components of a sensible Social Security reform — means-testing for wealthier beneficiaries, changing the way benefits adjust for inflation, a slow increase in the retirement age The third "component" is actually taking place - and it should, in order to reflect the longer life expectancies. The second one is a threat to older people - a few years of moderate inflation may make benefits almost meaningless.
The one that pisses me off is the one about means testing. 1) that wasn't the deal when they collected from people serious money, for decades, and the future benefits were clearly spelled out. Not nice to change rules late in the game. 2) means-testing will change SS into a form of welfare. As sh*tty as its design is*, it was conceived not as welfare, and not as insurance, but as a pension plan administered by the government.
*Pay as you go was a terrible idea. A large part of the funds should have been invested in the individual payers name, in an "index of indexes" - which would include equities, bonds, real estate, etc., with its composition not subject to change.
That said, the government should have stayed out of the pension business altogether. Let people save and prepare for old age. Those who fail to do so would have to rely on welfare. That would be better than to have people rely on a pension, only to change it along the way into a form of welfare. |
