Skip to main content

View Diary: The middle-class tax hike Republicans are arguing for (47 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I actually think the least evil "solution" (0+ / 0-)

    is with means testing--and as I've learned to specify--a sliding scale means test that gently reduces benefits in higher income brackets but doesn't eliminate the benefit.  

    First, since the payment formula for SS is already a sliding scale formula, this can be adjusted.  

    Second, eliminating the cap won't happen by itself (why should I have to pay more but get nothing more is the constant reply), but if the cap is eliminated and the top payment rate increased, but means tested--sliding scale--according to overall income, then conservatives have less of an issue regarding payment relative to benefit.    

    •  But everyone hates Welfare (0+ / 0-)

      Means testing converts them from prepaid benefit programs, which everyone pays into when they're working, to a form of Welfare.  That changes them from a political third rail (don't touch them) to a political whipping boy.  Welfare benefits get "reformed", and cut, routinely.  It completely changes the program's political dynamics.  So we can't go there.  Better that a few rich folks collect a little that they don't need than the rest of us be tarred as welfare recipients.

      •  I've heard this but I don't buy it. (0+ / 0-)

        Convince me.

        As I see it, if benefits still occur for all, it is not welfare.  If one guy gets 100% of potential benefits but another guy making $1M per gets only 50%, he has no welfare argument and the difference of another $1250 or so per month is not going to effect this person and the public will agree.      

        Something will change in social security. That is a fact. I don't like raising the age.  I don't like trimming benefits to the most needy.  This, a sliding scale means test, from my perspective, is the least harmful.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site