Comments posted organically
Homepage

Trump annoyed with Epstein questions because Trump hates conspiracy theories. 🙄
Conspiracy by Curt_Anderson     July 8, 2025 6:37 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (4 comments) [55 views]


Supreme Court backs Trump’s effort to dramatically reshape federal government
Law by HatetheSwamp     July 8, 2025 2:35 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (2 comments) [93 views]


SCOTUS only took a day to slam a district judge
Law by oldedude     July 3, 2025 7:23 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (69 comments) [543 views]


People that Actually Make differences instead of hiding.
How-to by oldedude     July 8, 2025 12:30 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (8 comments) [58 views]


A question for our Trump voters
Religion by Ponderer     July 8, 2025 6:47 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (9 comments) [93 views]


Musk just wrote the one thing that Trump cannot abide.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     June 5, 2025 11:56 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Ponderer (12 comments) [229 views]


Did you know that an average of over 1,000 immigrants were deported EVERY DAY throughout the 8 years Obama was president?
Education by Donna     July 7, 2025 3:47 pm (Rating: 5.0) Last comment by: Indy! (22 comments) [186 views]


Is it too late" Is mankind doomed?
Politics by meagain     July 7, 2025 12:50 pm (Rating: 5.0) Last comment by: Indy! (20 comments) [134 views]


Tesla is in deeper trouble than you think
Business by Indy!     July 8, 2025 10:26 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [27 views]


TACO Wednesday?
Economy by Curt_Anderson     July 7, 2025 10:30 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (2 comments) [47 views]


Economy selectors, pages, etc.
Social Security, Medicare to run short of funds in 2033---immigrants could be a solution.
By Curt_Anderson
June 19, 2025 11:25 am
Category: Economy
(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post & Tips.

SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Basically the ideas to keep Social Security solvent are to increase the amount that workers pay into the SS fund, reduce the amount collected by retirees, or a combination of both. Specific ideas include raising the eligibility age and reducing the monthly amounts paid to recipients.

My solution is less painful than those. Namely encourage immigration. Even Trump admits that immigrants are working at jobs that otherwise go unfilled: that includes agriculture, meat packing, wildfire fighting, restaurants, hotel and senior care jobs among other sectors.

Importantly, lawful permanent resident immigrants are eligible for some federal benefits, but often face a waiting period, usually five years, after obtaining their status. Undocumented immigrants are generally barred from most federal public benefits, with limited exceptions like emergency medical care. So they are not using the social safety net, but they are paying into it on the job and as consumers through sales tax and other taxes.

Here's how immigrants help make Social Security solvent:

Increased tax revenue: Both legal and unauthorized immigrants contribute to Social Security through payroll taxes, even if they may not be eligible to receive benefits themselves. This increases the amount of money flowing into the trust fund, which is crucial as the worker-to-beneficiary ratio declines in the US.

Younger workforce: Immigrants tend to be younger and contribute to the Social Security system for many years before they retire, if they retire in the US at all. This helps to improve the age dependency ratio, meaning more people are working and contributing to the system compared to those receiving benefits.
Addressing workforce needs: Immigration can help fill labor shortages in key sectors, such as direct care work, which is critical for an aging population.


Cited and related links:

  1. news.google.com

Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "Social Security, Medicare to run short of funds in 2033---immigrants could be a solution.":

  1. by Indy! on June 19, 2025 11:48 am

    Raise the cap on contributions (or better yet - remove it altogether). Simple, easy, painless - done... except for the oligarchs who run the country won't let it happen because it affects them. It's always squeeze the poor even more than they are already being squeezed.


  2. by meagain on June 19, 2025 2:36 pm
    Or, introduce a universal healthcare system. The hundreds of billions that could be saved by caring about health, would cover the Social Security shortfall.


  3. by Ponderer on June 19, 2025 3:04 pm

    Simple solution: Raise the payroll cap.

    It's been the simple solution for a couple decades now.


    "No kidding!"


  4. by Curt_Anderson on June 19, 2025 4:37 pm
    Indy & Ponderer,
    As attractive as it might be soak the rich, consider these numbers:
    In 2025, the maximum amount a person would pay into Social Security annually is $10,918.20. The maximum annual Social Security benefit for an individual retiring at age 70 in 2025 is $61,230 ($5,108 per month).

