tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7334408760351487944.post4496421384991789025..comments2023-11-12T06:43:00.060-05:00Comments on Notes on Social Security Reform: Cutting the payroll tax on older workers: a tax cut that could pay for itself?Andrew G. Biggshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16617460431856611873noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7334408760351487944.post-59354676169803830372012-05-01T14:58:28.780-04:002012-05-01T14:58:28.780-04:00Arne,
Re 1, this is proposed as a steady-state po...Arne,<br /><br />Re 1, this is proposed as a steady-state policy to increase employment, not a stimulus for current conditions. My guess is that once the economy recovers, we may see greater demand for older labor as the Boomers retire in larger numbers. <br /><br />On 2, I'm really not sure one way or the other.Andrew G. Biggshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16617460431856611873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7334408760351487944.post-36954225837320018482012-05-01T14:03:44.223-04:002012-05-01T14:03:44.223-04:00Interesting analysis, but I am dubious about a cou...Interesting analysis, but I am dubious about a couple things.<br /><br />1) With high unemployment and low demand, increaasing the the labor supply by keeping near-retirees in the workforce is not going to increase the overall employment now the way it would have in 2005.<br /><br />2) Many people clearly retire as soon as they think they can afford it without optimizing their retirement income. Increasing their ready income just before retirement would give them a source to pay for the medical insurance they need to bridge the gap to Medicare. If you were to make the change gradually, so they got in the habit of spending it, you would not be increasing their retirement security.Arnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00796151499106650732noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7334408760351487944.post-89503317315628869982012-04-30T22:20:36.899-04:002012-04-30T22:20:36.899-04:00"The reason is that the current system encour..."The reason is that the current system encourages too many individuals to retire early, forgoing the extra savings they could have by extending their work lives."<br /><br />This is just the opposite of what Social Security's objective was in 1935; to encourage older workers to leave the workforce and open up jobs for younger workers.<br /><br />"A 2009 study I coauthored with David Weaver and Gayle Reznik of the Social Security Administration (for the SSA's Office of Retirement and Disability Policy) found that for each dollar of additional payroll taxes a near-retiree pays into the system, he or she receives only around 2.5 cents in extra lifetime benefits."<br /><br />I figured this out in 1984 when I was modeling SS-OASI. A person who is age 55, stops working has little impact on total OASI Benefits.<br /><br />Why are we still fooling with Social Security? It is unfunded, unable to pay full scheduled benefits and it is a money loser as everyone knows. Why is it so difficult to JUST SAY NO TO SOCIAL SECURITY?<br /><br />http://www.justsayno.50mgs.com/ss.htmlWilliamLarsenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00226403551284640494noreply@blogger.com