New Administration & Social Security

[rk911]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Letj I don’t know if that’s true. A lot was passed in the last Congress and there wasn’t 60 votes.

60-votes is currently required for cloture...end of debate. a simple majority passes a bill once cloture is reached

[Dtail]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarieIG Nothing about the poor shlubs who turned 60 in 2020?

That's me.

[Chuckanut]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarieIG Nothing about the poor shlubs who turned 60 in 2020?

Oh, they get their FRA raised to 70.

Just kidding.

[Gumby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuckanut Oh, they get their FRA raised to 70. Just kidding.

And they have to come and clean our bathrooms.

[mh]

They should just get rid of the yearly cap on contributions

[Montecfo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mh They should just get rid of the yearly cap on contributions

Well to me the starting point of reform would be gradually moving the FRA back over a number of years as they did in the 80s when SS was in crisis then, for people under 45 say.

I would expect higher taxes to be part of it as it was then, both on wages and on benefits to provide further "means testing".

[pjigar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainsoft Agreed. I have never understood the reasoning behind the donut hole. It just seems to make more sense to have all income subject to taxes. Then again, that's too simple and we know government doesn't do simple.

Donut holes are easier to pass the smell test. People in the donut hole (significant percent of the population) thinks that they are not affected with this legislation (until they realize few years later!) and don't complain/oppose. The outside edge of the donut hole is typically a small percent of the constituents and hence easy to shove those complains aside. Inside portion of donut hole is the safe zone. I think this is a classic trick for passing many bills into a law.

[pjigar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mh They should just get rid of the yearly cap on contributions

That is what will essentially happen once the donut hole naturally closes due to inflation. I remember the max wage for SS in 2000 was around $81,000 and now it is already in the $142,000 range. So yes, it may take couple of decades but it is designed to happen if the legislation is passed.

[bigcmagor]

Although uncomfortable to mention, I wonder whether the mounting covid toll on seniors has changed the calculus on SS depletion. There's 300,000+ that are no longer drawing from the fund and 100,000+ that never will. (insert hiding under chair emoji)

[NoiseBoy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ready For 2021 SS is taxed on income up to $142,800. If they just passed a law increasing the cap to something a little higher than that they could begin to catch up for the eventual shortfall. If you are already making $142,800 in salary, it would seem like paying SS on income up to $165,000 would not be that much of a burden. It's much better than shorting senior citizens who rely on it, or playing around with the full retirement age again.

I had eleven years where I hit the SS earnings limit. Other than larger net paychecks towards the end of the year, I didn't really notice the difference. I would be in favor of removing the cap.

[jim584672]

The Senate can do away with the filibuster by simple majority vote. It isn't a Constitutional requirement. Moderates of both parties like it because it gives cover to quash a bill, they can just say procedure killed it.

[Aerides]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jim584672 The Senate can do away with the filibuster by simple majority vote. It isn't a Constitutional requirement. Moderates of both parties like it because it gives cover to quash a bill, they can just say procedure killed it.

Let's stick to the proposed legislation, and not the potential for Senate rules to change, or who likes them or not, etc....to allow this thread to continue, please.

[USGrant1962]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigcmagor Although uncomfortable to mention, I wonder whether the mounting covid toll on seniors has changed the calculus on SS depletion. There's 300,000+ that are no longer drawing from the fund and 100,000+ that never will. (insert hiding under chair emoji)

~44 million retirees on SS, so ~1% "excess" deaths (realistically they are early, not excess) is unlikely to change things much. However, I've seen analyses that suggest the shutdowns and job losses are likely to move the depletion date a year or two earlier.

Here's the official model from November, forecasting one year earlier depletion: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/solvency/Up...e_20201124.pdf

[pb4uski]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigcmagor Although uncomfortable to mention, I wonder whether the mounting covid toll on seniors has changed the calculus on SS depletion. There's 300,000+ that are no longer drawing from the fund and 100,000+ that never will. (insert hiding under chair emoji)

Probably true, but not enough to make enough of a difference to move the needle much. Even 300,000 at $25k a head would be $7.5b and annual benefits are over $900b and the reality is that most of those who died were elderly and towards the end of the mortality table anyway.

[Tekward]

Thanks to the Moderators for allowing this discussion to continue.

[Chuckanut]

I think the most likely change will be that higher income folks will see 100% of their SS taxed.

[Montecfo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuckanut I think the most likely change will be that higher income folks will see 100% of their SS taxed.

This is from memory, but I think when they reformed it before, the thinking was that it would affect all stakeholders in some way. So the young had the retirement age pushed back. Current recipients I think got a delay in a cola adjustment or two, and there were higher taxes.

I would think the prescription would be the same these days, in order to gain enough support for it. But quite possibly nothing will happen yet because it's not a crisis that is near enough from politicians' viewpoint.

I tend to think increasing benefits with no reform ( i.e., the thread topic) is something that's not going to happen.

[CardsFan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuckanut I think the most likely change will be that higher income folks will see 100% of their SS taxed.

I have always planned on this happening.

[foxfirev5]

Like any of us over 62 or when we take ss, it becomes less of an issue with each passing month. Immortality is a myth.

[phil1ben]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarieIG Nothing about the poor shlubs who turned 60 in 2020?

I was also born in 1960. Those born in that year will want to pay attention to Senate Bill S. 4180 (IS) - Protecting Benefits for Retirees Act. It appears to be bipartisan and was sponsored by a Democrat and a Republican.

If adopted, it would fix the problem.