General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGen Z would rather cut Social Security benefits for current retirees than pay higher taxes to save the program
More than half of respondents under age 30 said younger workers should be protected from higher taxes even if it means reducing benefits for current retirees, compared to 89% of adults age 65 and older who said current retirees’ benefits should be protected even if it means increasing taxes for younger workers.
Cato asked participants how they would feel about various reform tactics, such as increasing taxes, in a few ways. Almost 6 in 10 people (58%) said they would favor raising “income taxes,” while 63% said they would favor increasing “payroll taxes as much as necessary” if it meant maintaining benefits. When asked if they would be willing to raise those payroll taxes from 12.4% to 16.05%, more than half (55%) said yes. But when they were asked about dollar figures, there was less support: Only 23% said they would be willing to pay $1,300 more a year in taxes to maintain benefits.
Young adults also were more likely to misunderstand how the program pays out benefits, the Cato poll found. Half of Gen Z members thought Social Security taxes were saved for them, such as in a personal account or invested in the trust fund, and just 29% knew that what they paid in taxes was used for current retirees in the pay-as-you-go system.
(Edited to add 4th paragraph instead of lead in sentence)
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/retirement/gen-z-would-rather-cut-social-security-benefits-for-current-retirees-than-pay-higher-taxes-to-save-the-program/ar-AA1StpJW?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=LCTS&cvid=6947067333a84cb8a34c49bf8f4fc508&ei=24
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
no_hypocrisy
(54,126 posts)
pfitz59
(12,265 posts)and it would be solvent forever
the failure of the poll to mention this as an option, among other things, makes it sound to me like the poll was biased against saving the program.
I don't recall anyone ever seriously advocating that in order to save SS, taxes should be raised on anyone but the rich.
Chemical Bill
(3,032 posts)tells me it's a biased poll.
rampartd
(3,581 posts)
ProfessorGAC
(75,694 posts)...that otherwise excellent idea to work.
SS needs to apply to total compensation. Not just wages.
Otherwise CEOs & board members will configure compensation packages to be 99% stock & dividends from treasury stock.
Plus, they have to be willing to cap benefits at 100% above the benefit at the median.
Then, the cap adds solvency for many decades.
Jack Valentino
(4,251 posts)ESPECIALLY upon those with millionaire and billionaire incomes!!!
RubyRose
(316 posts)to SSI deductions.
beaglelover
(4,416 posts)Eliminating the Social Security salary cap (set at $176,100 for 2025) would significantly delay the program's insolvency but, on its own, is generally not projected to achieve permanent long-term solvency.
The impact depends primarily on whether higher earnings also result in higher future benefits:
Taxing all earnings without increasing benefits: This aggressive approach would close approximately 70–73% of Social Security's 75-year funding gap. Trust fund depletion would be delayed from the early 2030s until roughly 2067.
Taxing all earnings and increasing benefits accordingly: If high earners receive additional benefit credits for their newly taxed income (maintaining the "contribution-benefit link"
, the policy would close only about 53–57% of the long-range shortfall. In this scenario, trust fund exhaustion would be delayed until roughly 2055–2060.
Key Considerations for 2025
Current Gap: Social Security currently faces an actuarial imbalance of 3.82% of payroll, the largest since 1977.
Projections: Most consensus estimates from the Social Security Administration and non-partisan groups like the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) indicate that even the most drastic version of "scrapping the cap" would still leave a significant deficit, requiring further reforms like raising the retirement age or adjusting benefit formulas to achieve full solvency.
Economic Impact: Opponents argue that eliminating the cap would constitute one of the largest tax increases in U.S. history, potentially reducing private retirement savings and slowing economic growth.
dweller
(27,776 posts)The ‘rents are moving in with you …
✌🏻
littlemissmartypants
(31,442 posts)
The Madcap
(1,693 posts)They'd better think twice. Cleaning the chamberpot is an unpleasant task....
thucythucy
(9,039 posts)including polls.
