Social Security needs to be fixed for the long term

When Social Security was inau­gu­rat­ed in 1935, the required retire­ment age to receive full ben­e­fits was 65. Today, for those born after 1960, the retire­ment age need­ed to receive full ben­e­fits is 67. In 1935, the aver­age lifes­pan was 61 years. Today, the aver­age lifes­pan is 78.7 years.

See the problem?

I won’t dis­cuss the amounts doled out to indi­vid­u­als today com­pared to 1935 because the infla­tion rate has great­ly exceed­ed both life expectan­cy and the SS payouts.

Social Security is under attack today by the admin­is­tra­tion of the man who, when run­ning for President, swore he would not attack it. Heads of region­al offices are retir­ing, employ­ees are being laid off by the hun­dreds (at a time when more demands are made of Social Security), and there is a move­ment in progress to close and sell off 1,200 SS offices, those places where the American pub­lic has the best oppor­tu­ni­ty to address ques­tions and concerns.

This year, approx­i­mate­ly 69 mil­lion Americans will require some ser­vice from the Social Security fund, which will pay out an esti­mat­ed 1.7 tril­lion dol­lars over the year.

Of course, this is an enor­mous amount of mon­ey, but it com­pares quite favor­ably with the esti­mat­ed 7.5 tril­lion dol­lars that will go into the pock­ets of mil­lion­aires and bil­lion­aires over the next ten years if the Trump tax cuts are approved. Sixty-nine mil­lion indi­vid­u­als get­ting the advan­tage of 17 tril­lion dol­lars over ten years will do more good for the econ­o­my than $7.5 tril­lion in the bank accounts and stock pur­chas­es of a select few thou­sand individuals.

Several years ago, two Senators under­took an expan­sive study on mak­ing Social Security viable for decades into the future. I can’t recall all of their rec­om­men­da­tions except that I seem to remem­ber one for grad­u­al­ly increas­ing the age lim­it for receiv­ing benefits.

At retire­ment, I was one month shy of six­ty-six but just over the min­i­mum retire­ment age. It is still pos­si­ble for some indi­vid­u­als to retire ear­li­er than age 67, but they do so with reduced benefits.

With the increas­ing lifes­pan and the trend of many peo­ple con­tin­u­ing to work lat­er in life, it seems that increas­ing the retire­ment age is a rea­son­able option to strength­en the sys­tem. This could be done grad­u­al­ly, per­haps increas­ing it by one month per year up to a spec­i­fied lim­it. At that time, it could be re-exam­ined again.

Another more pos­i­tive way to secure Social Security would be to remove the cap on tax­able earn­ings. Between 2020 and 2024, the cap on tax­able earn­ings for Social Security with­hold­ing rose from $137,700 to $160,200. But why should such a cap even exist? If peo­ple above those wage lim­its are going to be receiv­ing funds on retire­ment, why should they not pay into the fund on all earn­ings, not just those below those limits?

In fact, since most of the wealth­i­est in this coun­try obtain their wealth through means oth­er than sim­ple earn­ings, some method must be found to tax at least some of that income and apply it to the SS fund.

Perhaps the best way to fix Social Security over the long term would be to require that every mem­ber of Congress be vest­ed into the sys­tem instead of receiv­ing spe­cial retire­ment ben­e­fits based on their con­gres­sion­al terms. If our Representatives and Senators were pay­ing into the sys­tem and were more aware of the need for its via­bil­i­ty, they would be more prone to actions that would assure its long-term health. It might also stop the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment from bor­row­ing from Social Security funds for invest­ing in gov­ern­ment bonds and then harangu­ing about how Social Security is foundering.

Social Security is the great­est under­pin­ning of American soci­ety. It has been respon­si­ble for keep­ing mil­lions of aging Americans from abject pover­ty while con­tribut­ing to the economy’s strength through pur­chas­ing power.

But it can­not per­sist with­out mea­sures to ensure its longevi­ty. The cur­rent attempts to weak­en it and divert fund­ing to the wealth­i­est of Americans are some­thing that should con­cern not just 69 mil­lion Americans but all of us, espe­cial­ly those who will join those ranks in years to come.