Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, October 06, 2026

In fact, an overwhelming 89% of Americans over the age of 65 said Social Security benefits should be protected at current levels, even if it means higher taxes on younger workers, according to a 2025 survey by the Cato Institute (2). And it's not only Americans aged 65+ who prefer this solution. Roughly 84% of those aged 55 to 64 preferred higher taxes on younger Americans, while 74% between the ages of 45 and 54 agreed with it as well.

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

literally the most selfish generation in American history.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

"Moreno, Warren NYT Op-ed: Lift The Social Security Cap

WASHINGTON " Today, Senators Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote a new op-ed in the New York Times laying out their plan to lift the Social Security payroll tax cap to extend the solvency of the program for future generations of hardworking Americans.

"One of us is a Republican from Ohio who built a business that generated hundreds of jobs. The other is a Democrat from Massachusetts who built a career protecting consumers from financial tricks and traps."

"We don't agree on everything, but here's one thing we do agree on: Congress must act now to save Social Security for generations of Americans to come."

"Social Security is a core component of our nation's promise " a covenant between the federal government and Americans who pay into it throughout their working years so they can retire with dignity."

[ ... ]

"Why should a middle-class nurse pay a larger share of her paycheck " than a wealthy corporate lawyer? This is doubly unfair in an economy in which top earner's wages, over time, have pulled far ahead of those of the average worker."

[ ... ]

"This is a no-brainer: the wealthiest Americans, who have benefited the most from America's opportunities, should contribute the same percentage of their income as a factory worker in Chillicothe, Ohio, or a teacher in Worcester, Mass."

more
www.moreno.senate.gov

Payroll Taxes are Regressive

www.pgpf.org

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2026-10-06 02:18 PM | Reply


"Social Security is a core component of our nation's promise " a covenant between the federal government and Americans who pay into it throughout their working years so they can retire with dignity."

Great line of BS....

It was never a promise, the LAW specifically states the Federal Gov can keep the SS taxes if it wants too and NEVER pay it back.

If it was a promise then the government should have invested it, but that was never the point. FDR, other than interning the Japanese, was the worst president in US history, bankrupted her while she was in her prime.

The seeds of the collapse were sown.

#2 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-10-06 02:29 PM | Reply

literally the most selfish generation in American history.

Which one is the whiniest?

#3 | Posted by REDIAL at 2026-10-06 02:32 PM | Reply

#3

ha! The OP answers that question with each and every post.

And now, when a Dem and a Repub lawmaker want to try to make adjustments, he's going to cry about that.

Payroll taxes are regressive, and upper limits on income for taxing SS is obscene when millionaires and billionaires already pay less as a percentage of their income.

And this ESL dropout teaching us American history? That's always good for a laugh.

#4 | Posted by Corky at 2026-10-06 02:39 PM | Reply

Personally, I'm going to start blaming 1Nut's Gen for tic-toc and doom scrolling... not mention celebrity incels.

#5 | Posted by Corky at 2026-10-06 02:48 PM | Reply

" bankrupted her while she was in her prime."

Skipped the math and history classes?

Reagan changed the equation, and between then and ~2010, the SS system brought in more was they paid out. Going underwater with the equation was something we knew in 1986 would happen around 2010-2012, regardless who was President. It's also why the subject NEVER CAME UP during those years.

We've also seen the bubble of the baby boomers' retirement coming at us for a half-century, and we're currently in the 16th year of 19 years of that bubble. It will continue as the youngest age through retirement.

If anyone had a brain they would've used the surpluses from 2001 to shore up known coming shortfalls, as baby boomers were just about to start to retiring at that time.

Instead, Cheney and Dubya reset America's fiscal sights from Surplusville to Debtsylvania. THAT is the moment that'll be seen as "bankrupting" America.

That, and Trump spending like his hair is on fire.

#6 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-10-06 03:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

And now, when a Dem and a Repub lawmaker want to try to make adjustments, he's going to cry about that.

Adjustments are like putting lipstick on a pig. Given the structure of SS there's no way it won't consume the country.

Which one is the whiniest?

Its a toss up between Trump & Hillary, but why deflect, is it because you got nothing else other than TDS?