MichMan
(16,533 posts)thucythucy
(9,039 posts)but then I haven't looked. You posted the poll. Are you defending its methodology?
The Cato Institute is a libertarian organization that is in favor of destroying Social Security, and it does everything it can to undermine support for the program.
It figures then that they would be touting a poll that basically says, "See, young people are in favor of cutting it, so you GOP politicians have nothing to fear from young voters. So have at it!"
Have you examined the poll format, the questions asked, the demographic surveyed--aside from that weighted for Gen Z?
And are you aware of how the Cato Institute has been a factor in the ever rightful tilt of our politics?
I trust them as much as I trust the Federalist Society and the NRA.
Which is to say, not at all.
MichMan
(16,533 posts)You and anyone else, of course, are free to dismiss it entirely as being false. That is typically what I see here regarding polls with results we find disagreeable.
BannonsLiver
(20,200 posts)Never mind. I’m not sure I want to know the answer. 😬
littlemissmartypants
(31,442 posts)MichMan
(16,533 posts)It would have been very easy to stop reading and trash the thread.
littlemissmartypants
(31,442 posts)thucythucy
(9,039 posts)and I might take it seriously.
But, as I said, the Cato Institute is a renowned libertarian "think tank" that opposes pretty much every social program since the New Deal, and probably then some.
And I don't think I've ever before dismissed a poll I've seen posted here on DU, even when I've been appalled by the results.
Then again I don't think I've ever seen one here that was produced and publicized by the Cato Institute.
You're free to post most anything you want, but if you post something produced by right wing extremists don't be surprised if some of us won't take it "at face value."
MichMan
(16,533 posts)Same thing I asked for in post #6
DFW
(59,689 posts)I know only one guy who follows them closely. He is a guy who grew up well-off, and made himself a decent amount of money on his own afterward. At this point, even he seems to be reaching the point where their rigidly extremist stances are getting to be too much for him.
markodochartaigh
(4,905 posts)It pits young workers, who have always supported the system with payments, against elderly retirees.
It does NOT pit the working class against the rich by asking if the cap on Social Security should be increased for the wealthiest who have inordinately benefited from the economy over the last half century.
dem4decades
(13,589 posts)
Lonestarblue
(13,196 posts)I don’t really know what Gen Z believes, but I do not trust Cato as an institution.
Silent Type
(12,412 posts)
Historic NY
(39,579 posts)
They will have to build in-law apts. to take care of the rents. and the grandrents.
markodochartaigh
(4,905 posts)filial responsibility laws.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filial_responsibility_laws
MarineCombatEngineer
(17,552 posts)what's next?
My military retirement so these pricks don't have to pay higher taxes?
Here's a thought you bunch of whiney pricks, go after the rich and make them pay their fair share of taxes instead of the older generation who worked their asses off to earn their SS.
OldBaldy1701E
(9,992 posts)How marvelous. Let's trash the very generation that gave us the very thing we are using to trash them with.
oasis
(53,309 posts)WhiskeyGrinder
(26,168 posts)SheltieLover
(76,139 posts)
Norrrm
(3,874 posts)SheltieLover
(76,139 posts) IbogaProject
(5,565 posts)We need to adjust the constitution to allow for a wealth tax. Im also in favor of capital gains on captive gains above a one or two million exclusion. And executive and board pay needs to be escrowed. There should be a base FICA wage tax but we have to fund Social Security via the general fund. We have been raiding the Social Security Trust Fund since the Viet Nam war.
