Comment

Comment on A boomer gets just $1,056 a month in Social Security and works as a bus driver: 'I don't see myself being able to retire, but I'm grateful and healthy'

<- View Parent

phdepressed@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

It’s not a negation when there is a standard of 28k before any deduction and the ratio of deduction is 2:1 or even 3:1 after that. I’m not proposing a drastic difference, the current system just with more income considered. If you have greater income you still have greater income. Maybe you lose out on a couple k from ssi but you make enough to live better than someone with only ssi.

I’m talking what could be or imo should be. You keep talking what is. I never said anything about the practicality of this getting through congress anytime soon. That’d require a greater cultural shift than I foresee happening anytime soon.

Reality is that under the current system ssi already isn’t going to work past 2035 if things remain as they are. Anyone in retirement after that shouldn’t be including ssi in their retirement plans right now because it very well may not exist.

Your argument is the same as property taxes for schools being so unequally distributed. Don’t want to pay for other kids just your own. As we’ve seem from the past however many decades or centuries this “separate but equal” doesn’t work out long-term we need “united and equitable”. I don’t know when or if these changes will occur, but I know they won’t without being talked about.

I’m by no means an economist, lawyer, or politician and I doubt you are either, chillax on the seriousness and trying to find flaws in what is a random internet musing and certainly not a legal bill or treatise on the subject.

source

Sort:hotnew top

partial_accumen@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Thank you for confirming nearly every single one of the issues I cited. For a reminder, here’s the quick list I came up with, and your answers afterward:

who decided what income equals “affordable” in my example above?

I’m talking what could be or imo should be.

So you’ve decided the best person to decide is you.

is SS benefit reduced by just rental income, or do you go after people with pensions and 401k income?

If you have greater income you still have greater income. Maybe you lose out on a couple k from ssi but you make enough to live better than someone with only ssi.

So you’re confirming you’re looking to remove SS benefits and punish those that did save or have income in any capacity.

is it fair to be forced to pay into a system for your entire working career and not get any benefit out of it at the individual level?

Fairness or equality of paying in get pay out is not the same as equity or justice of those who have less getting helped more.

And you’re okay with changing the terms of the deal of SS benefits after decades of people relying on it as a part of their retirement.

Your argument is the same as property taxes for schools being so unequally distributed.

Nice strawman. I’m not taking the bait on that.

chillax on the seriousness and trying to find flaws in what is a random internet musing and certainly not a legal bill or treatise on the subject.

Okay so you’re just looking to talk at your audience without any response? Whats the point of coming up with a plan if you’re not willing to subject it to scrutiny or deal with its flaws? If that’s all you want, then you don’t need me or anyone to read or respond to your ideas. Its not what you’re looking for.

Carry on and talking into the void then. I’m out. Have a nice day.
source