Changes

====The Clinton/Gore Tax on Social Security benefits ====

====The Clinton/Gore Tax on Social Security benefits ====

In 1993 President Clinton sought to increase taxes on Social Security benefits of the elderly and disabled.<ref>http://www.house.gov/house/Contract/seniorsd.txt</ref>  The final version of the bill passed by the [[Democrat]]ically controlled Congress increased taxes on beneficiaries from the first 50% to 85%<ref>http://web.archive.org/web/20040408115747/www.ssa.gov/OACT/HOP/hopi.htm</ref> of benefits (or "annuity payments" as they were originally called). [[Vice President]] [[Al Gore]] cast the deciding tie-breaker vote in the Senate to make the tax increase law.  The Clinton-Gore tax increase on Social Security benefits included 15% more of the social security benefit at the beneficiary's marginal rate. It collected some taxes on retired couple making as little as $22,000 per year.<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=vLg4iJR0J9kC&pg=PA16593&lpg=PA16593&dq=Vice+President+Gore+cast+the+tie-breaking+vote%2Bsocial+security&source=bl&ots=-ImIDX6fHa&sig=ttWVUNAIVsLQoEg1ZhCntHB_02Y&hl=en&ei=dobVTMr9HoOglAe0iuX9CA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Vice%20President%20Gore%20cast%20the%20tie-breaking%20vote%2Bsocial%20security&f=false Congressional Record, Comments by Rep. Christopher Cox,] July 27, 2000.</ref>  

In 1993 President Clinton sought to increase taxes on Social Security benefits of the elderly and disabled.<ref>http://www.house.gov/house/Contract/seniorsd.txt</ref>  The final version of the bill passed by the [[Democrat]]ically controlled Congress increased taxes on beneficiaries from the first 50% to 85%<ref>http://web.archive.org/web/20040408115747/www.ssa.gov/OACT/HOP/hopi.htm</ref> of benefits (or "annuity payments" as they were originally called). [[Vice President]] [[Al Gore]] cast the deciding tie-breaker vote in the Senate to make the tax increase law.  The Clinton-Gore tax increase on Social Security benefits included 15% more of the social security benefit at the beneficiary's marginal rate. It collected some taxes on retired couple making as little as $22,000 per year.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=vLg4iJR0J9kC&pg=PA16593&lpg=PA16593&dq=Vice+President+Gore+cast+the+tie-breaking+vote%2Bsocial+security&source=bl&ots=-ImIDX6fHa&sig=ttWVUNAIVsLQoEg1ZhCntHB_02Y&hl=en&ei=dobVTMr9HoOglAe0iuX9CA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Vice%20President%20Gore%20cast%20the%20tie-breaking%20vote%2Bsocial%20security&f=false Congressional Record, Comments by Rep. Christopher Cox,] July 27, 2000.</ref>  

In 2009 conservatives attacked the Democrats health care reform program because it reneged on promises made to Medicare beneficiaries.

In 2009 conservatives attacked the Democrats health care reform program because it reneged on promises made to Medicare beneficiaries.

Rep. [[Paul Ryan]], Chairman of the House Budget Committee in the 112th Congress, proposed in his ''Roadmap for America's Future'' a choice  for all workers to be allowed to invest 2 percent of their first $10,000 of annual payroll tax into personal accounts. Workers would be allowed to select from a list of managed investment funds, approved by the government for soundness and safety, like those in the federal government’s Thrift Savings Plan.

Rep. [[Paul Ryan]], Chairman of the House Budget Committee in the 112th Congress, proposed in his ''Roadmap for America's Future'' a choice  for all workers to be allowed to invest 2 percent of their first $10,000 of annual payroll tax into personal accounts. Workers would be allowed to select from a list of managed investment funds, approved by the government for soundness and safety, like those in the federal government’s Thrift Savings Plan.

