Comment on Social Security can be saved. Scrap the cap!
chiliedogg@lemmy.world 1 week agoSocial security is a social safety net, not a personal retirement fund. That’s what my pension, 401k, etc are for.
When social security was instituted with the retirement age of 65, the average life expectancy was 63. It was only “retirement” income for people who had lived longer than expected and would otherwise be living on the street - especially since so many had lost their savings in the Depression - but retirement savings wasn’t its primary purpose.
But people started living longer and stopped saving (either because they knew they had social security coming, or because we suck at planning ahead, or because corporate America sucks donkey balls and people are always living paycheck-to-paycheck) and it became something it wasn’t meant to be.
It should provide income for retirees who have no other income, but like other social programs it should be based on need. Super rich people should pay into jlot just like everyone else, but they shouldn’t be able to collect it because they don’t need it and it’s not intended to take the place of personal savings.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 6 days ago
I disagree with the “based on need”. That’s “means testing”, and converts the program from a simple social entitlement program into charity. It immediately builds in resentment for “successful” people being compelled to support “failures”. Means Testing is the underlying problem that creates and systematically oppresses the poverty class.
Social security should be provided equally to every person of “retirement age”, regardless of need or whether they have actually retired or are continuing to work.
Social Security should be moving toward becoming Universal Basic Income.