General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Paul Krugman Tells GOP Senator: ‘Your Facts Are False’ On Social Security [View all]Benton D Struckcheon
(2,347 posts)I had a long debate on this a while back on an investing forum where this one guy was trying to say the same thing. I pointed out, among other things, that the reason SS's Trust Fund invests only in gov't securities is to prevent it from influencing the private economy in any way, a thing which the Trustees say on the website they have. If SS is invested in anything other than Federal gov't securities, it immediately will distort the price of whatever it starts to invest in. That goes beyond even the safety of the investment issue; obviously Federal gov't securities are the safest bet out there.
These Reps with their nonsense don't even bother to do basic research and think logically about why SS is structured as it is.
On the cap: another simple logical thought. It subsidizes Wall Street at the expense of Main Street. Think about this for a second: what percent of employees of Black Rock or Goldman Sachs are making more than the SS limit? Now think about what percent of employees at an ordinary company making widgets (Ford, Boeing, etc.) or selling them (Amazon, Macy's) are making more than that limit? Obviously for Wall Street companies a lot more than for Main Street companies.
So, why are we subsidizing the financial industry and their crazed bonus culture this way? Eliminating that cap is the most sensible solution to long-term SS solvency.