• ramble81@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    If you make $176K your SS payout is $5,251/mo.
    If you make $5M your SS payout is $5,251/mo.

    If we remove the cap on contributions, is it fair to remove the cap on payouts?

    (My personal answer is no, but it is hard to argue about the lack of equity in that case. The original cap on both ends was built with that in mind)

    • just2look@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      If you’re making $5M a year, you likely will never need any payout. Its the whole point of a progressive tax system. The wealthy can afford to pay more, and require less support from the state.

      • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Counterpoint: anyone paying any amount of social security tax is part of the working class, even if they’re making $5M/yr. Increasing taxes on the working class isn’t going to solve wealth unequally. We need to tax wealth.

        • just2look@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          I agree we need to tax wealth, but I’m fine with removing the cap on paying into social security. The system is going to break as it is, and needs more money flowing in. And the government needs to be barred from diverting that money to other things. If it had been treated as a hands of retirement fund, we wouldn’t even have this issue.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      You can even esssentially take the same rule - the payout is a curve, not a flat line. People near the cap get proportionally less payout. All we need to do is continue that thought so the xurve flattens out