• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    15
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    At least in principle, social security is a mandatory way of saving for retirement, not simply a tax. In that context, it makes sense that contributions are capped since payouts are capped.

    • zout
      link
      fedilink
      81 year ago

      Then why are CEO’s even paying for it?

      • @Thaumiel
        link
        31 year ago

        Because it’s cheaper for them than actual social safety nets.

    • rynzcycle
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      Right, but it’s not really and hasn’t been for a while. It’s at best a ponzi scheme and a lot of us have been left holding the bag.

      It’s time to make it what it always should have been, a little touch of socialism so that people don’t die/go hungry/end up homeless when they are too old to work.

      • @jimbo
        link
        1
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        deleted by creator

        • Mossy Feathers (She/They)
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          Hey, there are a few beanie babies that are actually worth something now. That said, they’re only worth something because they’re rare, most people that had them didn’t keep them in an acrylic case for 30yrs, and iirc their value is ironically tied to manufacturing defects.

      • @jimbo
        link
        0
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        deleted by creator

    • prole
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Social Security is not “a mandatory way of saving for retirement,” that’s a bullshit way of looking at it. You are not putting money into an account, and getting that money back when you retire. It 100% is a tax. Tax is not a bad word. It’s a social safety net, payouts should be capped, but contributions should not be (or if they are, it should be much much higher).

      That’s how functioning societies work. They take care of their old and infirmed.