Deuxcents
(25,350 posts)I did not know how the system worked..all we cared about was how much money we had. My Union steward gave me some good advice and explained how it’s a pay forward promise and the same idea was for Union dues..it wasn’t for the present but for the future. I think if younger people had a good mentor or something to help them understand how things work, we’d have better luck with them. Good communication is needed, imo
GoodRaisin
(10,697 posts)before all us old folks take a haircut. Time is running out to even keep having this discussion.
turbinetree
(26,932 posts)Charles Koch......you know the Heritage Foundation and the current Project 2025 that everyone is living thru, you know the haves and the have nots......................in 1974.............all they do is pit one generation against the other and then do the side bets on attacking regulations.............what the fuck do you think Social Security means it is an Act that is regulated for a means............you know to keep people from living in the streets without anything.........or did Charles and his gang ever hear of 1929............ maybe they should read the current book that is now out and maybe these younger people coming up behind the older generation should read the book ..............JFC.............
msongs
(73,017 posts)and that applies not just to Gen Z. money paid into SS could buy a new iphone every year
markodochartaigh
(4,905 posts)The only reason that this sycophantic organization has any credibility is because it is backed by obscenely wealthy people who don't want to pay their taxes.
The framing of the question here is a good example of removing choice from people while pretending a faux interest in the liberty of those people. Better to frame the question to include the facts that most of the income growth for the last half century has gone to the top 10%, and that the cap on Social Security taxes has only gradually increased. Better to ask whether the Social Security system should be turned over to banksters or if those at the top, who have benefited the most from our economy, should begin, at long last, to pay their fair share.
Tribetime
(7,030 posts)Just a crazy thought , instead of trying to pit us against each other
Turbineguy
(39,796 posts)
Vinca
(53,220 posts)sakabatou
(45,707 posts)
snowybirdie
(6,545 posts)Gets grannies this monrh?
Response to MichMan (Original post)
wcmagumba This message was self-deleted by its author.
bucolic_frolic
(53,800 posts)
RockRaven
(18,624 posts)just those young adults have failed.
viva la
(4,464 posts)With the grandchildren.
C_U_L8R
(48,794 posts)Gen Derp is more like it.
OAITW r.2.0
(31,337 posts)Uncap the limits of SS taxes on all incomes. Really, this is precisely the fight that the rich wants to see happen.
FalloutShelter
(14,138 posts)Done..
Everybody sing…
jmbar2
(7,537 posts)Whenever a new election cycle starts gearing up, I ALWAYs see a rash of "boomer bashing" social media posts. I believe that this is a strategy to try to divide the liberal left, tapping into genuine and fully merited resentments from our younger folks by providing them with a generational scapegoat.
I always address these types of posts with genuine empathy, reminding them that the decisions that have put everyone in such a bad place were largely Republican decisions. We will need a strong, huge, multigenerational coalition to turn the ship around.
Look around at the pink hat protests, No Kings protests, etc. Full of grey heads. We are with you in your struggle. Let's join together.
Boomer bashing posts seem to be bot-driven a lot. Watch for them, and try to put in an alternative voice before they suck younger people in. Nip that shit in the bud.
Mariana
(15,613 posts)jmbar2
(7,537 posts)They framed the discussion as binary choices: Reduce benefits for the boomers to save social security, or raise taxes on current workers (GenZ). They ignored the best option: raise the income cap for contributions to social security from the current $176,100.
The discussion is structured to pit GenZs and boomers against each other, ignoring awareness of a third choice -- raising the cap on high earners.
In other words, "Let's you and him fight".
MichMan
(16,533 posts)Gen X and Millennials are the ones in the prime of their working years, and would be the ones paying the bulk of any tax increases. Gen Z are all under 30.
jmbar2
(7,537 posts)My main point is to watch for deceptive framing of issues seeking to divide age cohorts. That framing is increasing on social media and I think it's no coincidence.
They are trying to peel GenZs off from a multigenerational voting block needed to stop the madness. We all need to pull together to get the bus out of the ditch. The haves want the have-nots fighting. We cannot afford to fight each other.
Goonch
(4,198 posts)
Fichefinder
(394 posts)Slider19
(11 posts)In the 1980s the boomer generation was the largest voting block. Social security was exempt from federal taxes. In 1984, boomers who were still far from retirement, voted to make social security taxable for their parents/grandparents. Now that boomers are retired and collecting social security, they are trying to reverse what they previously did and get social security exempt from federal taxes.
