Marc Fisher says cut social security for the wealthy.

[dkf]

Everyone needs to pitch in something.

Fast track immigration approvals for people who can buy real estate in the US to prop up the real estate market. He thinks this would change real estate psychology as people would want to front run the policy to get in before the world's rich buy in.

Interesting.

[lldu]

1. If they do this, it becomes welfare N/T

[dkf]

6. Maybe it is anyway.

Learning about the tiers really changed my view of social security. It is very skewed towards the lower income where the more you contribute the less is returned.

[Jackpine Radical]

2. Cutting SS for the wealthy is STUPID!

That, more than anything else, would convert SS into an "entitlement" and make it easier to fiddle with (e.g. privatize, raise ages, etc.) for everyone else.

[KansDem]

5. True, SS is "insurance," not "entitlement."

And entitlement will be linked to "welfare" if the cut-and-runners have their way...

[young but wise]

8. Exactly.

[WCGreen]

15. I couldn't agree more....

altering the program like that just gives ammunition to those who insist the program is an entitlement...

[KansDem]

3. "...approvals for people who can buy real estate in the US to prop up the real estate market."

I believe this is going to come back and bite us in the butt.

Boomers are beginning to retire. It has always been "conventional wisdom" that one's house was a sure investment for one's retirement years. Buy a house, pay mortgage for 30 years, sell it for a tidy nest egg.

But what happens when sellers out-pace buyers? I'm wondering if boomers will discover there's no one to buy their "investment." What then? Sell at a loss?

Immigrants could help offset that possible scenario...

[hughee99]

10. If you've owned a house for 20+ years, it's going to be tough to sell at a loss

even though the market is down now, it's still way up from where it was back then.

[KansDem]

13. I wonder in 10 years of so, what's the possibility there'll be many more sellers than buyers...?

:shrug:

What will happen then?

[eleny]

4. SS should remain a retirement, never a means tested, plan

Otherwise it becomes another target for the powerful right wing.

[Davis_X_Machina]

7. If it were means-tested, it'd already be dead. n/t

[DFLforever]

9. Exactly. SS queens would take the place of

the 'welfare queens' which fueled welfare reform.

[Davis_X_Machina]

11. And if not dead, radically scaled back....

...in size and availability. Look at the history of the Pell Grant for a demonstration of the process.

[dkf]

12. It's not means tested but it already has a lower payout for higher income levels.

Right now you get 90% of your highest 35 years income up to $9,132, then it falls to 35% up to 55,032 and 15% above that. So it's not like a regular retirement program where you get a return across the board.

[Davis_X_Machina]

14. I don't get it at all...

....GPO and WEP.

So there's a limit to how closely I follow it.

[eleny]

16. I see your point...

However, if we "crucify" the higher income levels by leaving them out they'd tear at their clothes and pull out their hair over this new burden.

So I say we leave it alone since it's actually not broken in the first place.