This is a problem with Trump's proposed Tax plan. Not been confident either side will be able to fix our looming Social Security issues in the coming years. What Would the Trump Campaign Plans Mean for Social Security? | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget President Trump’s proposals to eliminate taxation of Social Security benefits, end taxes on tips and overtime, impose tariffs, and expand deportations would all widen Social Security’s cash deficits.
There is solution to the upcoming social security shortfall although the current crop of politicians doesn't have the will to implement the remedies which could include raising or eliminating the cap on earnings which are subject to the FICA payroll tax, raising the amount of the tax one or two percent, raising the age for full SS benefits to 70 with exceptions for individuals in physically demanding occupations and increasing legal immigration which would have the effect of significantly the increasing number of workers paying into the SS trust fund. Also proving the SS trust fund with the authority to invest a small percentage of its assets in equities could increase the return on investment.
On Social Security, aren't FICA taxes taken from gross wages on employee paystubs? Making it akin to a roth IRA or roth 401k contribution?
Agree we need to make some hard choices, and neither side is up to the task. This is why we need term limits because this is a losing issue whichever party makes the painful decision that won’t be popular with the public more likely to be voted out next election cycle. If there were term limits some people would do the right thing and make the hard choice now rather than prolong the inevitable.
Yes, FICA taxes are taken from your gross wages (up to the income cap for SS taxes). No, they are not akin to a 401k contribution.
One thing worth bearing in mind, though, IMO, is that Trump says things like this without really meaning them. This is why I'm more hesitant than some to jump on him about his wacky tariff ideas; IMO he's just babbling whatever he thinks will scare up some votes. But that aside, I agree 100% with OP.
Oh, he'll add tariffs. B/c it is easy - he doesn't need congress. I wish we'd change laws, so that tariffs were not at the whim of BIG GOV idiots.
MTG has weighed in on the Social Security issue, in her own shallow-minded, ignorant, vindictive way. A lobbyist for a group looking to strengthen Social Security presented her with a Trump document containing his pledge not to weaken SS, and Greene threw it on the floor and went off on him. She apparently did not want to discuss it. Another republican, Greg Lopez of Colorado, says cuts to SS (and Medicare) are coming. With no changes to the system, SS will be cut 23% in 2034. With Trump's proposal to eliminate income tax on Social Security (for wealthier people, who have enough income to require income tax), that SS cut will automatically go up to 33%. Apparently, members of Congress were supposed to keep quiet about the cutting of benefits. So, elderly voters (and voters approaching retirement), remember that when you voted for Trump, you were voting for a 10% cut in your SS income. Don't worry, Trump will be fine without 10% of his SS income. Marjorie Taylor Greene snatched Trump’s Social Security pledge and threw it on the floor — here’s why she’s so mad Quite the diplomat she is. A little too much honesty, buddy. Let's tone that down and start passing out the Kool-Aid.
No. The taxable wages on a wage are determined by reducing the gross wage for a contribution to qualifying retirement and healthcare plan. The amount withheld for social security and Medicare is not deducted from the employee’s gross wage to determine taxable wages. We pay/paid income tax on the employee’s portion/contribution to social security and Medicare. The employer is allowed to deduct their matching contribution as a business expense. So for 40+ years many of us paid taxes on the amounts “contributed” to social security only to have to pay taxes on the amounts received from social security as a retirement benefit. There is an exclusion of a portion of the retirement benefit….. depending on income and filing status. I believe 15% is the lowest exclusion increasing to 100%. I still have a consulting business and pay an effective payroll tax rate of approximately 12% in social security and Medicare taxes on those earnings.
The tried and true ponzi solution of forcing younger generations to pay for older generations. The real way to address SS is to turn it into a safety net like it was sold. But to do that you have to tell millions they do not get anything. Instead we will tell my kids they need to pay a higher rate on more taxable income so we can get an extra vacation in retirement. And then their kids and them will be in an even worse spot. fdr truly is one of the worst Presidents ever!
