Social Security Now Expects Shortfall Earlier, in Late 2032

JJumpCrisscross about 4 hours ago 12 commentsRead Article on wsj.com

DE version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

100% Positive

Analyzed from 589 words in the discussion.

Discussion (12 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

while_true_•about 2 hours ago

Put a tax on AI for each human employee it displaces. Estimate the human labor equivalent of AI each year and levy a tax to replace Soc Sec and Medicare revenue no longer received. Benefits need to be funded for existing retirees and they need to be there for younger generations too.

CurtHagenlocher•about 4 hours ago

GenX here, and yep: this is what we were promised.

sameAsItEvrwas•about 2 hours ago

This is what you slept walked into

damnesian•40 minutes ago

this is what we had no choice but to contribute to

f4llGuy•9 minutes ago

That's what my generation is going to claim as we loot your retirement to fund our future

You all benefited from looting the pension system to fund Wall Street

It's American tradition

Thoughts and prayers; you also did not do the collective action work to implement universal healthcare. Decided you weren't worth such assurances.

So we'll respect your apathy and not burden ourselves with caring for you

cyanydeez•about 1 hour ago

yeah, except that promise is closer to Mafia talk than fiscal anything else. This is all about how Congress has spent it's time making policies that on paper make it look like it's losing money. The same way conservatives say "the post office doesn't make money" as if a service is suppose to turn a profit.

Take this UBer example of what we're talking about: https://consumerwatchdog.org/accountability/accountability-r...

Uber is _insuring itself_ not via the Market but through it's own susidiary. Then claims it's "losing money" anytime California does anything to rectify the abusive relationship it has with it's consituents.

That's SS. That's all. It's magic paper talking points and we can fully fund SS if we gave a damn about quality of life for all, rather than QOL for billionaires and minorities (obviously, you know which direction those two diverge and how the social safety net is the 1960's public pools).

WheelsAtLarge•about 3 hours ago

BS, watch how they somehow get the funding. Old people vote and they will make their unhappiness known to every elected official even if the official can't do anything about it.

The coming generations are the ones that will feel the pain. It's likely that SS will switch to a partial stock market funding. Where some of the money the government deducts will be invested in the stock market.

sameAsItEvrwas•about 2 hours ago

The coming generations have no skin in this game. As more Boomers die the youth will be forced to rewrite the rules.

Nice of the elders to wipe the slate clean on their way out dismantling what they benefited from.

Thomas Jefferson wrote that Constitutions must be rewritten every 19 years to be updated with modern thought. Or else the next generations are ruled by fiat decree.

So it's for the best. Would be preferred if such was done intentionally and not made a necessity due to malfeasance of the dying generation.

quickthrowman•about 3 hours ago

It could easily be funded by raising the payroll tax cap and leaving the benefits cap in place. High income earners would be subsidizing the program, sounds fair to me after society enabled them to become high income earners.

robocat•8 minutes ago

Tax the fuck out of people and do they stop working, or quiet-quit reduce hours/effort?

There are many highly paid essential jobs that society needs. Good luck finding a doctor.

Obviously wouldn't matter for deadwood or bullshit jobs: but we struggle to identify those.

No more startups - why bother if there's no reward.

Make Britain great again, by making the US suck!

> after society enabled

You've got causality reversed. Society depends on businesses and workers.

JumpCrisscross•about 2 hours ago

> raising the payroll tax cap

I hope a capital-gains tax is considered as part of the mix.

exabrial•about 2 hours ago

Social Security such a Ponzi scheme. At least, proper reform should be elective. One can either pay in, or make it mandatory that part is invested privately.

I'll pay in probably something like $250k-$500k in, and I'll doubt I'll get even the principal amount out. If I were in charge of investing my own social security, I'd end up with millions.

rehevkor5•about 2 hours ago

I don't think it would take many changes to fix it. Scott Galloway has some persuasive things to say about it.

Even though Republicans are always trying to kill it, it's still better than the alternative which is old people living in abject poverty. Also, public health matters like keeping people off the street shouldn't be a source of corporate profit.

mono442•32 minutes ago

Every investment is somewhat of a ponzi scheme. With stocks or real estate you also rely on the fact that the economy will function in the future and future generations will buy them back from you.