The fix is known, will is weak

There’s a way.
But — so far — there hasn’t been the will necessary to do the job.
Politicians of every stripe love to speechify about Social Security.
They laud it. They warn that their opponents will destroy it. They warn of impending disaster. And mostly they just point fingers at one another.
But assuring the future solvency of Social Security is one of those problems where there is a known solution, just not the necessary political courage.
Three relatively minor changes could make a world of difference.
First, there should be a continued gradual increase over a period of several years in the age at which one becomes eligible for benefits. The retire-at-65 standard doesn’t mesh with changes in human longevity.
Second, the cap on how much of a person’s wages are subject to Social Security taxes should be raised.
It wouldn’t have to be dramatic, but the current cap is unrealistic and arbitrary. Right now, it’s about $107,000. Raising the limit to $150,000 or $200,000 would bring in significant new revenue.
Third, some sort of means testing or sliding scale should be instituted so that retirement benefits are linked more closely to an individual’s need.
In other words, what’s required is a combination of spending less and bringing in more revenue.
Trouble is, the first and third steps tend to be viewed as political poison by Democrats, while the second one is just as abhorrent to Republican lawmakers.
And both sides find that it’s safer to play to their political advantage than to sit down and actually solve the problem.
None of this, unfortunately, is new.
A mix of raising the retirement age, raising the cap on taxable wages, and means testing has been recommended for years.
It would work, but don’t hold your breath until Congress finds the political courage to get it done. — J.R.[[In-content Ad]]