Bernie Sanders article: "Time to expand Social Security"

[Catherina]

Bernie Sanders writes for the Observer: Time to expand Social Security

Highlights:
It has paid every nickel owed, through good times and bad

Now some Republicans want to cut it

A better idea: Lift cap so wealthy pay higher Social Security taxes


President Franklin D. Roosevelt signs the Social Security Bill on Aug. 14, 1935.

By Bernie Sanders
Special to the Observer

Social Security is the most successful government program in our nation’s history. Before it was signed into law, nearly half of senior citizens lived in poverty. Today, the elderly poverty rate is less than 10 percent. Although still much too high, that’s a dramatic improvement.

Through good times and bad, Social Security has paid every nickel owed to every eligible American – on time and without delay. As corporations destroyed the retirement dreams of millions over the past 30 years by eliminating defined benefit pension plans, Social Security was right there paying full benefits. As millions of Americans lost their life savings after Wall Street’s recklessness crashed the economy in 2008, Social Security was right there paying full benefits.

Today, Social Security is more important than ever. Over half of workers between the ages of 55-64 have no retirement savings. More than a third of senior citizens depend on Social Security for virtually all of their income. One out of every five senior citizens is trying to scrape by on an average income of just $8,300 a year.

Given these facts, our job cannot be to cut Social Security. Our job must be to expand it so that every American can retire with dignity and respect.

...

At a time when millions of Americans are working longer hours for lower wages, even as virtually all of the new income in this country is going to the top one percent, my legislation will begin to reduce the obscene level of income inequality in America.

...

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article36486309.html#storylink=cpy

[beam me up scottie]

1. Happy to be the first K & R.

Too many seniors have to work crappy jobs, can't afford their medication and are going without other necessities because they can't afford to live.

This is unconscionable.

[merrily]

33. +1 As Sanders told Liberty U, these are moral issues.

[yeoman6987]

2. I heard that if the cap is lifted completely,

It would give social social security another 10 years. I say do it!

[truedelphi]

3. I would say that with the high rate of death among Baby Boomers,

Social Security has at least five years longer than "experts" state it has.

But I agree - Lift the cap!

[7962]

10. The Boomer death rate has dropped over the past decade, not risen.

Although diabetes is a major issue.

And I agree too, lift the cap!!

[Ed Suspicious]

15. This disease is likely to take me before I collect, but I still say expand it any way possible. I'm

happy to pay in now just in case I make it and also for my mom, my wife, my kids, my soon to arrive grandchild. I want everybody to be able to take advantage of the most successful antipoverty legislation our country has ever seen.

[Vincardog]

32. If the cap was lifted social security would be solvent for ever.

[merrily]

34. What would collecting the OASDI contribution from ALL workers and their employers do?

[merrily]

38. BTW, from whom did you "hear" ten years?

[yeoman6987]

42. Facebook. I know not a great example.

[merrily]

44. If facebook is your only source for something important, you owe it to DUers to say so. JMO.

[Recursion]

54. Meh. The only real way to "strengthen" SS (which isn't weak) is to raise wages

Get wages back on track with the economy like they were until 40 years ago and even the fictitious "crisis" Republicans bemoan disappears.

[CharlotteVale]

4. K&R

[Doctor_J]

5. Haven't heard anything from Clinton on this. Add another line to this

[tabasco]

6. He's right, as usual.

I like this guy a lot.

[abelenkpe]

7. K&R

[Cheese Sandwich]

8. Sure is time.

We ought to have a full proper retirement system. Thanks for posting

[AtomicKitten]

9. I fully support this. k&r

[cantbeserious]

11. Good Medicine For The People - Go Bernie Go

[AppalachianAmerican]

12. My grandparents barely survive on their fixed income.

Anyone who entertains the idea of cutting this vital program even by half a percent, or via slimy accounting methods (Chained CPI) is not fit to be an American, let alone an American in power.

We need more good legislators and presidential candidates like Bernie willing to stand up for Social Security.

