WSJ article: Can you retire w/out SocSec? Will 2% cut damage SocSec?
Why, yes, it will!
WSJ writes that the Obama/Republican tax plan with its cut in SocSec payroll taxes of 2% will lead to weakening or demise of the program.
So, start saving lots lots lots more is the message.
The deal, by cutting payroll taxes for one year, weakens Social Security's funding. It puts those payroll taxes "in play" as a political football for the first time. And by freezing federal taxes at today's low rates, it will add at least $900 billion—and probably much more—to our spiraling national debt. That threatens the ultimate financial stability of the federal system.
Note that while Social Security is called a "trust fund," that is largely a matter of internal accounting. Your Social Security checks ultimately come from the same flow of tax dollars as all other federal spending. Social Security can't stay solvent unless Uncle Sam does.
If we don't raise taxes, we are left with two options: a financial crisis, or deep spending cuts. Assuming we embrace the latter, that would mean going after Social Security and Medicare. After all, that's where the money is. ....
While the WSJ news articles have been noted for fairness and accuracy, the paper is by no means lefty. This is the view Repubs have. And Obama probably has.
How screwed over are you feeling?
Via sidebar list of articles next to lambert's link to smartphone privacy invasions.