Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Social Security says system's costs will exceed income this year

cbsnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 117 posts

Re: Social Security says system's costs will exceed income this year

#101

Post by krapp »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #20
encoderer wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a millennial, I do. There are just too many easy mitigations here that will extend life several decades: - Remove the cap and tax income above $120k, just like medicare and income tax - Increased tax rate, possibly just on payroll not income (the employer-paid portion) - Limited forms of means-testing (Maybe, attenuated survivor benefits as your estate value clears a certain high mark like $3 million) - Eliminate…

means testing is super unfair to those who sacrificed lifestyle in their youth to save for retirement. Consider the person that could have, but didnt, live a lavish lifestyle and instead responsibly saved. Then a benefit (which they paid into, and maybe rely upon) is removed after the fact? Bad news.

>Consider the person that could have, but didnt, live a lavish lifestyle and instead responsibly saved. Then a benefit (which they paid into, and maybe rely upon) is removed after the fact? Bad news.

Such a person wouldn't be able to live a "lavish lifestyle" with the benefits alone - that's not what they're for. And if they saved up throughout their entire life then they wouldn't depend on those benefits in the first place, and could likely live far more lavishly than the average recipient, anyway.

Re: Social Security says system's costs will exceed income this year

#103

Post by dragonwriter »

dgzl wrote: post #41
encoderer wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a millennial, I do. There are just too many easy mitigations here that will extend life several decades: - Remove the cap and tax income above $120k, just like medicare and income tax - Increased tax rate, possibly just on payroll not income (the employer-paid portion) - Limited forms of means-testing (Maybe, attenuated survivor benefits as your estate value clears a certain high mark like $3 million) - Eliminate…

As a millennial-ish, I think the government should stop stealing my money and make Social Security opt-in only.

Social Security is opt-in; you choose it by choosing to work in a job which (either by mandate applicable to the job or by choice where not mandated, as is the case for some public sector jobs) participates in Social Security. You opt out by choosing to work in a non-participating job or to rely on some means other than wage labor for income.

Re: Social Security says system's costs will exceed income this year

#104

Post by jeffreyrogers »

assblaster wrote: post #37
jeffreyrogers wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Market rates are inflated due to lack of price controls in programs like Medicare and Medicaid, plus employer-sponsored insurance plans are not as incentivized to negotiate for lower prices as individual consumers are. Couple that with the supply side problems where doctors need 7+ years of training before they can perform simple procedures like testing for strep throat or prescribing antibiotics, and the fact that a…

Medicare and Medicaid are the definition of price controls for paying physicians: they pay below market rate such that private insurance is billed higher to offset. There are week price controls for medical equipment and pharmaceuticals and the failure to address overuse of unnecessary equipment costs way more than the savings from price controls. Testing for strep and prescribing antibiotics represent the smallest f…

Sorry, you are right about price controls. I think it's still a problem that they incentivize unnecessary care.

I don't think we're actually that far apart on what we think the problems are. I wasn't trying to say that requiring large amounts of school in order to test for strep and antibiotics are the only cause of our high costs of healthcare, but they obviously contribute.

I agree (and I think any thinking person would agree) that you should have training to perform more specialized procedures.

Expensive end of life care is partly the fault of clinicians who get paid to authorize expensive procedures and who don't want to tell their patients and their families that there is very little they can do to prolong their life, so they should just surround themselves with loved ones and prepare to die.

And we can both agree that there is wasteful spending without arguing that people should kill themselves sooner. Just looking at our healthcare expenses relative to other countries shows we pay somewhere between 1.5-2x more for roughly the same level of care. That's obviously a market failure.

Re: Social Security says system's costs will exceed income this year

#105

Post by dgzl »

dragonwriter wrote: post #103
dgzl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a millennial-ish, I think the government should stop stealing my money and make Social Security opt-in only.

Social Security is opt-in; you choose it by choosing to work in a job which (either by mandate applicable to the job or by choice where not mandated, as is the case for some public sector jobs) participates in Social Security. You opt out by choosing to work in a non-participating job or to rely on some means other than wage labor for income.

Doesn't sound like much of a choice to me.

