Social Security: Proposal for $2,400 Extra in Checks Expanded and Reintroduced in Congress

[Hortensis]

17. Thanks. I'm especially wondering because of the 2023 bill, and

what issues would have to be addressed, i.e., what changes would have to be made, to get majority support for it.

Big is that Soc Sec's always been a self-funded retirement program. Those checks are paid for by the people who receive them, not by transfer of wealth from general taxes. There is no employer "contribution." It's worker earnings that are paid directly to the fund instead of going home in the paychecks.

Changing self funding to taxing rich people to pay into our retirement is actually a really big deal, with its own political and economic risks to the long-term stability of the program.

When you think about it, it would create both public dependence on perpetuation of wealth and establish a right for the wealthy to be at the decision-making table. That alone makes me spit, but, undoubtedly, many people'd buy into the notion of need to protect those who "keep Soc Sec going" and to feel "grateful" to them. I've been nauseated many times in the past by idiot gratitude to the wealthy for gifts that keep afloat public institutions the people are supposed to pay for, like public colleges. It could either become part of or break growth of movement to finally tax the dangerously destructive and antidemocratic wealthy classes out of existence, as I believe we absolutely need to.

In any case, when factors finally come together and public attention focuses on the ideological issues (like if SCOTUS acts?), those backing this approach will already have gathered some support for taxing wealthy people to help fund it. We have to be concerned that an ideological shift could be weaponized to divide. Oh, hell, would be. Look at the manufactured healthcare divide over two for-profit healthcare systems in 2016.

As soon as 2024? What actual role will this approach play in the battle? On the other side, some Republican pols are already taking potentially personally risky stands on the need to cut benefits, and a few to destroy Soc Sec itself. What'll SCOTUS be doing?