    So if a person made top wages over a 45 or 50 year working career retiring around age 70 they would have paid about half million dollars into the Social Security fund, plus their employer(s) would match that amount making the total amount together about one million dollars paid into SS. So a person would need to collect SS for 16 years to collect all they paid into it. That's well beyond the average life expectancy.

    So if the cap were to be adjusted how far could it moved upwards before there is an open revolt of the rich?



  5. by Donna on June 19, 2025 5:19 pm

    Remove the cap altogether, which was suggested. A lot of Democrats would vote for that, but no Republicans would, as they're the party that has a record of transferring wealth from the middle class and poor to the wealthy. Their employers woukdn't like matching the amount they pay in, though. Plus, many wealthy people make the bulk of their wealth through capital gains, which is a separate tax that should be increased, too.

    The U.S is the wealthiest country on the planet, but most of that wealth is in the hands of a relative few. 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, which includes my wife and I, and probably some others who post here.




  6. by Curt_Anderson on June 19, 2025 6:22 pm
    Another, perhaps a better way of looking at it is to consider actuarial tables (see link) A retiree at 65 or 70 can expect to live another 15 or 16 years on average. That means most people will live long enough to withdraw from SS more money than they put in. Of course many people die before they reach retirement age.

    It's a safe guess that the people who participate in this forum will not be having more kids who will soon become employed and pay into the SS fund. That's where immigration can help as I explained in the opening post.

    Since how we make SS solvent is a political choice, we need to choose wisely. Removing the cap as you've suggested probably would alienate high income earners, as they will realize that they are paying more into it than can ever hope to withdraw.

    I'd rather give immigrants a chance at a better life doing the jobs our economy needs.
    ssa.gov


  7. by Donna on June 20, 2025 8:48 am

    "Removing the cap as you've suggested probably would alienate high income earners..."

    Boo Hoo.


  8. by Ponderer on June 20, 2025 8:56 am

    I believe that what Bernie has been calling for is raising the cap from $125,000 to $400,000 and that alone would take care of the vast bulk of any shortfalls. The cap hasn't been raised or adjusted for decades. Kinda like the minimum wage.


  9. by Curt_Anderson on June 20, 2025 9:14 am
    Donna,
    It's not a boo boo matter. It's a matter of do you prefer Democrats or Republicans in office? Me, I favor the causes and policies that Democrats champion and favor. If you raise the cap too high, rich people will be saving money by donating to Republicans.

    It is also a pragmatic matter, eliminating the cap will never happen (there is some room to move it upwards). We may be able to move past America's nativist, xenophobic impulses...as we have in the past when the No Nothing Party's political influence.


  10. by Indy! on June 20, 2025 10:34 am

    Donna beat me to it. Boo-hoo. Fuck the rich. If you can't deal with that, Curt - maybe you are the wingnut you always seem to defend.

    "So if the cap were to be adjusted how far could it moved upwards before there is an open revolt of the rich?"

    What kind of revolt? They're already squeezing every dime they can out of the middle and poor. And they're already Republicans. You're the classic old school D who is now actually a Republican. The class war has been going on for 40 years now - when are the Democrats going to start fighting it instead of merely ceding ground on EVERY FUCKING ISSUE?


  11. by Curt_Anderson on June 20, 2025 10:46 am
    "And they're already Republicans." ---Indy!

    No, not entirely. Your screw the rich politics would be counterproductive to any progressive policies you favor. Moving the cap upwards somewhat makes mathematical sense. It is important to know who your allies are and not push them into the arms of the Republicans.


    pewresearch.org


  12. by Indy! on June 20, 2025 11:40 am

    You ARE the problem with the Democrats, Curt. You are why that worthless party continues to lose to unbelievable dumb candidates like Trump and Bush 43.


  13. by meagain on June 20, 2025 11:54 am
    To add to what I posted above, which, by the way, was a serious answer. The USA in 2021 spent 17.4% of its GDP on healthcare. Canada spent 12.3%.
    Say the USA created roughly the same system, which would save 5% of GDP or about $1.3 trillion.

    It is the answer you should be looking at and agitating for.


