pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 8 Feb \ parent \ on: The Future of Social Security econ
One of the issues is that you don't get what you "deserved based on years worked, salaries and age of retirement". People live much longer than they used to but don't retire correspondingly later. That means those withdrawing today are getting far more benefits than the program was designed for.
I'm sympathetic to the "just print it" solution, though. As you say, it's much more transparent what's happening. Also, those of us who see it as a problem can opt out of holding dollars.
The number of years and life expectancy isn't the biggest problem imo, that's an excuse to not pay what you should receive, the problem is birth rates, the current work force is smaller than the previous one that is going into retirement, birth rates are lower bc of costs of living (inflation), less workforce, less funds, solutions: direct penalty in the value or in time? Time is the easiest. People are talking about UBI for people that are in active age and for retirees we are cutting entry age, makes no sense. Just print it, and remove that tax from the working force,that's why many countries accept immigration, to increase work force number. We must keep in mind that these systems worked while the fiat system worked and was expanding, now it's breaking and there is bills to pay, so all these systems are breaking, the underlying problem is the same, and all the solutions so far is taking your money to pay these bills. Would be better for govs to just come clean, print it.
reply
I don't think I disagree with any of that. However, saying low birth rates are the biggest problem is a bit like saying "gravity is the biggest problem in plane crashes." The birthrates are what they are and there's no way to instantly make new working age adults (immigration is the closest thing to that).
Given the demographic situation, adjusting program eligibility is the best way to improve its financial solvency.
reply
deleted by author
reply