Social Security Is Deeply Unfair. The Social Security Fairness Act Won't Fix That.
What is paid out to Social Security beneficiaries is not a return on workers' investments. It's just a government expenditure, like any other.
What is paid out to Social Security beneficiaries is not a return on workers' investments. It's just a government expenditure, like any other.
The Social Security Fairness Act will boost payouts to public sector workers who receive pensions and did not pay taxes to support Social Security.
Doing nothing will lead to Medicare benefits being cut by 11 percent and Social Security Benefits being cut by 23 percent in less than a decade.
Saturday is a great day to give to the magazine of free minds and free markets—and double your dollars!
Trump is talking about cutting government spending, but that's mostly in Congress' hands.
Americans should plan for their futures rather than relying on a nonexistent Social Security “trust fund.”
Stop robbing poor, hard-working Peter to pay well-off, retired Paul.
Even before the pandemic spending increase, the budget deficit was approaching $1 trillion. The GOP has the chance to embrace fiscal sanity this time if they can find the political will.
When it comes to cutting waste, fraud, and abuse, what's lacking is not ideas but the political will to act on them.
The president-elect’s record and campaign positions belie Elon Musk’s talk of spending cuts.
Healthcare promises always come with high costs.
As it stands, the program effectively redistributes money from younger and poorer people to richer people.
These policies may sound good on paper—but they would be disastrous in reality.
When they entered the White House, the budget deficit was a pandemic-influenced $2.3 trillion, and it was set to fall to $905 billion by 2024. It's now twice what it was supposed to be.
"Right now, we need to get ourselves at least to a balanced budget, and that involves cutting a lot of the third rails of American politics," the Libertarian presidential nominee tells Reason.
As conservatives push for cuts, lasting reform will require closing accountability gaps and restructuring entitlements.
The campaign promise from Donald Trump sounds nice, but it would be disastrous when considering the program is already racing toward insolvency.
Facing an economic downturn in the 1990s, Japan racked up debt. America should not repeat that mistake.
Although former President Donald Trump's deregulatory agenda would make some positive changes, it's simply not enough.
Which party can do the least to fix America's troubled old-age welfare system?
The U.S. has successfully navigated past debt challenges, notably in the 1990s. Policymakers can fix this if they find the will to do so.
The candidate who grasps the gravity of this situation and proposes concrete steps to address it will demonstrate the leadership our nation now desperately needs. The stakes couldn't be higher.
The candidate makes the case against the two-party system.
Plus: A listener asks if there are any libertarian solutions to rising obesity rates.
We could grow our way out of our debt burden if politicians would limit spending increases to just below America's average yearly economic growth. But they won't even do that.
Reasonable options include gradually raising the minimum retirement age, adjusting benefits to reflect longer life expectancies, and implementing fair means-testing to ensure benefits flow where they're actually needed.
Why aren't politicians on both sides more worried than they seem to be?
Social Security is expected to hit insolvency in 2035, while the portion of Medicare that pays for hospital visits and other medical care will be insolvent by 2036.
Neither presidential candidate is willing to back the reforms necessary to close the gap between revenue and benefits.
Plus: A listener asks about the absurdity of Social Security entitlements.
An obvious, tepid reform was greeted with shrill partisan screeching.
Raising the payroll tax cap could generate up to $1 trillion over 10 years, but Social Security faces a $2.8 trillion deficit.
The government needs to cut back on spending—and on the promises to special interests that fuel the spending.
The reality raises questions about the kind of future we want to leave for the next generation.
A decade ago, DeSantis was supporting real efforts at reforming Social Security. Now, he's refusing to even acknowledge the problem.
That's bad news for Americans.
Lawmakers can take small steps that are uncontroversial and bipartisan to jumpstart the fiscal stability process.
A fiscal commission might be a good idea, but it's also the ultimate expression of Congress' irresponsibility.
The Copenhagen Consensus has long championed a cost-benefit approach for addressing the world's most critical environmental problems.
This week's debate was the first signal that the party's next presidential nominee might actually understand the entitlement crisis.
In the last 50 years, when the budget process has been in place, Congress has managed only four times to pass a budget on time.
Entitlement reform has long been considered a third rail in American politics, but that perspective might be changing.
Over the last several years, they have worked nonstop to ease the tax burden of their high-income constituents.
Those sounding the loudest alarms about possible shutdowns are largely silent when Congress ignores its own budgetary rules. All that seems to matter is that government is metaphorically funded.
Until Congress is willing to acknowledge that it makes no sense to send monthly checks to wealthy seniors, everything else will be on the chopping block.
It's not the first time that has happened, but there are key differences about what happened this year.
Since Congress won't cut spending, an independent commission may be the only way to rein in the debt.
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10