Even some prominent Republican members of Congress are considering raising payroll taxes on younger workers, in order to maintain generous Social Security benefits for retired millionaires. This is a profoundly immoral and destructive idea. Anyone suggesting it should be embarrassed. The @washingtonpost explains today that the problem with Social Security is benefits rising too quickly, not a failure to coerce enough tax revenue out of American workers.

Sep 18, 2026 · 6:05 PM UTC

18
35
3
205
14,883
RelevantRecentLikes
washingtonpost.com/opinions/…

Opinion | Raising the payroll tax would not fix Social Security

The problem is benefits rising too quickly, and the tax hikes necessary to cover them would be enormous.

washingtonpost.com
1
3
595
Wsj has a similar oped. I submitted a letter throwing additional cold water on the idea.
2
6
255
good!
4
168
my dad retired last year with like 2.3M in his 401k and still gets his full SS check. i looked at the numbers and means testing would save basically nothing - administrative costs eat most of it. the real money is in the COLA formula
9
i looked at the cbo numbers last month and the 75-year shortfall is basically the same size as extending the 2017 tax cuts would cost. we just pick which one to care about
5
We absolutely should take away the cap on earnings that get taxed. That is so easy and would it take care of a lot of it. As to increasing taxes on the young, it was already done to all of us in the 80s and it was the right thing to do.
3
122
It’s only a tiny increase in imoralness.
2
107
Sort of. The cap on payroll taxes should be eliminated and that burden wouldn’t affect most young people at all (and is much better than raising rates on low-middle income young people). This is not mutually exclusive with changing cost of living formulas which we should also do!
3
5
222
Retired millionaires paid into the system and were promised a modest benefit in return. Stealing it from them would be immoral. It should be noted, Social Security is a progressive tax. High lifetime earners get back less than their contributions, low lifetime earners get more.
2
68
Suggest targeted change: Full benefits for people who had 3+ kids, for every child below you didn't have as dependent on tax forms for 10 years (natural or adopted), lose 25% (no kids ever max benefit is 25% of top) people who didn't invest in children had more savings and should not be a burden on the next generation.
1
52
They shouldn’t be raising Social Security taxes. They should raise corporate taxes
1
79
This was a well written editorial, even though the majority of the WP readership in the DC area hated it.
1
133
You think a million is enough to retire on? I don't want to see the younger generations taxed more but your pretty fast and lose with your arguments.
30
Another problem with this is that it assumes that taxes alone would be the solution. You can combine tax increases with adjusted colas. It's easy to do and has been done before. That's what will happen. The real problem is Medicare and medicaid.
92
Or eliminate the FICA contribution limit.
1
75
Yes, all retirees are "millionaires", and the median benefit of $1900/mo is "generous".
1
124
Interesting perspective
13
Ok. So only your way. I get it.
7
Load more replies