There was also massive deficit spending from when boomers were in charge of every level of government from the 80s-00s, which will need to be paid back by future generations (ie. gen Z). That bill is now coming due in the form of increasing taxes to keep social programs, like social security, solvent. A total mismanagement of funds by the boomer generation occurred before the first gen Z was born, and then boomers expect gen Z to pick up the tab. Why on earth would gen Z want to support those who selfishly disregarded the future (gen Z) generations?
Nictuku
(4,529 posts)I thought their parents took care of that for them.
Jedi Guy
(3,397 posts)Forget that it's the Cato Institute for a sec. Forget the methodology. Instead, put yourself in Gen Z's shoes for a sec and try to see through their eyes.
These kids have grown up in a fundamentally different world than previous generations have. They don't have any trust at all in our institutions because by and large those institutions have failed them.
They grew up in a world where some crazy bastard might shoot up their school at any given moment. A world where damn near everything is too expensive to afford. A world where they're drowning in debt if they went to university. A world where finding a job is brutally hard, especially a good job that pays well. A world where keeping a roof over their head might take half their income, assuming they can afford a place of their own at all. A world where the dating game is a hellscape and there's a very real loneliness crisis. A world where climate change is out of control. A world where decent healthcare is next to impossible to find.
So yeah, I don't blame them for being a little nihilistic. I don't blame them for feeling some existential dread and despair. These kids have no reason to believe SS will be there for them by the time they retire, always assuming they can afford to retire rather than working until they keel over at their workplace.
They don't care about SS because they don't see a future for themselves. So rather than dismissing the methodology of this poll or dismissing these kids as whiny little punks it would behoove us as a society to try to address that dread and despair.
OldBaldy1701E
(9,992 posts)I went through the exact same things when I was in my 20s. I guess that this current situation that you mention is not so unique, eh?
And, maybe those younger people need to understand that.
Jedi Guy
(3,397 posts)When I was in my school years I didn't worry about an average day becoming a bloodbath. I worked retail and had a place of my own (with roommates, granted) but we could afford to buy things we wanted rather than struggling to afford the basics. In state tuition at a good university was $1200 a semester, not counting books. Keeping a roof over my head didn't devour all my money. The loneliness crisis wasn't yet a thing. Climate change was just being discussed. I don't recall my situation with healthcare at the time.
I came of age in the late 90s and early aughts. I wasn't a ball of stress and anxiety like these kids are. Maybe I was just uncommonly lucky.
Judging by your username I'm guessing you're older than I am. Your personal circumstances may have been difficult but there's no comparison to today. There just isn't, and trying to say otherwise is, at best, wildly disingenuous.
MichMan
(16,533 posts)In the mid 80's, I was living with my girlfriend (celebrating 40th wedding anniversary next year) in a one bedroom apartment that neither of us could afford without the other. Occasionally had to take back bottles for deposit to put gas into my $500 car. Made $4 per hour driving a box truck; combined we made $11,000 a year net income.
Took a job as an intern at a manufacturing plant, and took out loans to attend Engineering college at night to earn a degree. Living under those circumstances is a big motivator.
Jedi Guy
(3,397 posts)You had hope for something better. I would wager that those loans for your education weren't so extensive as to be financially crippling for years thereafter. Now any career in engineering is almost certainly going to require a four year degree, so night classes may not be available. Even if they are available, the loans required to attend may be ruinous.
That doesn't even touch on the existential dread aspect of out of control climate change or the anxiety of knowing that some lunatic might turn your workplace, your school, or the mall into a shooting gallery.
I'm not saying that previous generations didn't have their own struggles and sorrows. Of course they did. I'm saying that previous generations had the hope of things getting better. Gen Z is the first generation in American history that's poised to be less well off than their parents were.
The lack of hope for Generation Z is what's behind their lack of concern for SS. They're not just being greedy little shits. They've lost hope so might as well eat, drink, and be merry now because the future isn't looking all that bright from where they're standing.