Perhaps. If the SSA becomes insolvent, likely Congress will step in at that time and fix because constituents will have pushed back en mass. Slightly OT: regarding FDR, you have a very bold opinion (shared by many). Not many Presidential historians would agree with the view he was one of the worst.
No doubt historians are not in tune to the disaster fdr installed with SS. He could have been one of the greats. But he deceived and pushed the New Deal. Absolutely one of the worst Presidents ever. Arguably the worst. Granted Woodrow Wilson gave him the ability to enact the Ponzi scheme SS is. If he instituted an actual safety net program. I would have no issues. But he failed and instituted a Ponzi scheme that redistributes wealth from younger generation to older. And now we can’t fix it. Because politically you can’t. Which is why he is the worst if you ask me. I have no issues helping those in need. But now the argument is I paid x so I deserve y even though x never was enough to produce y. Hence the solutions always say…younger generations pay more and retire later to receive less. It should have always been about protecting those that did not have the means. fdr was a complete failure and enacting one of the most damaging programs ever to our future generations. No doubt many have benefited. But it will be at the expense of our kids. My kids and your kids likely don’t have to worry (assume most on GC are well off and fully capable of surviving). But my kids and your kids/grandkids have peers that grow up in completely different situations. And forcing them to pay for those who have the means is ridiculous in my opinion!
If only the dumb ass congress would have let people invest a percentage of their deductions in the stock market...
Nothing says “I’m a genius” like proclaiming FDR a terrible President and Trump a great one. lol. You guys have to be trolling.
Another reason to hate us baby boomers. SS should have been fixed years ago. It’s our fault for electing people who ignored it.
His plan is ironically more socialist than any president (other than perhaps FDR,due to necessity), that I recall. I truly cannot envision it getting pushed through for approval.
The problem with Social Security is not that it's a Ponzi scheme (it isn't), but that people are living longer than they used to, and are requiring more years of income. There are only three acceptable fixes to Social Security: 1) Raise the retirement age, which has been done in the past and will probably be done in the future. 2) Increase the tax on income, which Congress is scared to do. 3) Decrease benefits, which will also happen in 2034. Putting a percentage of the money into the stock market is a really bad idea, because it is a good way to bankrupt the government (or screw retirees out of their income for a few years). Everything is fine when stocks are going up, but what happens when the market crashes (like in 2009, when some stocks lost 80-90% of their value) and grandma can't afford to pay for food, heat, and medicine? Which one should she give up? A lot of retirees are living on the edge of extreme poverty.
agree. Besmirching a president from 80 years ago based on our problems today while following and setting their moral compass to Trump because of his demagoguery & promises.
I cannot imagine saying a president elected to save us from massive corporate fraud, not to mention security fraud,that destroyed the entire economy, with the worst unemployment crisis in our history, all coinciding with one of the worst natural weather droughts ever experienced in this Country, is the “worst presidents ever” because a program he instituted 90 years ago is threatened (due to successive governmental misfeasance over that 90 year span). Yes, FDR was incredibly aggressive in his emergency programs, many of which failed and many which were found to be illegal. But, you completely ignore the unprecedented and incalculable confidence that he bestowed on the country when there was virtually no confidence left. And as we headed to recovery, the greatest conflict the world has ever seen broke out across the Ocean, where FDR had to calculate how to protect our country—when we wanted nothing to do with the World’s problems—and protect democracy as a whole, when all objective factors pointed to democracy losing to military superiority. He presided over a recovery that led us to be the wealthiest, most prosperous, strongest, most-sought after Country on Earth, and that point is not debatable. And when we entered the War, he had to first ready our Nation for Conflict (which we were ill-prepared), and then to navigate the politics, first with Great Britain who single-handedly staved off the Nazi victory, to lead the War, because we were stronger and wealthier, and later with Stalin, on how to lead and prosecute the War. Sure, on single issues he was a flawed president. But, putting his presidency and his actions in direct context to the time and issues confronting our nation, he was one of our greatest presidents ever.
