« Federal Debt as a Percent of GDP | Main | A Great Economics Resource for Teachers (or Proactive Parents) »
Ten For Tuesday, July 12, 2010
By JLP | July 13, 2010
1. Cool! People are paying down their credit cards. Or are they?
2. Try to Outfox the Box.
3. An analysis of 30 Ways to Fix Social Security.
…increasing the payroll tax by 2 percentage points over the next two decades, cutting benefits for all new recipients by 15 percent, and making all earnings subject to Social Security taxes would each alone wipe out most of Social Security’s projected shortfall.
That last suggestion makes me sick to my stomach.
4. Is David Swenson Lucky or Good?
Swenson is the CIO of Yale’s Endowment and author of several books. A study was done of Swenson’s performance.
5. I love Arthur Laffer.
6. Greenspan and the Constanza Principle.
7. Living Debt Free, Part 1. To each his own.
8. It’s a nice day for a Cheap Wedding (on a budget). Billy Idol, anyone?
9. Jonathan at MyMoneyBlog asked his readers to share their property tax assessment repeals.
10. The latest column from my hero, Thomas Sowell. I won’t tell you what it’s about…I’ll let it be a surprise.
That’s it. I need to get to bed. Enjoy.
If you’d like to be a part of next week’s Ten for Tuesday, shoot me an email with a post you think is worth sharing and I’ll see about including it (no promises).
Topics: Weekly Roundup | 11 Comments »
July 13th, 2010 at 3:29 am
…increasing the payroll tax by 2 percentage points over the next two decades, cutting benefits for all new recipients by 15 percent, and making all earnings subject to Social Security taxes would each alone wipe out most of Social Security’s projected shortfall.
See how easy it is to fix Social Security! Now all the people who are/were so sure SS would not be there when they retire are going to have a windfall when they do retire!
Of course the real problem is Medicare and Medicaid and fixing those problems are going to be MUCH MORE DIFFICULT than fixing SS.
July 13th, 2010 at 9:20 am
I’m perfectly fine with the second suggestion of cutting benefits for all new recipients by 15 percent, since this is more than the 70% they’re projected to be able to fund by the time I retire in 2045-2050. I like the idea of increasing the payroll tax less, but I’d probably be okay with it if THAT PORTION was combined with the option of private accounts.
The issue I have with making all earnings subject to Social Security taxes is that currently, the taxed income is capped because benefits are also capped. I understand that it’s a regressive tax, and that a lot of the people who would be subject to FICA above the current income limit probably don’t need extra social security payments anyways, but it still feels like forced charity to me.
July 13th, 2010 at 9:35 am
I have always argued that because those at lower incomes receive higher benefits as a percentage of their income, social security is not regressive.
July 13th, 2010 at 9:43 am
I know, I know – you and I disagree on the definition of ‘regressive’ so let’s not get into that again
Why does that suggestion make you sick to your stomach?
July 13th, 2010 at 9:46 am
Because I feel that my wife and I already pay in enough as it is. I’m also offended by the fact that OUR generation is having to foot the bill for previous generation’s bs.
July 13th, 2010 at 10:06 am
I guess I just wondered why only removing the cap churned your stomach. You’d have to individually be making over $30K above the cap before the amount of additional SS tax would exceed a 2% increase below the current cap.
July 13th, 2010 at 10:51 am
Courtney,
I read your comment a couple of times. I’m not sure I understand what you are saying.
July 13th, 2010 at 11:17 am
You said on item #3, “That last suggestion makes me sick to my stomach” – I took that in reference to the suggestion about making all earnings subject to Social Security taxes. But unless you are making significantly over the current income cap, the 2% increase in payroll tax affects your bottom line more.
July 13th, 2010 at 1:11 pm
Are you going to remove the PAYMENT cap, too?
Here’s a simpler solution to SS and Medicare — index the retirement age to the population distribution.
Right now, the retirement age is 65. Now, in 2000, those over 65 accounted for 12.4% of the population. That percentage needs to be frozen (or nearly so). If the oldest 12.4% in the 2010 Census is 67, then over the next 10 years we slowly ramp up the retirement age to 67 by 2020. If the 2020 Census says that the oldest 12.4% are 70 and above, then we ramp up the retirement age to 70 by 2030, and so on.
This way, we will essentially lock down the worker:retiree ratio.
July 14th, 2010 at 4:38 pm
Hard to grow old here in America. I’ve got my other plan to just skip out to a tropical island where I hope not to worry about SS and Medicare so much.
July 15th, 2010 at 7:53 am
Costa Rica here I come!