• ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    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.

        • Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 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@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s actually not. A lot of people do absolutely nothing for retirement, which is infinitely worse.

    • prole@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      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.