Skip to main content

View Diary: Protecting Social Security: Let's Tell The Deficit Commission Not to Slash Entitlements (261 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  But how does that help? (0+ / 0-)

    Withdrawals are proportionate to contributions.

    Won't that just mean we put in more money and later need to take out more money?

    Or are you suggesting that we make high earners pay Social Security on their full income but only give them benefits based on the current cap?

    •  Yes (3+ / 0-)

      Make the rich contribute to the "General Welfare" of the country they have  benefited so much from.

      I do not like thee, Doctor Fell, The reason why I cannot tell; But this I know, and know full well, I do not like thee, Doctor Fell.

      by opinionated on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 08:31:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not Really Proportionate (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      opinionated, barkingcat

      There are Currently three "levels" of "marginal return" on your contributions - 90%, 32% & 15%.  (See: )  IE, the first n dollars you earn contribute a whole lot to your benefit amount. by the time you near the current cap each dollar is contributing only 1/6th (15/90) as much to your benefit as the first dollars you made.

      So no, benefit is not really proportionate to contributions.  It DOES always go up as conributions do....ut at a much different rate.

      There's no reason we couldn't establish a fourth, much lower rate on amounts over the current cap a the same time we eliminate the cap. Say, 1%.  Or even 0%.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site