OldBaldy1701E
(9,992 posts)Just as there was 'no comparison' to my day as opposed to my parents or grandparents day. (If I had shown my eight year old father a reel to reel tape machine, which they did have at the time, he would have sat there with a very confused look on his face. Assuming he didn't start up with yelling about 'the devil!'. I mean, all he knew was 45 speed records and the radio where they played 45s. Different time.)
There are specifics that are different, but to borrow and paraphrase a line from the first 'Men In Black':
"There are always 'worse times', or 'bad periods' or 'historically rough times' in every generation."
And, I will remind you that I specifically said I did not have to deal with the dangers of school shootings, and therefore had no frame of reference for that.
I was/am always a ball of stress and anxiety. I am very glad that you were not.
Growing up poor is growing up poor. So far, that doesn't seem to be different from generation to generation.
But, if they decide to cut their losses from that program, it won't matter to myself. I don't have that long anyway, and Social Security has already told me to eat a big one twice. So, they can go for it.
But, the constant blanket blame game, especially when someone like myself, growing up on a farm in the middle of nowhere, had no way to have had anything to do with that, just gets a little old is all.
fujiyamasan
(1,127 posts)Last edited Tue Dec 23, 2025, 10:07 PM - Edit history (1)
Columbine was my senior year of HS. That was really shocking at the time.
That this would later become almost endemic and nothing changed in terms of politics or legislation, is truly shameful. Hell, the victims have just got younger since then. Even more sickening.
Coming back to this poll, the reality is that we have a lot of investment and trading platforms and tools that simply did not exist in the past. For better or worse, this does make the younger generation more likely to believe they will gain a return greater than what SS is going to provide them.
It’s going to be a challenge to simply say, “trust the system”, because as you stated the system has failed. Just to reiterate what 2026 will be about — affordability. That goes for everything — education, health care, housing, food. Everything not only pushes upward, but the wages don’t keep up. It’s not going to get any easier because the entry level jobs they are vying for are most likely to be replaced by AI. In tech, the H1 visa lowers salaries, and pulls down the wage structure especially for entry level workers. I’d be surprised if the H1 lasts much longer given the bipartisan backlash, but a lot of those jobs will likely be outsourced then.
Addressing this will require a new way of thinking about how we provide for our retirements. This isn’t to say, we need to get on board with privatization (a non starter), but taking a less patronizing view that provides for some flexibility on how we save and invest may help.
Samael13
(116 posts)They did this and chose that wording to push a generational divide and keep left leaning voters fighting amongst each other
karynnj
(60,765 posts)They ask people about a pretty significant change in the percent and a fixed number of dollars. What is not asked is what has been suggested by many people - raising the cap.
This is CATO proposing a pretty regressive change rather than significantly changing the tax on the wealthy.
ProudMNDemocrat
(20,557 posts)Both are and their spouses, are successful.
The Granddaughters may get what is left if I change my will.
seniors today think the money they paid in to SS was put away for them as well. My now retired husband worked with a lot of maga people that thought/think that. Not just Gen Z folks.
P. S. I hate this labeling of the different generations! Does anyone else feel that way?
MichMan
(16,533 posts)thucythucy
(9,039 posts)Thankfully we have millionaires and billionaires who can get out of doing both, and thus have the resources to fund "think tanks" to keep us minions fighting among ourselves.
just in case it's needed.
MichMan
(16,533 posts)
gulliver
(13,699 posts)Eventually that's going to have to happen. We need to make sure all humans get an automation and AI dividend. Otherwise, these things just shrink the tax base and compete for our jobs.
I'm actually amazed to watch as people fall into the two- and three-income trap and simply let it happen. You ride the machine or the machine rides you.
fujiyamasan
(1,127 posts)But it’s going to be tough to enforce.
Will corporations be taxes on how many robots or AI software license seats they purchase? Will investments in AI have a separate tax code? People will always look for loopholes.
Ultimately, the simplest answer is just to increase taxes on the ultra wealthy.
gulliver
(13,699 posts)You can also increase taxes on corporations. It's not only how the taxes are collected but how they are spent imo. We want the automation working for everyone.
We're not going to be able to solve it here. But I hope to see our Democrats, whose core concern should be workers, addressing the issue seriously.
