The United States will need 7 million migrants to cover old age support programs for baby boomers
The United States will need 7 million migrants to cover old age support programs for baby boomers
The country’s aging population and low fertility rate jeopardizes the solvency of Social Security and the Medicare program, according to a new study by Brookings
The country’s aging population and low fertility rate jeopardizes the solvency of Social Security and the Medicare program, according to a new study by Brookings
The immigration crisis has become a recurring theme in social gatherings and political debates, and is the main issue of the U.S. presidential election. Amid this discussion, one certainty stands out: while it’s well known that migrants have a need to live in the United States, a study has highlighted that the country needs them too.
Twenty percent of U.S. workers were not born in the United States, and it is expected that in the near future more than seven million more migrants will be needed for the labor market. That’s according to a study by Brookings, which warns about how the higher-than-expected increase in pensioners following the Covid-19 pandemic will affect the U.S. economy.
As the baby boomer generation approaches age 80, two challenges are facing the U.S. economy: providing staff to care for the elderly and ensuring the solvency of Social Security and the Medicare program.
You're viewing a single thread.
Or eliminate the cap on the tax so they actually pay their fair share. That would fix all the problems that Social Security and Medicare have in an instant.
Removing the cap would go a long way, but it's not enough by itself. We'll still need more people, or a time machine with a fertility clinic in it. From what I can tell, boomers seem to be thinking we're going to find that time machine somehow.
I've never seen any math that disproved that. Now if you're looking at actual federal income tax paid, maybe, but social security tax is based on income, it doesn't get reduced by often fraudulent deductions and credits. So a lot more income is taxable under social security tax than federal income tax which is laden with loopholes and complexities. So when Jeff Bezos in 2007 paid $0 in income tax, he likely would have paid tens or hundreds of millions in Social Security tax if there wasn't a cap, because he did have income. Of course, we aren't legally able to get the actual numbers because of privacy laws, but there have been some leaks recently if you want to see some of the numbers.
https://www.pgpf.org/blog/2022/11/social-security-reform-options-to-raise-revenues
There's a ton of right wing sites that would tell you eliminating the cap is a complete waste of time horrible for the economy, bringer of the end of days, etc.
Bezos, like many ultra wealthy, most likely paid himself some token amount in wages. Many CEO's used to pay themselves $1, just to say they had an income. They have accountants that decide how much he should claim as wages, just to maximize the returns from Social Security, without paying into it any more than needed.
And the guy who leaked the tax info of the billionaires got sentenced to prison beyond the maximum threshold - because the judge explicitly wanted to make an example of him.
That's why abortion has been under fire for decades and contraceptives are next, which i bet wil make the Korean 4b movement explode here.
Which then begs the question of will we back off cause birth rates are generally unaffected but with less "for fun" sex or go full handmaids tale.
I make a little more than double the cap. I'm in favor of increasing or eliminating the cap but that would double my check in the future. (Not quite, I haven't made double the cap my entire working life, but it would increase it a lot.) That would still help a bit because not all of our withholdings go to basic social security. Some goes to disability, spousal benefits, etc. Increasing taxes and benefits proportionally, which is the way benefits are structured now, doesn't solve anything.
I believe social security has a lot of value so I'm in favor of not just fixing the funding, but expanding it as well. But if you want to make it healthier just with payroll taxes they would have to be progressive, like income tax, without increasing benefits.
Seems like you don't know how the SS bend points work.