Social Security Essay, Research Paper
Since the Second New Deal and the Social Security Act of 1935 the aged and handicapped of the United States have relied upon their monthly cheques from the authorities to last. However, from its origin the Social Security system has been plagued with legion jobs. Out of all the jobs that have enveloped the system. There are merely two that have earnestly threaten the being of the full Social Security system. The first job that jeopardized the being of the system was in 1937 when there was a motion in the tribunals to declare the actions and creative activity of the system as being unconstitutional. This motion to forestall the constitution of the Social Security system ne’er reached the Supreme Court. The 2nd and most recent job to confront the system is by far the greatest menace of all time to the being of the system. This new menace is one that has been perpetuated by the inability of the system to work out the job.
The job that is at manus today is that the Social Security system will non be able to pay its receivers their merited financess. This job was created by the fact that length of service has increased and that in the following 5 to 10 old ages the babe boomers will go eligible for Social Security. What is alone about the job is that the system? s financess will non be wholly depleted until the twelvemonth 2029. The job of low financess in the system is created because the system is unable to set to the alteration in life manner and cost of life. Thus the system over clip will non take in adequate money or give out plenty to back up the receiver with the proper financess to last.
However as a consequence of a period of healthy economic growing, reduced unemployment and low rising prices, the long-range solvency anticipations about the Social Security system have improved over the past twelvemonth, harmonizing to the Social Security Board of Trustees. The robust economic system we are presently basking and the passage of the Balanced Budget Act support this statement. With the past twelvemonth of economic success the board predicts that the system will stay solvent until 2032. Kenneth S. Apfel, commissioner of the Social Security Administration, calls the system & # 8217 ; s long-run fiscal jobs manageable, but warns against trusting on the frequently unpredictable economic system to assistance in the hereafter of the ailing system.
It is clear that action must be taken to stave off a serious Social Security crisis. As a Senator from Pennsylvania I am in a hard and alone place. Pennsylvania is a province with two immensely different spectrums of the Social Security system. The first is the urban spectrum where most of the receivers are barley life above the poorness line. There are two causes for this job. First, the cost of life in the metropolis is extortionately expensive. Second, many of the urban receivers had occupations that were low paying ; therefore the sum of return on their Social Security cheques was low.
The 2nd is the rural spectrum where most of the people are holding few jobs with the system. This is because the cost of life in the countryside is low. The returns that the receivers get from the system enable them to populate a comfy life.
Because of the immensely different spectrums within my province I must be careful when back uping reforms for the Social Security system. I can non back up a reform that will ache one spectrum and profit the other. Besides being a Senator I must maintain in head how the reforms will consequence the remainder of the state. I must maintain the outlook of a solon at all times.
Bing cognizant of the crisis and the fortunes in my province and the state there are seve
ral reforms that I feel should ne’er be implemented into the system. One such reform is the proposal to privatise the system. Supporters of privatising the Social Security system argue that denationalization provides the single with control of the Social Security part of their retirement program. Therefore leting investors to accomplish higher rates of return and higher benefits than Social Security provides. I feel this reform is non acceptable. In order to alter the system to a private 1 it would be a important sum of money. This alteration could sabotage the stable benefits that the people receive from the Social Security system. This would particularly ache the low-income receivers. It is my belief that single histories to put financess can be auxiliary but non replace the system. Presently many Americans invest their money for retirement. This is great but an across the board move should non be done.
Another reform for the system, which I feel, should non be implement is the rise of the paysheet revenue enhancement. Workers and persons pay the paysheet revenue enhancement from their wage cheques to the system. In 1999, workers and their employers each paid 6.2 per centum paysheet revenue enhancement on rewards, up to a upper limit of $ 72,600. It is believed that by raising the paysheet revenue enhancement the gross would lift, which could intend less terrible benefit cuts to salvage the system. I am against this because raising the paysheet revenue enhancement could hold a negative consequence on the economic system and will cut down the take-home wage of most workers, particularly low-income workers. And, employers would hold to pay more paysheet revenue enhancement.
These are merely two illustrations of proposed reforms with which I disagree with. There are nevertheless several reforms that I am a strong support of.
Presently the age at which 1 is to get down having Social Security benefits is planed to be 67. Sing that the length of service of people in America has increased it is merely a plausible reform to increase the retirement age. I feel that the retirement age should be alteration to 70 old ages of age. This alteration can besides be supported by the fact that if the retirement age in 1935 was set at 65 ; today the it would be above age 70. Oppositions to the addition say that the older plants that are forced to go on working due to the addition in the retirement age may go unemployed and autumn below the poorness line. They besides say that elder people are frequently phased out of work because of their age. My response to this is that there are legion Torahs against age favoritism. Any company that discriminates against seniors will experience the wrath of justness.
And the concluding reform is a alteration of presently proposed reform. Bing from a province were there are both important urban and rural populations I know the important difference in the cost of life. Understanding this difference I propose that the Social security system take into history the location of life for the receiver. If a receiver lives in a significantly urban country they would have more financess to keep a similar life manner to those who receive financess in the rural countries. The benefits of the rural receivers would non be affect they would have the same sums as they presently do. Just the benefits of the urban receivers would be increased to see a comfy manner of life.
The jobs confronting the state with the Social Security system are such that it will take a to the full bipartizan action to work out them. While making reforms for the system we must maintain in head why the system was created, how the reforms will consequence each person in the state, and to keep a nonbiased system. We must a state solve these issue before they reach a point in which we can no longer salve the system.