I may be naive. I don't think the billionaire class would want anything else but to see everyone benefit. Musk, Bezos, Gates, and Zuckerberg give off that vibe. I think they want to do good for people for the most part. It's one of the main ways they measure their own achievements.
Larry Ellison and Rupert Murdoch might not.
fujiyamasan
(1,127 posts)No offense but have you been living under a rock for over a year now? Especially with Musk, the dude is an outright fascist. He has no interest in seeing humanity benefit unless it’s white people (and white males in particular). The others make racial claims much less obvious (I’m not sure if Bezos and Zuck have completely bought the white supremecist agenda), but their fascist leanings are more subtle.
Gates is somewhat the exception there (Epstein links notwithstanding). His life work since leaving Microsoft has been in finding ways to actually benefit people in the least developed countries, like in vaccination programs. Had he held on to his Microsoft stock, he would have been worth over a trillion dollars by now, but he has given most of it away. Even his recently much aligned re prioritization on climate change funding wasn’t made in a vacuum. His organization is likely covering a shortfall in global health spending left by Musk’s action at DOGE.
I agree democrats need to come up with coherent ways to address the economic disruptions with AI (I favor UBI though I understand that’s a tough sell). I disagree with some posters here claiming it’s a moral evil or whatever. I see a lot of uses for it (unrelated to AI art slop), and it’s still in its infancy.
pinkstarburst
(1,870 posts)and all the posts proclaiming grandpa and grandma will just move in with Gen Z have missed it even worse.
Gen Z is graduating with massive college debt.
They are graduating and then are finding themselves in a job market where there are not entry level jobs. It sucks going to school and getting a computer science degree and then discovering AI and H1Bs are making it to where companies do not want to hire entry level programmers.
They are graduating and cannot afford housing, not to rent and certainly not to buy a house. Young people can't even begin to think about having children of their own because it's too damn expensive.
They want the OPTION of all those things. They want a job that pays well, they want a nice house, they want to be able to have kids if they want to and not have to pay their entire salary in childcare, and none of those things are affordable.
And neither party has done a damn thing to make those things happen.
And we can point fingers and say "it's all the republicans. All their fault."
Who cares? The end result is that both parties have traded back control of the White House for years, and this is the end result. Things suck for young people. And they continue to get worse. So what is the answer? Whoever is going to lead this thing in 2028 is going to have to address this. And they are going to have to have REAL answers, REAL solutions. Their answer cannot be "we are better than the other guy so you need to vote for us because the republicans are worse."
That answer didn't work in 2024 and it isn't going to work in 2028. Young people feel quite hopeless and they will definitely stay home and not vote at all if there is not someone with actual answer and an actual plan that will help THEM.
And "if you don't like this, guess you better look forward to granny moving in with you" isn't going to cut it. That's how we guarantee young people stay home. Again.
Mariana
(15,613 posts)
EllieBC
(3,602 posts)They are facing a future with few jobs, huge student loan debt, and stagnating wages. There won’t be SS for them. They don’t have the same opportunities that generations before them have had.
If we expect them to be bootstrappy then they’re going to expect those of us in older gens to do the same.
BlueTsunami2018
(4,826 posts)Or raised it to a million dollars at the least. Social security would be fine for a long time if we simply lifted the cap.
RazorbackExpat
(882 posts)"Members of Generation Z, those born between 1997 and 2012..."
Response to MichMan (Original post)
RandySF This message was self-deleted by its author.
RandySF
(80,856 posts)I loaned some money to my son and his fraternity to cover a water bill and the little fuckers still haven’t paid me back.
Intractable
(1,572 posts)
quaker bill
(8,261 posts)Pretty much anyone will say they would like to pay less taxes.
A better way to ask the question is if they would like to pay less taxes if it means 25% of seniors become homeless and hungry?
Would you prefer less taxes and then have mom and dad living with you?
SSRI is not a cushy lifestyle.
QueerDuck
(883 posts)Sigh.