#7 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-10-06 03:01 PM | Reply

Personally, I'm going to start blaming 1Nut's Gen for tic-toc and doom scrolling... not mention celebrity incels.

Doomscrolling? LOL Of course when you're destroying the country other people are doomscrolling.

FFS Just look at DialAgain for a perfect example of a doomscroller, all he complains about it Trump, never a critique with a solution.

#8 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-10-06 03:03 PM | Reply

"Payroll taxes are regressive"

Actually, the SS taxes are super-regressive, since the withholding has a cap.

The Medicare tax is garden-variety regressive, like a sales tax.

#9 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-10-06 03:03 PM | Reply

Given the structure of SS there's no way it won't consume the country.

Not to forget about the ACA..... thats killing families, while Corky sucks up cheap Medicare, and in CA illegal immigrants get FREE healthcare.

#10 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-10-06 03:05 PM | Reply


Payroll taxes are regressive, and upper limits on income for taxing SS is obscene when millionaires and billionaires already pay less as a percentage of their income.

All this would do is kick the can down the road. If raising the limit you would need to raise the payouts.

The tell is that it's not the poor taking the higher payouts over time, it's the "rich", retiring early and taking SS at 62.

Why not limit SS to those that never earned more than the median income?

#11 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-10-06 03:08 PM | Reply

Its a toss up between Trump & Hillary

Those, in your mind, are examples of Generations?

Have you ever even tried to post something relevant?

#12 | Posted by REDIAL at 2026-10-06 03:09 PM | Reply

And this ESL dropout teaching us American history? That's always good for a laugh.

Corky never has a valid point just ad-hominem attack, pretty worthless really.

#13 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-10-06 03:10 PM | Reply

Those, in your mind, are examples of Generations?

Yes, they are the whiniest of the whiniest generation. No President or presidential candidate has ever whined more than those two. Boomers will forever be known as the whiniest and most irresponsible.

Its such a horrible and spoiled generation.

Have you ever even tried to post something relevant?

Have you? You ask an irrelevant question, then complain about my posting relevant responses.

#14 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-10-06 03:16 PM | Reply

"Given the structure of SS there's no way it won't consume the country."

Nonsense. At its root, SS is an equilibrium equation. From 1986 to ~2011, more was brought in than paid out. Nobody complained.

As it currently stands, adding one point of withholding on both the worker's and the employer's sides would put the equation in balance into perpetuity, which is actuarial-speak for 75 years.

And yes, I know that's a 16.2% hike in SS taxes. The options a decade or two ago (when I started warning about it) would've been more pleasant.

Other choices include lowering payments, pushing the minimum and maximum windows later, reducing COLA adjustments, etc.

#15 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-10-06 03:17 PM | Reply

"You ask an irrelevant question, then complain about my posting relevant responses."

Aren't you the guy who asked for examples of voter suppression, and then ran away when multiple posters gave multiple examples?

#16 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-10-06 03:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

-Payroll Taxes are Regressive

Boohoo

SS benefits completely screw those who pay in more than others.

Case in point.......I've paid in 5 times more than my wife has.

our expected benefits? She's set to collect a monthly benefit of 60% of mine.

IOW, the benefits for those who have paid in the most are pretty shitty.

#17 | Posted by eberly at 2026-10-06 04:38 PM | Reply

-Actually, the SS taxes are super-regressive, since the withholding has a cap.

And the benefits follow that cap.

#18 | Posted by eberly at 2026-10-06 04:39 PM | Reply

-- you're destroying the country

It 'thinks' I'm Trump!

- while Corky sucks up cheap Medicare

While 1Nut sucks up cheap Trump diapers.

- kick the can down the road

Is that Confucius? Or are you just confusing yourself with some expert on American history and economics yet again?

#19 | Posted by Corky at 2026-10-06 05:29 PM | Reply

The following HTML tags are allowed in comments: a href, b, i, p, br, ul, ol, li and blockquote. Others will be stripped out. Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Anyone can join this site and make comments. To post this comment, you must sign it with your Drudge Retort username. If you can't remember your username or password, use the lost password form to request it.
Username:
Password:

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy

Drudge Retort