A majority of millennials think that the Social Security program is making more payments than it receives taxes, according to an exclusive Newsweek poll.

Millennials, Gen X and Gen Z say the system needs reform, an exclusive Newsweek poll found, amid fears the benefits won’t exist when they come to retire

Younger generations in the U.S., including millennials and Gen Zers, are much more likely to believe that the Social Security system needs reforming than those in their 60s and 70s, according to a recent survey conducted by Redfield & Wilton Strategies on behalf of Newsweek.

…

Some 40 percent of respondents said they believe that the Social Security program currently pays out more to retirees than it is receiving in Social Security tax payments, while 26 percent disagreed with this statement.

Gen Zers (ages 18-26), millennials (ages 27-42) and Gen Xers (ages 43-58) were more likely than boomers (59 and older) to think that Social Security should be reformed.

  • lolcatnip@reddthat.comEnglish
    0·
    10 months ago

    Some 40 percent of respondents said they believe that the Social Security program currently pays out more to retirees than it is receiving in Social Security tax payments, while 26 percent disagreed with this statement.

    And who’s right? Do your fucking job, Newsweek!

    • Deceptichum@kbin.social
      0·
      10 months ago

      Our generation is going to have less children, so who’s going to pay into it when you’re too old to work?

  • M500@lemmy.mlEnglish
    0·
    10 months ago

    So the generations that have heard all their life that their will not be any social security for them when they get old think it should change and the people currently getting it do not think it should change?

  • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
    0·
    10 months ago

    Tl;Dr: 26% of the respondents simply don’t know what they’re talking about.

    Honestly I’m surprised it’s that low

  • leaskovski@kbin.social
    0·
    10 months ago

    This same shit gets pulled in the UK… people complain that the state pension won’t exist when they retire. Thats just bullshit, with no evidence that something like that will happen, because it would never gets passed in the commons.

  • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
    0·
    10 months ago

    Oh, it will probably exist, but it will exist on newly created dollars, and therefore, cause massive inflation, and the dollars will buy less and less as time goes on. The dollar is headed for a death spiral like Argentina.

  • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
    0·
    10 months ago

    Easiest and fairest way to fix this is to stop exempting high earners and investment income from SS tax.

    • SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml
      0·
      10 months ago

      Just for those unaware - the social security pay-in is a percentage of your income, but the maximum amount of your income subject to social security withholding is capped at a fixed level that increases annually. The last time I looked, the cutoff was somewhere around $138k. So if your cumulative income for the year hits $138k in, say, June, you are no longer subject to SS withholding and your weekly paycheck goes up by a couple of hundred dollars or so as a result. Most people don’t hit this amount, but enough do that were the cap eliminated, it would increase solvency and possibly allow for an increase in payouts.

      On the flip side, your payout from social security is proportional to what your pay in was. It’s still capped, and it’s not really enough to live on. Those who hit the cap typically have multiple other sources of savings for retirement and could easily contribute more to the national program.

      • hpca01@programming.dev
        0·
        10 months ago

        I’m sorry but this disproportionately affects W2 workers who live in HCOL areas. I’ve paid into social security since I started working in HS. I’m now a 34 year old, and am expecting nothing during my retirement years as I’ve been told. Naturally I’m saving up with a 401k and Roth IRA, and you’re saying it’s okay to drain more from me because I am planning on there being nothing left for me?

        I don’t agree with that. Why can’t we do a wealth tax first and see where we are, why must we hit W2 folks over the head every time.

        • SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml
          0·
          10 months ago

          Yeah, it disproportionately affects W2 workers making over 140k per year or so. Thats fine. That’s the way things are supposed to be.

          It’s not hitting “W2 folks” to extend withholding beyond $140k. It’s doing the appropriate thing and not giving them a free ride. If you want to additionally hit up the people who are living off of the various ways you can monetize wealth, that’s fine too. I’m in favor of a wealth tax. I think that’s also fair. I think Warren proposed a 2% tax on holdings over $4M. I support that. That’s still different than SS withholding.

          Let’s say you’re making a whopping $150k. That means that you’ll pay (and I am probably overestimating) a few hundred dollars a year into the SS fund. It’s not a noticeable amount, whether you live in a HCOL area or not. It’s a nice dinner, stretched out over 365 days worth of payments.

          It’s a trivial amount of money for an individual, which when spread over the population of the country, can make the difference to the majority of the population. I’m very much down with that.