Harold Meyerson of the [[Democratic Socialists of America]], writing in the ''[[Washington Post]]'' proposed eliminating the payroll tax altogether, for both employers and employees, claiming it would increase by $2,100 the take-home pay, and buying power, of workers making $50,000 annually.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/time-for-another-stimulus-mr-president/2011/08/09/gIQAjwLQ5I_story.html</ref>

Harold Meyerson of the [[Democratic Socialists of America]], writing in the ''[[Washington Post]]'' proposed eliminating the payroll tax altogether, for both employers and employees, claiming it would increase by $2,100 the take-home pay, and buying power, of workers making $50,000 annually.<ref>https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/time-for-another-stimulus-mr-president/2011/08/09/gIQAjwLQ5I_story.html</ref>

===Medicare===

===Medicare===

===Present liabilities promised to [[Baby boom]]ers===

===Present liabilities promised to [[Baby boom]]ers===

[[File:Editgrf11.jpg|thumb|241px|right|Graph: ''USA Today'']]

[[File:Editgrf11.jpg|thumb|241px|right|Graph: ''USA Today'']]

The cost of Social Security benefits that were promised to 70 million Americans of the "baby-boom" generation exceeds $53 trillion ($53,000,000,000,000).<ref>http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-10-03-debt-cover_x.htm</ref><ref>http://www.usatoday.com/news/graphics/debtcalculator/flash.htm</ref><ref>http://fiscalsolvency.com/the_3_parts_of_our_fiscal_crisis.htm</ref> To understand the magnitude of this figure by contrast, the [[World Bank]] estimates the [[GDP]] of the planet (total economic output) for the year 2008 as $61.063 trillion.<ref>http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdi&met=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&idim=country:USA&dl=en&hl=en&q=gdp#met=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&tdim=true  See also CIA World Fact Book [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/xx.html]</ref> The sum total of promises made to all working age adults in the U.S population is estimated at over $106 trillion,<ref>http://www.cnbc.com/id/38979552</ref><ref>http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/14/taxes-social-security-opinions-columnists-medicare.html</ref> more than one and half times the total annualized economic activity of the planet.  An editorial in ''[[USA Today]]'' claims "Without action, outlays on benefit programs such as Medicare and Social Security, combined with interest on the [[national debt]], are projected to grow so fast that they will devour all tax revenue in as soon as 20 years. That means every government department and agency, except for those that pay benefits and service the debt, could be eliminated — and Washington would still run a deficit."<ref>[http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2010-11-11-editorial11_ST_N.htm Our view on government inaction:] Gridlock's just another word for lack of leadership, ''USA Today editorial, November 11, 2010.</ref>

The cost of Social Security benefits that were promised to 70 million Americans of the "baby-boom" generation exceeds $53 trillion ($53,000,000,000,000).<ref>https://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-10-03-debt-cover_x.htm</ref><ref>https://www.usatoday.com/news/graphics/debtcalculator/flash.htm</ref><ref>http://fiscalsolvency.com/the_3_parts_of_our_fiscal_crisis.htm</ref> To understand the magnitude of this figure by contrast, the [[World Bank]] estimates the [[GDP]] of the planet (total economic output) for the year 2008 as $61.063 trillion.<ref>http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdi&met=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&idim=country:USA&dl=en&hl=en&q=gdp#met=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&tdim=true  See also CIA World Fact Book [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/xx.html]</ref> The sum total of promises made to all working age adults in the U.S population is estimated at over $106 trillion,<ref>http://www.cnbc.com/id/38979552</ref><ref>http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/14/taxes-social-security-opinions-columnists-medicare.html</ref> more than one and half times the total annualized economic activity of the planet.  An editorial in ''[[USA Today]]'' claims "Without action, outlays on benefit programs such as Medicare and Social Security, combined with interest on the [[national debt]], are projected to grow so fast that they will devour all tax revenue in as soon as 20 years. That means every government department and agency, except for those that pay benefits and service the debt, could be eliminated — and Washington would still run a deficit."<ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2010-11-11-editorial11_ST_N.htm Our view on government inaction:] Gridlock's just another word for lack of leadership, ''USA Today editorial, November 11, 2010.</ref>

