Whatchamacolumn: Caution urged with using Social Security chainsaw
Get ready for some numbers about Social Security and aging Americans — if you don’t care for statistics, you might consider skipping this article.
First, let’s warm up with some figures versus facts from President Donald Trump, who this week said the market increased a “highest-ever” 80 percent during his first term of office. Actually, the Dow Jones Average rose 56 percent in Trump’s first term compared to 40 percent in Joe Biden’s term, but neither matched the 65 percent Dow increase during Barack Obama’s first term.
For those who prefer the S&P 500, that market measurement increased 70 percent in Trump’s first term compared to 55 percent for Biden, but it jumped 75 percent during Obama’s first term. Trump’s brain just doesn’t seem to record facts that suggest less than his total personal grandiosity.
Moving on to the main math course: Social Security and the U.S. population. I have studied Social Security while managing accounts for five different people during the past 22 years; for even more decades, I’ve marveled at America’s disregard for well-known challenges of the Baby Boomer population bulge.
Our 2025 projection of Americans age 65 and over is 63 million — 19 percent of a total 338 million population. The projection for 2035 is 76 million people age 65 and over — 22 percent of a total 351 million people.
That’s a 21 increase in people 65 or older, suggesting a need for more infrastructure to maintain the historically high level of Social Security services and its amazing achievements in accuracy and efficiency. Instead, we have reduced hours for SSI phone services, eliminated thousands of SSI jobs, and have plans to close many field offices while requiring more in-person visits for various SSI transactions.
It’s already started. My call to SSI this week began with notification that the wait time was more than two hours and ended in a curt “Goodbye” with no callback option. A Medicare representative that same morning told me he was receiving high numbers of calls from people unable to connect with SSI for questions.
Back to population and the most worrisome 2025-35 projection: The number of American age 80 or older will rise more than 50 percent, from 15 million this year to 23 million in 2035. It doesn’t take much research to conclude that we face major challenges over the next decade with underfunded Social Security and Medicare; inadequate housing, transportation and long-term care infrastructure for the aging population; shortage of health care workers and caregivers; and more economic inequality for seniors.
Baby Boomers had their opportunity to make needed changes in SSI and other federal systems, but failed to act with resolve. They voted strongly for Donald Trump, and now may pay in unexpected ways for the continuing chainsaw assault on Social Security, Medicare and other programs.
One last statistic: After 2033, says the Social Security Trustees’ 2024 report, “reserves will become depleted and continuing program income will be sufficient to pay 79 percent of scheduled benefits.”
Getting old is getting worse.
Jeb Bladine can be reached at jbladine@newsregister.com or 503-687-1223.
Comments
Judy
It's so sad. The Republicans have never cared about the people, only money and power. Wish they would change. England and Canada care about their people.
treefarmer
Much appreciate this column, many are affected by the unelected madman's chainsaw and need to prepare for the reckless assault on our Social Security savings accounts. (SS is NOT an "entitlement.") But stand by for incoming vitriol - some of our resident commenters do not appreciate facts and logic or supporting statistical documentation. (Goes with the territory?)
Don Dix
The tax limit on SS is $176,100 (2025). Any amount earned above that figure is not subject to the 6.2% tax. So the most SS tax any individual would pay annually is just a little under $11K. It makes no sense that one who draws a $1M annually (or more) only pays about twice as much as one making $100K.
It's inevitable that there would be pushback from many who would be affected, but eliminating the cap evens the entire field -- everyone pays 6.2% of their yearly income to fund SS. Not gonna' happen, but it should!
treefarmer
Agree! The cap is unfair, makes no sense, and there is no realistic expectation for change. What a shame!
tagup
The pushback on removing the wage cap is that Social Security also has an annual payout cap. It’s a weak argument made by people that for the most part don’t need Social Security income anyway.