I would
have to respectfully disagree with Mr. Adrian Martinez' opinion of
eliminating the social security fund because it is an “exponentially
growing tax” burden http://adrianmartinez41130.blogspot.com/
Indeed, social security is funded by American's income withholdings,
but to eliminate this federal fund would cause many Americans,
especially the elderly to fall into poverty. I do however agree with
Mr. Martinez' that “more people are living longer,” but it
doesn't have to mean that there will be no money in the future for
this program. What we need is to reform the social security fund
and eliminate or at least substantially bring down the deficit so
that this most important federally funded program can continue to
keep poverty at bay.
One
proposal that has been brought up, but is not exactly popular with
Americans is raising the retirement age. Experts say that life
expectancy has risen tremendously since the program began in 1937
when the average life was 62 years. Now Social Security is paying
benefits to Americans for longer periods of time. With the raising
of the retirement age it would shorten the length of time paid to
retirees. Again, experts predict that if this reform goes into
effect, the deficit could be reduced by as much as 44 percent.
A
second proposal, which in my opinion is more logical and favorable
would be to “modify” the social security cap. Currently, an
employee who makes over $107,000 annually is only subject to being
taxed on $107,000. Experts propose that anything made over $107,000
should be subject to being taxed, but should not be counted towards
social security benefits. The more fortunate would essentially be
paying more into the fund, but why did the government cap the social
security at $107,000 where it has been for years? This amount should
have keep growing concurrently with wages over the years. If this
would have occurred, the federal government's social security fund
would not be such a taxing burden.
