@theHRguy@lemmy.world to A Boring Dystopia@lemmy.world • 1 year agoStudy: 83% of Americans will have to work into their 70s in order to afford to retiremedium.commessage-square43fedilinkarrow-up1221arrow-down10
arrow-up1221arrow-down1external-linkStudy: 83% of Americans will have to work into their 70s in order to afford to retiremedium.com@theHRguy@lemmy.world to A Boring Dystopia@lemmy.world • 1 year agomessage-square43fedilink
minus-square@givesomefucks@lemmy.worldMlinkfedilinkEnglish15•1 year agoIf you’re less than 62 this year, you have to wait till 67 to get full Social Security https://faq.ssa.gov/en-US/Topic/article/KA-01885
minus-square@givesomefucks@lemmy.worldMlinkfedilinkEnglish15•edit-21 year ago2022, it wasn’t publicized much, so most still haven’t heard of it. Would be a great rallying cry for young voters if Dems were trying to fight it and lower it back down after removing the cap. But donors dont want that, so voters don’t get an option that will do it.
minus-squaregoferking (he/him)linkfedilink5•1 year agoDid dems get anything for that change or was it another or their compromise and get nothing negotiations?
minus-square@givesomefucks@lemmy.worldMlinkfedilinkEnglish15•1 year agoIt was done by Reagan in the 80s… Not even exaggerating. They do these based on birth year, so changes are set decades in advance so they people getting fucked don’t get to vote on it https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/03/social-security-retirement-age-reaches-67-some-say-it-may-go-higher.html And in the last 40 years, no one’s never really did anything to fight it. Like, it’s not a rachet, it doesn’t just go one way. We can lower it too. But to afford to do so wed have to remove the cap on contributions and the wealthy wouldn’t want that.
If you’re less than 62 this year, you have to wait till 67 to get full Social Security
https://faq.ssa.gov/en-US/Topic/article/KA-01885
When did this change?
2022, it wasn’t publicized much, so most still haven’t heard of it.
Would be a great rallying cry for young voters if Dems were trying to fight it and lower it back down after removing the cap.
But donors dont want that, so voters don’t get an option that will do it.
Did dems get anything for that change or was it another or their compromise and get nothing negotiations?
It was done by Reagan in the 80s…
Not even exaggerating. They do these based on birth year, so changes are set decades in advance so they people getting fucked don’t get to vote on it
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/03/social-security-retirement-age-reaches-67-some-say-it-may-go-higher.html
And in the last 40 years, no one’s never really did anything to fight it.
Like, it’s not a rachet, it doesn’t just go one way. We can lower it too.
But to afford to do so wed have to remove the cap on contributions and the wealthy wouldn’t want that.
This wasn’t even a compromise.