Social Security Now Expects Shortfall Earlier, in Late 2032
9 points
1 hour ago
| 4 comments
| wsj.com
| HN
while_true_
6 minutes 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.
reply
exabrial
9 minutes 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.

reply
CurtHagenlocher
1 hour ago
[-]
GenX here, and yep: this is what we were promised.
reply
sameAsItEvrwas
7 minutes ago
[-]
This is what you slept walked into
reply
WheelsAtLarge
1 hour 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.

reply
sameAsItEvrwas
1 minute 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.

reply
quickthrowman
1 hour 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.
reply
JumpCrisscross
39 minutes ago
[-]
> raising the payroll tax cap

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

reply