[7962]

13. I agree with him, although I do think it should be means tested

No reason for people bringing in over a certain amount to still draw a check from the govt. Make it a high number and attach it to inflation. Yes, everyone pays into it,but we also pay taxes that are used for welfare. And all of us dont get welfare unless we need it. Bill Gates doesnt need a SS check. Neither do a helluva lot of other people. That would make the fund last even longer along with lifting the cap

[Ed Suspicious]

17. Means testing dooms this program. Once it becomes "welfare" it's over. Everyone who contributes,

if they or their spouse lives to the age to use it, should have full and unfettered access to their monthly allotment.

[7962]

19. I dont know anyone who would consider it "welfare". Its not. We paid into it.

I just dont see how its bad to NOT give the rich a check every month. Millions or billions more pissed away every year.
Even my most "conservative" friends dont call SS welfare
Lots of things in the tax code either cut off after a certain amount or start after a certain amount. This is no different.

[Qutzupalotl]

27. Any of the wealthy could potentially need it.

Even a millionaire is one successful lawsuit away from the poorhouse.

Once you start means-testing, you open the door to a revolt by the upper class: "Why should I pay into a system that will never benefit me?" And as you know, the 1% has outsized influence in Washington. They will see that the program ends.

Better to pay them and keep the whole system going than to withhold payments and cause its collapse.

[7962]

28. Of course. But then you'd qualify because you were no longer "rich"

Its not like its a lifetime disqualification. Just like the income categories; people move into and out of each one all the time

[Qutzupalotl]

31. But that universal risk means everyone should pay.

Same principle as buying insurance not just when you're sick.

[7962]

55. oh yes, everyone should pay. Lift the cap too!

Sorry if i made it look like i also didnt think the rich should be paying into the system

[stuffmatters]

18. "Means testing" turns it into a welfare profgram

Means testing is the favorite refrain of neolibs and safety net saboteurs like Darrell Issa. It's their way of whittling away justifying cuts to soc sec, creating tiers, classes, and , of course, resentments (fav tactic) It takes it from being a universal American safety net to a welfare program.

So Sec works and has survived because it is a program available to all. The Cap on income should be erased. Repub
plots like "means testing" are actually just another route for the wealthy to justify not paying into our national aging insurance. I don't care if Bill Gates gets 1500/month soc sec if he had to pay in the same percentage on his income every year that a working class person did. You start excluding paying out to the wealthiest, you start creating a rationale for them never having to pay in.

I'm for expanding soc sec auto taxes for both employees and employers on all income.

[Recursion]

29. OTOH that third rail already seems less electric

People have called for cuts without paying an electoral price, so the logic of keeping it out of the welfare rubric may not be in play anymore. Plus it's been means tested to some extent for a while now, in that it's taxable if you have other income.

[merrily]

36. Please encourage each Third Way candidate to run on cutting Social Security. At a minimum, seeing

some honesty and candor from them would be refreshing.

Plus it's been means tested to some extent for a while now, in that it's taxable if you have other income.

That's not means testing, but thanks for playing.

[Recursion]

37. That would be a horrible idea. But it's exactly means testing

How in the world is that not means testing? "If you make more than X outside of SS, we will tax your SS benefits". Is the semantics of that not being a "cut" really that important?

But, no, a Democrat should absolutely never run on cutting Social Security.

[merrily]

39. No, it is not means testing, ffs. For just one thing, it disqualifies no one, even Buffet.

But, yes, if a Democrat is aiming at cutting OASDI and thinks it's a great idea, he or she should NOT deceive voters by remaining slient.

[Recursion]

40. You're being ridiculous. Of course it is. If you have more income, you get less in SS benefits

You literally cannot honestly think of that as anything other than means testing.

[merrily]

41. Again, no it is not, and insults don't make your position more sensible.

[Recursion]

43. Fine, it's "not means testing" even though it's completely identical to means testing in its outcome

[merrily]

45. It fucking is not. Name one person denied OASDI by reason of this alleged means testing.

Name one way in which the tax creates a stigma in the mind of the public like that created by welfare.

Name one way that this alleged means testing makes it easier to "end OASDI as we know it," which is the ultimate goal of those advocating means testing.

You get taxed on income from employment. Is that "means testing" your right to work?

