LINK https://www.instagram.com/reel/DYEMoM9uN3p/
(trying to do better with actually following the rules and linking to these cretins)
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
What do they mean with privatising social security?? Sounds like libertarian bullshit, liberals aren't that enthusiastic about privatising public services no? Or maybe I'm wrong and it doesn't mean giving social security to a capitalist so they can rob people's money?
It's less common now, but it used to be that liberals simply took it as a given that the Social Security Administration was on the verge of bankruptcy and that somehow turning it over to private management would make it better instead of adding a middleman who would skim off the top. I think nowadays most people realize that the SSA is in fact just getting worse over time because the wealthy have been gifted more and more ways to hide their income from the SSA's taxes.
As the other poster said, this post is bait, but it's not how social security works at all.
As I understand it, social security payments to beneficiaries come from the currently incoming payments, not from an invested account.
Also social security is structurally set up to fail, because you don't contribute to it on income over $150k, meaning that inflation decreases the amount the rich pay in every year.
If only we could imagine a way to fix it. Oh well, I guess it's doomed to failure.
Carl is describing how liberals have talked about social security within our lifetimes; he isn't describing how it works.