Re: Social Security says system's costs will exceed income this year

#106

Post by dgzl »

craftyguy wrote: post #49
dgzl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a millennial-ish, I think the government should stop stealing my money and make Social Security opt-in only.

As a millennial, I think the problem with that approach is that no one would opt-in, but everyone would feel entitled to receive the benefits if they failed to save enough for their own retirement (and realized it).

Yes, I think the entire point of social security is to help people who don't have the foresight to help themselves. Since the program is dysfunctional and our representatives continuously borrow against the program, who is it really helping?

Re: Social Security says system's costs will exceed income this year

#107

Post by dgzl »

s73v3r_ wrote: post #65
dgzl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a millennial-ish, I think the government should stop stealing my money and make Social Security opt-in only.

As a millennial, I take issue with anyone who mischaracterizes taxes as theft for ideological gain.

This country was literally founded because of excessive and tyrannical taxes brought by the British empire. How long until America becomes that empire?

It's funny, I see this meme sometimes around tax day: "Well, I just paid my taxes. Those roads should be fixed anytime now". It's funny because the excuses people use (my roads!) to justify reckless and out-of-control taxation ($21T debt, that's T for Trillion) are almost never at the head of where the tax revenue is actually spent.

As a US government contractor, governments are great at overspending and under-delivering.

Re: Social Security says system's costs will exceed income this year

#108

Post by s73v3r_ »

dgzl wrote: post #107
s73v3r_ wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a millennial, I take issue with anyone who mischaracterizes taxes as theft for ideological gain.

This country was literally founded because of excessive and tyrannical taxes brought by the British empire. How long until America becomes that empire? It's funny, I see this meme sometimes around tax day: "Well, I just paid my taxes. Those roads should be fixed anytime now". It's funny because the excuses people use (my roads!) to justify reckless and out-of-control taxation ($21T debt, that's T for Trillion) are al…

"This country was literally founded because of excessive and tyrannical taxes brought by the British empire. How long until America becomes that empire?"

There were far, far more inputs to that than just "taxes are bad".

"As a US government contractor, governments are great at overspending and under-delivering."

And as a contractor, you're part of that problem.

Re: Social Security says system's costs will exceed income this year

#109

Post by dgzl »

s73v3r_ wrote: post #108
dgzl wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This country was literally founded because of excessive and tyrannical taxes brought by the British empire. How long until America becomes that empire? It's funny, I see this meme sometimes around tax day: "Well, I just paid my taxes. Those roads should be fixed anytime now". It's funny because the excuses people use (my roads!) to justify reckless and out-of-control taxation ($21T debt, that's T for Trillion) are al…

"This country was literally founded because of excessive and tyrannical taxes brought by the British empire. How long until America becomes that empire?" There were far, far more inputs to that than just "taxes are bad". "As a US government contractor, governments are great at overspending and under-delivering." And as a contractor, you're part of that problem.

> There were far, far more inputs to that than just "taxes are bad".

Very true, and excessive taxation was one of the major factors.

> And as a contractor, you're part of that problem.

Not myself, but it's a reasonable accusation about the company I work for. Even if that were true, we offer a product that the government could never engineer. The product is good, the government needs it, so they take money from their citizens to buy it. My points still stand unfortunately.

Re: Social Security says system's costs will exceed income this year

#110

Post by maerF0x0 »

krapp wrote: post #101
maerF0x0 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

means testing is super unfair to those who sacrificed lifestyle in their youth to save for retirement. Consider the person that could have, but didnt, live a lavish lifestyle and instead responsibly saved. Then a benefit (which they paid into, and maybe rely upon) is removed after the fact? Bad news.

>Consider the person that could have, but didnt, live a lavish lifestyle and instead responsibly saved. Then a benefit (which they paid into, and maybe rely upon) is removed after the fact? Bad news. Such a person wouldn't be able to live a "lavish lifestyle" with the benefits alone - that's not what they're for. And if they saved up throughout their entire life then they wouldn't depend on those benefits in the firs…

If I am paying into SS in my 20s and expect to get, say, $1000 per month in my 60s, and I responsibly design my 401k savings etc around that promise, and then have it taken away because I saved more than the average person then I will have a $1000 hole in my budget .

Itd be no different than a bank keeping the contents of my savings account and giving me the excuse "we changed the rules"

Post reply on HN