BTW, smilies don't improve nonsense any more than do your personal insults.

[Recursion]

46. It is less money in benefits to people who have other income.

That. Is. Means. Testing. Period.

[merrily]

47. Any tax reduces net $$ available to the taxpayer. Your attempts to spin that are worthless.

[Recursion]

49. Which is why it wasn't ever taxed for 60 years!!!

That's exactly my point. For decades it was not taxed and you simply got the amount of money the formula said. Then they started means testing and clawed back some of the earned benefits through a tax if you had other income.

[merrily]

51. Non sequitur. At some point, income tax was new to the US, too. That didn't mean income was getting

means tested. It meant the US needed to raise money.

[merrily]

35. Pete Peterson, is that you?

[7962]

56. Dont know who that is

[stuffmatters]

14. The biggest opponents of uniform soc sec tax are tax cheating corps and wealthiest

Soc sec should be collected like medicare, no cap on income. It's national "age insurance" and everybody ages. In fact life expectancy hasn't increased for the poor (who pay the highest amount of their paychecks into soc sec) but primarily the wealthiest demographic.


Soc Sec is an unavoidable tax for both employees and employers until that annual salary cap amount (113,000 I think) is hit. After the cap both employees and employers automatically avoid the tax. I don't think that it's stressed enough why corps and their mouthpieces Chamber of Commerce, NFIB, Koch Americans for (Kochs) Prosperity, etc are so powerfully against scrapping the cap. It would require them to automatically pay the "employer" side of FICA on their higher paid employees including on the stock gifting/grifting tactic. Image how many tax cheating corps and hedge funders would be forced to pay automatically more into soc security!

There's never been any parity between what one pays into soc sec & what one gets out. The working class person can pay in for 4-5 decades and then die before eligibility without collecting a penny. The demographics make this a much higher possibility than a millionaire dying before reaching 85. As a uniform tax with a cap before affluence, it's currently a really, really regressive tax...like applying a tax to food but not diamonds.

My understanding is that if the cap were erased on both the employee and employer side, soc sec would be assured for all in perpetuity.

[SoapBox]

16. Go Bernie!

And yes, to this:

"A better idea: Lift cap so wealthy pay higher Social Security taxes."

[liberal_at_heart]

20. That's what I'm talking about. Hell yeah!

[sabrina 1]

21. He is absolutely right. The 2 trillion $ surplus in the SS account, belongs to the American workers

who should be getting increases to prevent a surplus like that from building, 'borrowed' for Wars and Tax Cuts for the Wealthy, they now don't want to pay it back.

[wcast]

25. +1,000,000

That is exactly right! The money is there, SS is over-funded unless it is treated as a big Ponzi scheme. I remember when Bush ran against Gore in 2000. All the talk was about a "lock box" for SS funds. I also remember clearly when then candidate Bush stated in a debate, I think, that he believed in a lock box unless there was some sort of "emergency" such as war, etc. Didn't take much longer after that for the Iraq war to start.

The sad thing is most people think SS is underfunded. You never hear our politicians say they aren't going to pay back whatever country that loans us money but somehow Americans who have paid into the system aren't afforded that same right or respect. The saddest part is that most people are unaware and only know their news from soundbites.

[Recursion]

52. Well, no, it belongs to the Social Security Administration

And the SSA has legal obligations to pay out annuities using it.

Talking about it being "workers' money" like it's some kind of a savings account plays into GOP rhetoric here.

[marym625]

22. K&R!

Excellent article. It's the only way to go and Bernie is the only candidate fighting for the 99%

[DisgustipatedinCA]

23. That's a great op-ed. I hope North Carolinians will be receptive. nt

[Uncle Joe]

24. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Catherina.

[Enthusiast]

26. Kicked and recommended!

Thank you, Catherina.

[Recursion]

30. Good op-ed (nt)

[merrily]

48. LOL!

[Recursion]

50. WTF is your problem? It's a good op-ed, and I agree with him.

I've said many many times on DU we should remove the FICA cap entirely and lower the retirement age to 55.

[merrily]

53. If a sense of humor is a problem, I'll take 6. Other than that, I have no problem. You?