Article discussing in detail proposed changes to the "voluntary suspension" part of Social Security

[PoliticAverse]

in the new budget deal.

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/congress-planning-to-close-social-security-loopholes-cm536252

[Warren Stupidity]

1. Screw seniors to subsidize billionaires!

Yay!

[6chars]

2. This stuff is all pretty complicated

I get that some will lose out on something because of this. On the other hand, whenever I see these yahoo finance ariticles on how to get the most ss by starting stopping, going to,spousal, switching back, it seems like that couldn't have been the intent, and it just ends up benefiting the people in a position and with the know how to do it. And I strongly suspect that those people tend to be more well off, because the examples are always married couples with two incomes, at least one of which is at the top of the range.

[Igel]

3. It says flat-out that

46% of the benefits paid out under this provision are in the top 2 quintiles, in other words, top 40%.

I've heard it billed as "primarily benefiting the wealthy" but that 6% differential doesn't strike class envy in my heart, to be sure. I am willing to say I think that 80% or more of the benefits go to the top 3 quintiles, but I don't see that kind of number in the reporting. (It's "wrong" in the "politically incorrect" sense. It's a budget compromise that we "need", so pointing out that it disproportionately hurts not the poor but the middle would be counterproductive. Best, I'd guess, to emphasize any benefit to the upper echelons of society.)

Note that my household belongs in the 3rd quintile.


And this was definitely not the intent of the bill 15 years ago. Lots of laws have unintended consequences, and there's nothing more frustrating to all-knowing and all-wise social-control folk than when a perfectly good law intended to manipulate how things work in ways that will lead us to social perfection gets used in ways that benefit individuals in ways that the social-control folk didn't foresee, didn't intend, and think do not lead to social perfection. (Just the cognitive dissonance over assuming themselves all-wise and all-knowing and therefore qualified to shape society contrasted with the utter horror and evil of having their pure and good laws warped and twisted is enough to drive many to "authoritarianer" measures.)