===Reform===

===Reform===

[[Spain]] has the highest worker-pensioner ratio in the world. Four workers currently contribute 21.3% of their income to support one Social Security recipient.<ref>http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPENSIONS/Resources/395443-1142535808399/2329423-1170369479400/Pensions_in_Aging_Societies_Galasso.pdf</ref><ref>http://spanishinsight.blogspot.com/2010/10/when-will-spanish-pensions-system.html</ref> These numbers are particularly alarming given Spanish [[Unemployment]] has risen to a record high of 20%<ref>http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=z9a8a3sje0h8ii_&met=unemployment_rate&idim=eu_country:ES&dl=en&hl=en&q=spanish+unemployment</ref> after the [[global Financial Crisis of 2008]].

[[Spain]] has the highest worker-pensioner ratio in the world. Four workers currently contribute 21.3% of their income to support one Social Security recipient.<ref>http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPENSIONS/Resources/395443-1142535808399/2329423-1170369479400/Pensions_in_Aging_Societies_Galasso.pdf</ref><ref>http://spanishinsight.blogspot.com/2010/10/when-will-spanish-pensions-system.html</ref> These numbers are particularly alarming given Spanish [[Unemployment]] has risen to a record high of 20%<ref>http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=z9a8a3sje0h8ii_&met=unemployment_rate&idim=eu_country:ES&dl=en&hl=en&q=spanish+unemployment</ref> after the [[global Financial Crisis of 2008]].

By 2050 the worker-pensioner ratio in Spain is projected to shrink to 1.4 workers for every recipient.<ref>http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/worldageing19502050/</ref>

By 2050 the worker-pensioner ratio in Spain is projected to shrink to 1.4 workers for every recipient.<ref>https://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/worldageing19502050/</ref>

== Criticism ==

== Criticism ==

Social security has been called a "Ponzi Scheme" that "shifts wealth from private individuals to government."<ref>http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/the_politics_of_social_securit.html</ref> The Social Security tax (aka the payroll tax or the FICA tax - Federal Insurance Contribution Act) has been called a [[regressive tax]] by the [[liberals|political left]] because the effective tax rate decreases as income increases (because there is a taxable maximum).<ref>[http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/cbb.html "Contribution and Benefit Base." Social Security Online]</ref> Social Security has also been widely (and wrongly) criticized for contributing to the United States's [[National Debt]] even though the Social Security Trust Fund is separate from the Treasury's general funds and the Social Security Trust Fund has actually financed a large portion of the national debt.<ref>"The Truth About Who Really Owns All of America's Debt." Business Insider. http://www.businessinsider.com/who-owns-us-debt-2011-7#social-security-trust-fund-17</ref>

Social security has been called a "Ponzi Scheme" that "shifts wealth from private individuals to government."<ref>https://www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/the_politics_of_social_securit.html</ref> The Social Security tax (aka the payroll tax or the FICA tax - Federal Insurance Contribution Act) has been called a [[regressive tax]] by the [[liberals|political left]] because the effective tax rate decreases as income increases (because there is a taxable maximum).<ref>[http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/cbb.html "Contribution and Benefit Base." Social Security Online]</ref> Social Security has also been widely (and wrongly) criticized for contributing to the United States's [[National Debt]] even though the Social Security Trust Fund is separate from the Treasury's general funds and the Social Security Trust Fund has actually financed a large portion of the national debt.<ref>"The Truth About Who Really Owns All of America's Debt." Business Insider. http://www.businessinsider.com/who-owns-us-debt-2011-7#social-security-trust-fund-17</ref>

Most notably, the first recipient of Social Security, [[Ida May Fuller]], paid in less than $25 while she received well over $20,000 in return over the course of 35 years.

Most notably, the first recipient of Social Security, [[Ida May Fuller]], paid in less than $25 while she received well over $20,000 in return over the course of 35 years.