Buck's Debt-Ceiling Solution: Work Until You Die

8 thoughts on “Buck’s Debt-Ceiling Solution: Work Until You Die”

1. On the surface, Buck’s comments make an amount of sense.

   But, as always, the “devil is in the details.” What constitutes a “white collar job” versus a job that may be mostly “hard labor?” 

   The US Department of Labor has an older, large document, called the Dictionary of Occupational Titles. There have been more job tracking and job description tomes added in more recent years. Few job descriptions are so simplistic as to be easily definable. Often, the actual job title won’t match what the actual job requirements are.

   As an example, people may think they know what a “Hooker” is. The actual job, though, is in the steel making industry.

   I worked some years in disability benefits. One worker doing harder labor may see their body breaking down at age 45. Another may make it to 65. Every situation is different; every case is different.

   An increase in the payroll tax cap is the best way to deal with impending fiscal issues for Social Security and Medicare.

   Log in to Reply

   1. If we all agree on the solution, why raise the retirement age at all? 67 is plenty of time in the workforce. Let us enjoy our golden years.

      Log in to Reply

   2. Remove the cap, lower the rate. 

      Log in to Reply

2. Repeal Trump and Bush tax cuts.  Problem solved.

   Log in to Reply

3. Ken Buck in a capital-M Moron.

   In my lifetime I’ve worked in various physical and less-physical occupational areas — construction, farming, and ranching at a young age; finance, management, and other “desk jobs” at a later age. Most folks have.  So who gets the lower age, and who gets the higher age?

   And, shouldn’t this mean that Ken Dipshit and others can’t begin drawing their congressional pensions until much later in life?  (Yeah. That’s not happening, huh?)

   Of course, Buck knows he’s not offering any proposal worthy of consideration, he’s just slinging some party-appropriate buzzword salad hoping to find any way to excuse his party’s not doing anything to actually solve the obvious funding problem.

   Log in to Reply

4. I just looked it up. Granted, I haven't punched a clock in a long time, but 7.5% was deducted from my paychecks for Social Security, matched by the employer. It's now 6.2%. If anything, the rate ought to have gone up when the Boomers began retiring. We're such a large cohort and will, most likely, live a lot longer than older generations on that money.

   Log in to Reply

   1. I think you are talking about the 7.5% FICA tax line. 

      What is FICA?  “The FICA tax is the amount of money Uncle Sam deducts from your paycheck every time you’re paid. The money goes to the Internal Revenue Service first, then is steered into a Social Security fund to pay for Social Security program funding. A portion of your FICA tax also goes into the federal government’s Medicare trust fund. (Medicare didn’t launch until 1965.)”

      There’s been a few adjustments.  These days,

      • The FICA tax represents 7.65% of payroll earnings, up to $127,000 (any income earned via wages above $127,000 aren’t subject to FICA taxes.)
      • Workers pay 6.2% of their paycheck toward Social Security.
      • Employers pay 6.2%, per employee, for a combined amount of 12.4% of a career professional’s income.
      • Additionally, Uncle Sam deducts 1.45% from every worker’s paycheck for Medicare, and that 1.45% number is matched by an employer contribution (for a total of 2.9%), thus fulfilling the FICA obligations of both employee and employer.

      So, removing the cap ($127,000) and broadening to all sorts of income instead of just payroll earnings are both proposals to make the systems more solvent.

      Log in to Reply

5. How about a Universal Basic Income

   Log in to Reply