My earlier rant on the Social Security wage base made me think of a more important question (actually, I was already thinking of it, hence the need to Google the earnings cap): Should Social Security be more progressive than it already is? The most common ways liberals want to make it more progressive are (a) eliminating the cap on taxable earnings altogether and (b) reducing benefits for high earners. For part of my brain the automatic answer is “yes,” but I think there is a reasonable argument for leaving things roughly the way they are.
First, there’s a straight-up political argument. Social Security is popular because people feel like they earn their benefits. If people thought it was a covert redistribution program, then the high earners would definitely be against it, and most of the middle class probably would be too because of the American allergy to welfare. In fact, there are certainly people who think it is “pure welfare”, like the author of the post I criticized last time around. But it isn’t:
That is from a 2006 CBO analysis of Social Security taxes and benefits, by income level. As you can see, the retirement program on its own is only modestly progressive. The really progressive parts of the program are disability insurance and survivors’ benefits. The fact is that there isn’t that much redistribution based solely on income level; most of the “redistribution” is based on disability or having your spouse die young, which feels more like insurance than welfare. It turns out that most Americans’ instincts are right: Social Security isn’t a welfare program. If you make that bottom line steeper, then at some point opinions will change.
Now some people will look at that chart and say that Social Security should be more progressive. But I’m not so sure. Conceptually speaking, I think of Social Security as contributory pension system run by the federal government along with an insurance component to protect people against various risks—disability, early death of your working spouse, bad luck that prevents you from saving enough for retirement, living too long, etc. (Disability benefits are a standard feature of private defined benefit pensions, too.) I think of this governmental function as different from the welfare function—the one that ensures that everyone person has the basic means of subsistence. (Wait, we don’t have that in this country? Well, we should.) And that’s precisely what the founders of Social Security thought; they saw it as an alternative to noncontributory old-age assistance programs, which is what the conservatives preferred. (See Jacob Hacker, The Divided Welfare State, pp. 98–99.)
So to me, it makes the most sense to have (a) a contributory pension/insurance scheme that compensates participants for losses (e.g., disability) but is not mainly about redistribution; (b) a real welfare system for the poor; and (c) a progressive tax system to fund the rest of the government. And I worry that if you make (a) too much like (b) or (c) it will become unpopular and die a slow death. But I’m open to being convinced otherwise.
This post originally appeared at The Baseline Scenario and is reproduced with permission.
23 Responses to “Should Social Security Be Progressive?”
[...] Read thе original: ShουƖԁ Social Security Bе Progressive? – EconoMonitor (blog) [...]
Hope this helps References :
I never know what the swear filter will block out and Im damned if Im writing the bloody thing out again
One thing I want to say is that often before obtaining more laptop memory, look into the machine into which it could be installed. If your machine is actually running Windows XP, for instance, the memory ceiling is 3.25GB. Using in excess of this would purely constitute some sort of waste. Make sure ones mother board can handle the particular upgrade amount, as well. Interesting blog post.
Good luck with the UK Ironman, Kate. I understand its a hilly bike course including the infamous Sheephouse Lane climb. Any tips on how to deal with hills in endurance events like this?
Our scouts got to trail more players around worldwide, dnt tell me every player from brazil, france is good and can perform in Newcastle.
Hey thank you for this blog. That was really revealing.
Yup. Mitre and Gaudin both have one more arb year.
233. Pride goeth before a fall; a haughty spirit before destruction.
handy points I will bookmark this and keep an eye on updates. Im sure all of us readers appreciate your efforts as much as me!
Enjoying a post could be like giving an optimistic vote for change, I will like any post I like, but no likes can be thrown away through me if I give a good one for your website. I say to you right now, this has a great like from me.
This is nonsense. Have you read about the morning after pill controversy ?
Since when do people go to the ER and are turned away Unless you live in Chicago and go to the University Hospital where Michelle Obama worked, there they turn poor people away.
Thanks! Will probably be nice to anyone who usess it, including myself. Sustain the nice work for positive ill take a look at extra posts.. you said it my friend. Dont leave us hanging I want to hear more please. Thanks. terrific more please outstanding.
Hi are using WordPress for your site platform? Im new to the blog world but Im trying to get started and create my own. Do you require any html coding knowledge to make your own blog? Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Lets begin by minding our own damned business. We all have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Ones perceptions of morality are just that: ones perceptions. WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO IMPOSE THOSE PERCEPTIONS ON OTHERS. We have the right to practice our religious beliefs, NOT impose those beliefs on others, no matter how right we think we or those beliefs are.
ur my boy alexHit up my vids
All his personal information is under lock and key being in sealed records that even a court can not have opened.
JJ sure sounds a little like Jon, doesnt he? Report this comment Reply packer_bob says: November 12, 2009 at 10:33 pm The idea that Favre will ever play for the Packers again is just so painfully ridiculous for so many reasons, it doesnt bear comment.
I already did and am a member.
Ginger it will only be fine if you are healthy have no health needs and dont live long.
It’s really a nice and useful piece of info. I’m glad that you shared this useful information with us. Please keep us up to date like this. Thanks for sharing.
You really make it seem so easy with your presentation but I find this topic to be actually something that I think I would never understand. It seems too complex and extremely broad for me. I’m looking forward for your next post, I’ll try to get the hang of it!