The quiet liberal plan for entitlement reform
Social Security: Lift cap on taxable earnings
Revenues: $500 billion or more
Even if the Democrats accept chained CPI, they’re going to want some goodies in return. One big one: Let the highest earners pay more Social Security payroll taxes.
Right now, employers and workers only pay those payroll taxes on the first $113,700 of income.
Lift the cap so 90 percent of all Americans’ earnings are taxed — it’s only about 83 percent now — and a Social Security deal could raise about $550 billion in revenues over the next 10 years, according to estimates by Third Way, which has endorsed the approach. It would also wipe out Social Security’s deficit through 2020.
The Center for American Progress suggests getting rid of the earnings limit only for employers, but not for employees, so workers wouldn’t see a direct tax increase.
Either way, of course, this idea wouldn’t be a concession to Republicans at all — in fact, it would be a wildly tough sell. Any way it’s designed, it would look like a tax increase.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
What a joke.
darwin on January 28, 2013 at 8:56 AM
Well golly gee, a tax increase……….
dmann on January 28, 2013 at 9:01 AM
Yeah well the real entitlement reform plan is “The National Health Service Dehydration Follies”…..
they want seniors dead so they can keep raiding the cookie jar.
harlekwin15 on January 28, 2013 at 9:04 AM
Tax, tax, tax.
steebo77 on January 28, 2013 at 9:08 AM
The GOP needs to put forth a bill allowing workers to opt out of Social Security. They can use the Left’s “freedom of choice” language against them.
Why should we be forced to participate in the program?
Charlemagne on January 28, 2013 at 9:11 AM
And when the price of chicken goes up, they’ll buy cat food.
In other words, benefits are capped. But Alpo and Friskies are still a bargain.
BobMbx on January 28, 2013 at 9:13 AM
Look up Bush 2005
dmann on January 28, 2013 at 9:15 AM
Not the same.
I’m not talking about privatizing the system. I’m suggesting keeping the system as it is but allowing people to opt out of participating. No mandates. Nothing but no longer participating.
Charlemagne on January 28, 2013 at 9:18 AM
My proposal is simple:
1. Make participation in Social Security optional. This is among other things a moral issue. Why should any American be forced to participate in any government program? Are we not free citizens? Is our income not our property? Are we not largely adults responsible enough to plan for our own retirements? Participation in Social Security is government coercion.
2. Those that opt out will have to forgo all previous contributions. This will keep many, if not most, middle-age workers in the system. It will depend on their doing the analyses to determine what would be best for them financially. This also eliminates those that opt out as future liabilities. This is also a sop to the Left and those concerned about paying back previous contributions.
3. Require employers to continue funding their portion of the FICA tax until all participants have passed away. Yes, we all know that the employer contribution is really an employee’s salary that he is never paid but this provision should garner some Democrat support due to the continuing program funding.
4. Ideally we’d also raise the retirement age and in a bow to fiscal reality, implement a means test so younger workers aren’t subsidizing grandma and grandpa’s vacations to Maui.
Charlemagne on January 28, 2013 at 9:23 AM
Get the money….throw it down a hole.
Makes sense to me!
/
Mimzey on January 28, 2013 at 9:23 AM
And……. The relief and pork for Sandy ate up all of
tax increases for the ” rich ” !
Yeah ! Lets hit ‘em again !
Lucano on January 28, 2013 at 9:31 AM
Can you just imagine what your Social Security account would like now if it had been banked.
Cindy Munford on January 28, 2013 at 9:32 AM
Cindy Munford on January 28, 2013 at 9:32 AM
Or invested !
Lucano on January 28, 2013 at 9:40 AM
I wouldn’t exactly call this quiet, as Democrats have been trying to turn S.S. from a nominal retirement insurance plan into another wealth redistribution scheme for decades. The savings produced will undoubtedly be used for more vote buying expansions of the welfare state, which will accelerate the death spiral and make the inevitable crash even more painful.
RadClown on January 28, 2013 at 9:40 AM
because it is a ponzi scheme if you tried this you would be in jail ….
but the gov’t can because it is fair…
conservative tarheel on January 28, 2013 at 9:45 AM
I am all for the idea of an opt-out but…
Impossible to get the federal govt to agree to give up the gravy train dollars from SS.
lucyvanpelt on January 28, 2013 at 10:34 AM
IIRC, that was pretty much the Bush proposal.
It went nowhere, even with Republicans controlling the Presidency, House and Senate.
Not that its a bad idea, but you will never get your wish.
cool breeze on January 28, 2013 at 10:58 AM
Gee, I wonder how anyone could get that idea……
tommyboy on January 28, 2013 at 11:34 AM
LOL. The dems would immediately spend the extra cash on new social programs and this wouldn’t help SS one bit. I’ve seen this movie before.
tommyboy on January 28, 2013 at 11:35 AM
Guess what? That income threshold has been going up steadily every year. The lobster is already in the pot.
TexAz on January 28, 2013 at 11:49 AM