American voters occupied themselves during the 2020 presidential and congressional campaign cycle, talking about COVID-19, the Amy Coney Barrett nomination to the Supreme Court, national social justice strife, and an uncertain economy.
What
didn’t get much attention or discussion is the looming national crisis
facing the Social Security system or the Old Age, Survivors, and
Disability Insurance
system as it is formally known. For all their flowery talk of “life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” Social Security was not the
province of our nation’s founders.
Social Security was the product of the Great Depression in 1935. Initially covering private-sector workers, it was expanded in 1939 to cover surviving dependents when the worker retired or died.
The
1950s saw Social Security substantially expanded to cover farmers and
household workers, the military, most public employees (state and
local), and preachers.
By 1954, disability insurance was added to the program.
The
next major expansion of Social Security came in 1965 when Medicare was
enacted to provide health care for those aged 65 and older. In 1973,
additional
Medicare disability benefits were provided to certain individuals under
age 65.
How
many Americans are impacted by Social Security? According to the most
recent trustee’s report in April, the program at the end of 2019
“provided benefit
payments to about 64 million people: 48 million retired workers and
dependents of retired workers, 6 million survivors of deceased workers,
and 10 million disabled workers and dependents of disabled workers.
“During
the year, an estimated 178 million people had earnings covered by
Social Security and paid payroll taxes on those earnings. The total cost
of the program
in 2019 was $1,059 billion. Total income was $1,062 billion, which
consisted of $981 billion in non-interest income and $81 billion in
interest earnings,” according to the report.
So,
what’s the problem? In 1950, 120 workers were paying into the Social
Security system for every individual drawing a pension from it. By the
year 2035,
it is projected that there will be 2.3 workers contributing to every
worker drawing a pension. By 2035, the number of Americans 65 and older
will increase from approximately 56 million today to over 78 million as
the Baby Boomers reach that milestone.
What does that imply? Well, think of it this way - bout 25 percent of Social Security recipients report it as their sole source of income. About 65 percent of recipients report Social Security as 50 percent or more of their income.
In
2017, the average Social Security check for men was $1,503 per month or
$18,041 annually, while women averaged $1,196 per month or $14,353
annually.
The
Washington-based Committee for Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB)
analyzed the 2020 Trustees’ Report and offered this dismal assessment:
1) Social Security
will be insolvent in 2035, just 15 years into the future; 2) Trustees
projected the Social Security program would run cash deficits of more
than $2 trillion over the next decade, the equivalent of 2 percent of
payroll or 0.7 percent of Gross Domestic Product
(GDP); and (3) Social Security’s finances are deteriorating. Between
2010 and 2019, the program’s actuarial deficit grew by nearly 50
percent from 1.92 percent of payroll to 2.78 percent. Over the past
year, it has grown by an additional 15 percent
to 3.21 percent of payroll.
Oh,
yes, and none of those numbers assume the fiscal impacts of COVID-19 on
the program’s finances. Suffice to say those impacts will be
substantial and will
likely accelerate Social Security problems.
Finally,
what happens if Social Security becomes insolvent? The CRFB projects
that “upon insolvency, all (Social Security) beneficiaries will face a
21 percent
across-the-board benefit cut that will ultimately grow to 27 percent.
There
was a time when Social Security and Medicare were the “third rail” of
American politics. Touch it, mess with it, let it fail, and immediate
political
death followed. Whether or not that’s still true, we shall see.
The laments of the far left about “income equality” tend to roundly ignore the long national effort to address income inequality and poverty called Social Security and Medicare. How can we seriously discuss income equality when we are letting Social Security and Medicare die on the fiscal vine?
Sid Salter is a syndicated columnist. Contact him at sidsalter@sidsalter.com.
9 comments:
Good grief, please talk about something relevant to this week's news.
Does the right care about the deficit again now?
Most informed readers knew these obvious facts before Sid thought he had to explain the obvious again.
However, I did learn much new information about about Comeback sauce from St. John's column.
With Joe Biden and the Dems about to take the reigns the deficit will become a very real issue again for the conservative crowd. We've had a vacation from all this talk about the fiscal future of an overspending government during the last four years. That's over. It's time to start moaning about spending again. Let's moan.
Totally irrelevant if our next president and his crackhead son sells us out to the Chinese
@7:20 - Are you aware of Don Jr. and Eric? What's that about crackhead sons and chinese bank accounts?
At least we have a new state flower (bud).
They will find the social security deficit out of printed money. Just a matter of time before the dollar and our economy collapses. We are going to become Venezuela in 15-20 years.
NOOOOO 8:45. One of the Trump sons will run in 2024 and win and then cut taxes on the wealthy to ZERO. Then the Laffer curve will take care of all our problems and Mississippi voters will vote 60% plus for Laffer.
Post a Comment