  14. by Curt_Anderson on June 20, 2025 12:02 pm
    Meagain,
    A universal healthcare system or a hybrid universal healthcare system as found in some European nations would go long way to solving the Social Security dilemma.


  15. by Indy! on June 20, 2025 1:44 pm

    I've said that a million times on this board. But saving cash with universal healthcare has nothing to do with Social Security which funds itself. Raise the cap and/or have a cut off point for the wealthy receiving payments and SSI continues to fund itself as it always has and was always intended.


  16. by Curt_Anderson on June 20, 2025 2:17 pm
    "But saving cash with universal healthcare has nothing to do with Social Security which funds itself." ---Indy!

    Money is fungible, especially money within the federal budget. You have often suggested reducing the military budget so as to move money to address social issues.


  17. by Donna on June 21, 2025 3:18 am

    I don't think that many upper income Americans who are Democrats or who lean Democrat would stop donating to Democrats if the party somehow were able to remove the Social Security pay-in cap. If you're that wealthy and you're still supporting the Democrats, I don't think that would change your political ideology.


  18. by Ponderer on June 21, 2025 5:37 am

    It all comes down to a simple fact of life:

    America is going to do whatever benefits the richest Americans the most.


  19. by HatetheSwamp on June 21, 2025 5:44 am

    Straight from the brain of Karl Marx, po. Blatant.


  20. by Donna on June 21, 2025 6:44 am

    Hts - So iow you're in favor of doing whatever benefits the richest Americans the most.


  21. by HatetheSwamp on June 21, 2025 7:15 am

    Of course not. But, I have enuff of a brain not to mindlessly acceptance commie propaganda.

    The point of MAGA is that working class voters should rule... and, do more, than in the past. Your thinking is 19th century... and European, at that. IMO.


  22. by Ponderer on June 21, 2025 9:22 am

    "But, I have enuff of a brain not to mindlessly acceptance commie propaganda." -MAGA Hat Hate

    He just doesn't have the eyes to see what thefuck is happening right in front of his stoopid face.


  23. by HatetheSwamp on June 21, 2025 9:45 am

    "Hts - So iow you're in favor of doing whatever benefits the richest Americans the most."

    At moments like this, OD refers to Greg Gutfeld's "prison of two ideas," yours is a false dichotomy.

    Nuance, man!


  24. by Indy! on June 21, 2025 11:38 am

    The military does not fun itself, Curt. The reason that is important - since your mind seems to have been slipping lately - is that SSI does not exist on federal tax dollars. So when you and the other GOPers cry about how much SSI "costs" - you're crying crocodile tears because it doesn't cost anything in taxes. It does not apply to the debt/deficit as the military does.


  25. by Donna on June 21, 2025 11:49 am

    Hts - So iow you're in favor of doing whatever benefits the richest Americans the most.

    Of course not. But, I have enuff of a brain not to mindlessly acceptance commie propaganda. - Fred Astaire

    LOL!



  26. by Indy! on June 21, 2025 12:03 pm

    The other side to Curt's argument is - if anyone is deciding their politics on money alone? They are already Republicans. Now go find a mirror, Curt - look into it and ask it who you really are politicially.


  27. by Curt_Anderson on June 21, 2025 12:26 pm
    Indy,
    I checked the mirror. I am a Democrat, which I know you are not. I am also a pluralist as opposed to being a populist which I believe you are. Pluralism accepts and doesn't alienate our imperfect allies. Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are both populists. Populist solutions tend to be all or nothing. Populist solutions to complex problems tend to be easily conveyed and easily understood; building a border wall to stop immigration for example.

    oah.org


  28. by Indy! on June 21, 2025 1:58 pm

    So we're at war and your answer is to stand aside and let your friends and allies be overrun. Because that's what is happening between the wealthy and the not wealthy. The wealthy are at war 24/7365 on us - you - and you think the answer is to help them. You're a fool, but thanks for acknowledging that I am not a Democrat, that the Democrats have no intention of "offending" the wealthy by asking (or better yet - MAKING) them pay their fair share and ergo everything I've been saying about your worthless party is true - there is absolutely no reason to support them.


