This Statistic Should Shut Down Any Talk Of Cutting Social Security
When
this story broke earlier this week, it did not get nearly the attention
it deserved, so it bears repeating now: 36 percent of workers,
according to one poll, have less than $1,000 saved for their retirement.
That comes from the Employee Benefit Research Institute, which does an annual retirement confidence survey. That has jumped up from 28 percent who reported having less than $1,000 stashed away for retirement last year.
That is one of
the statistics that should shut down any conversation about pushing back
the retirement age for Social Security or reducing the cost-of-living
adjustment for benefits. The idea, often put forward on the right, that
people will be able to compensate for benefit cuts with their own
savings is not panning out in the real world – and won’t as long as
we’re in a slow-growth economy with high unemployment and stagnant
wages.
“Cost of living
and day-to-day expenses head the list of reasons why workers do not save
(or save more) for retirement, with 53 percent of workers citing this
factor,” the executive summary of the survey says. And no wonder, given
the stagnant wages of the working class the past two decades, which
result in 40 percent of the nation’s households today earning less than
$39,000 a year.
While many of
the people in this group are younger couples who presumably have time to
build their savings, only about 11 percent of those surveyed have
savings and investments in excess of $250,000. Further, only 17 percent
of those who are already retired have more than $250,000 in savings and
investments they can tap. Nearly 60 percent have less than $25,000 put
away for retirement; almost one in three have less than $1,000.
Much of the
reaction to this survey this week has centered on how to improve
participation in employer 401(k) plans and other savings vehicles, such
as President Obama’s proposal for a “MyRA” plan, an individual savings
plan targeted toward lower-income workers that would invest in
government bonds.
But these
measures will be relatively ineffective unless we have an economy with
rising wages and lower unemployment. Nor will these measures eliminate
the need to bolster Social Security benefits for those who will be
beginning to claim benefits over the next three decades.
It is cruel to
suggest pushing the retirement age to 67 or later at the same time the
government estimates that more than 40 percent of the long-term
unemployed are over the age of 50. It is also wrong to suggest that
Social Security benefits should be subject to the “chained CPI,” which
would guarantee that the purchasing power of Social Security benefits
would erode over time. These workers have had to use their retirement
savings to survive in the here and now, and we should be focused on what
these workers need to live in dignity – for some, an opportunity to
work at a job that will enable them to rebuild their nest egg, for
others, access to benefits that will enable them to retire without being
in poverty.
What we ought to
do instead is move quickly to improve Social Security benefits, and
build political momentum for the most important policy change that would
make that passible: Lifting the cap on payroll taxes so that wealthy
individuals would pay into the Social Security system the same share of
their income as working class people.
No comments:
Post a Comment