▲ 1343 ▼ Keep in mind that social security is set to run out in 10 years time. (lemmy.world) submitted 2 years ago by STRIKINGdebate2@lemmy.world to c/aboringdystopia@lemmy.world 153 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] DahGangalang@infosec.pub 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) I want to believe. Can you provide sources for that claim? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SasquatchBanana@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) How about OP provides sources to their claim first. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DahGangalang@infosec.pub 1 point 2 years ago* On one hand: fair. If you're not versed in elements of tax law this bit of data can seem arcane. On the other: this is a matter of policy - not one of research. The definitive answer can be found with relative ease via a Google search. Here's a link to a Social Security Administration page on the topic: https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/cbb.html By the math set out at the above link, one can calculate that, at a maximum income of $168,600 and a SS Contribution rate of 6.2%, the most any individual would contribute to social security in a year would be $10,453.20. $10,453.20 would represent 0.052266% of the income of someone making $20 millions per year. Even doubling that amount (as some conservatives do) to count the employer's contributions to Social Security would leave you with just over 0.1% of net income. So yeah, even if Social Security isn't going bankrupt, it's an anemic system that barely provides livable circumstances for those who depend on it. Raising or removing that "max income for contributions" limit would go a long way to seeing the system be able to actually support people who need it while only burdening those most able to bear the burden. Ninjaedit: grammar permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SasquatchBanana@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) How about OP provides sources to their claim first. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DahGangalang@infosec.pub 1 point 2 years ago* On one hand: fair. If you're not versed in elements of tax law this bit of data can seem arcane. On the other: this is a matter of policy - not one of research. The definitive answer can be found with relative ease via a Google search. Here's a link to a Social Security Administration page on the topic: https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/cbb.html By the math set out at the above link, one can calculate that, at a maximum income of $168,600 and a SS Contribution rate of 6.2%, the most any individual would contribute to social security in a year would be $10,453.20. $10,453.20 would represent 0.052266% of the income of someone making $20 millions per year. Even doubling that amount (as some conservatives do) to count the employer's contributions to Social Security would leave you with just over 0.1% of net income. So yeah, even if Social Security isn't going bankrupt, it's an anemic system that barely provides livable circumstances for those who depend on it. Raising or removing that "max income for contributions" limit would go a long way to seeing the system be able to actually support people who need it while only burdening those most able to bear the burden. Ninjaedit: grammar permalink fedilink source parent
[–] DahGangalang@infosec.pub 1 point 2 years ago* On one hand: fair. If you're not versed in elements of tax law this bit of data can seem arcane. On the other: this is a matter of policy - not one of research. The definitive answer can be found with relative ease via a Google search. Here's a link to a Social Security Administration page on the topic: https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/cbb.html By the math set out at the above link, one can calculate that, at a maximum income of $168,600 and a SS Contribution rate of 6.2%, the most any individual would contribute to social security in a year would be $10,453.20. $10,453.20 would represent 0.052266% of the income of someone making $20 millions per year. Even doubling that amount (as some conservatives do) to count the employer's contributions to Social Security would leave you with just over 0.1% of net income. So yeah, even if Social Security isn't going bankrupt, it's an anemic system that barely provides livable circumstances for those who depend on it. Raising or removing that "max income for contributions" limit would go a long way to seeing the system be able to actually support people who need it while only burdening those most able to bear the burden. Ninjaedit: grammar permalink fedilink source parent