  29. by Curt_Anderson on June 21, 2025 2:10 pm
    Indy,
    Like I said, populist solutions tend to be simplistic. Btw, the Social Security withholding from paychecks IS a tax.


  30. by Indy! on June 21, 2025 2:50 pm

    Moving the goal posts never works, Curt. Social Security is an investment vehicle - we are "taxed" specifically to get paid back upon retirement. I could explain the entire system to you - but why? To reward you for trying to avoid the issue like you always do when cornered? You and OD and your junior high level knowledge of government need to give up the "educating others" part of your schtick. We all* understand how things work - playing word games does not change anything other than - again - lowering my respect for your debating abilities yet another notch on the ladder.


    *Brown Shorts not included.


  31. by Curt_Anderson on June 21, 2025 3:22 pm
    "The military does not fun itself, Curt. The reason that is important - since your mind seems to have been slipping lately - is that SSI does not exist on federal tax dollars. So when you and the other GOPers cry about how much SSI "costs" - you're crying crocodile tears because it doesn't cost anything in taxes." ---Indy #24

    I was merely responding to you comment which I just quoted.

    "Good taxes" are taxes that provide a benefit that a person cannot practically buy on their own. For example we cannot each buy our private highway system or fire department.

    It's a little ridiculous, not to mention unfair, to ask people invest in a retirement program that there is no chance they will ever be able to use even if they lived to be 150 years old. Unlike highways and the fire department, a person can self-fund their own retirement.

    That said, there certainly is room to raise the cap, but it should be a reasonable increase.



  32. by Indy! on June 21, 2025 3:39 pm

    So just the other day you were claiming we need illegal immigrants because (for one thing) they fund SSI with their taxes even though they can never receive any benefits from it. You weren't worried about THEM not getting anything in return (in fact you were PROMOTING it) - but now you're worried about the wealthy (who WILL be getting retirement funds from SSI) might not get a full return on their investment?

    Again, Curt - the GOP is the party protecting the wealthy. You can call yourself a D, but obviously your politics do not align with that party's (stated, although rarely fulfilled) platform to defend the poor and unfortunate.


  33. by Curt_Anderson on June 21, 2025 3:53 pm
    "So just the other day you were claiming we need illegal immigrants because (for one thing) they fund SSI with their taxes even though they can never receive any benefits from it." ---Indy

    I said we need immigrants, I never use the term "illegal immigrants". As Donna pointed out, I favor open-borders and making it much easier and quicker to become a naturalized citizen.

    It is not true that immigrants can never receive benefits from Social Security. They can receive SS if they become documented. Plus they get the benefit they wanted: to live and work in the US of A.


  34. by Indy! on June 21, 2025 5:27 pm

    Good lord, Curt. I can no longer assume you are playing dumb - you are the real thing. This is from this very thread, started by you, with YOUR way to save SSI which included this paragraph...

    Importantly, lawful permanent resident immigrants are eligible for some federal benefits, but often face a waiting period, usually five years, after obtaining their status. Undocumented immigrants are generally barred from most federal public benefits, with limited exceptions like emergency medical care. So they are not using the social safety net, but they are paying into it on the job and as consumers through sales tax and other taxes.

    You said exactly what I said you just said. You want immigrants (illegal and otherwise works with that statement, so you can put the goal posts down now) to pay into the system and not get their money's worth back. So you're FINE with POOR PEOPLE getting screwed - but GOD FORBID you and your rich pals like Trump and Leon have to pay their FAIR SHARE.


  35. by Curt_Anderson on June 21, 2025 5:43 pm
    Indy,
    You are being patronizing. Immigrants know the score. Some have intentions of becoming citizens with all the rights and benefits of being citizens. Some choose otherwise. Many immigrants take arduous journeys often at great expense and risk to get here. Some plan to stay, some not. They choose to come anyway.

    You are not doing them any favors by opposing their chance to earn money here in the US, and yes, even if that means paying taxes.


  36. by Indy! on June 21, 2025 7:30 pm

    I did not comment on that aspect in any way at all and since you didn't go anywhere near the actual point of this discussion for like the 5th post in a row - I will take my win and go home now.


Go To Top

Comment on: "Social Security, Medicare to run short of funds in 2033---immigrants could be a solution."


* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
SelectSmart.com home page