicans being up the whole "more government" argument here, then Democrats should simply ask them "so you don't think the American people are good enough to get what members of Congress and federal workers get"?

[krazen1211]

What a major stud.