Social Security Needs to Be Expanded, Not Cut

Fat chance neolib millionaire Obama would EVER be in favor of this despite all of the financial devastation faced and experienced by millions of people over the age of 50:

In this policy paper, we offer one possible way to increase the overall public component of retirement security in the U.S. that
we call Expanded Social Security. Just as Medicare already has different components called Medicare A, B, C, and D, the
Expanded Social Security program that we propose would have two elements: Social Security A and Social Security B.

Under our proposal for Expanded Social Security, today’s Old Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI), commonly known simply as
“Social Security,” would be retained, possibly with modifications, as an earnings-based defined benefit program. This would be
renamed Social Security A. The expected shortfall in funding for promised benefits that is predicted to occur in the 2030s would
be made up for by revenue increases, not benefit cuts.

To supplement Social Security A, we would add a universal flat benefit for all retirees eligible for OASI called “Social Security
B.” Social Security B could be funded by revenues other than the payroll tax. Today’s Supplemental Security Income (SSI), a
means-tested antipoverty program that helps poor children and the disabled as well as the elderly, has always been funded out of
general revenues. SSI thus provides a precedent for expanding the funding base for Social Security B. Indeed, one option would
be to convert SSI into Social Security B.

The two components of Expanded Social Security, Social Security A and Social Security B, in combination would provide a
much greater share of pre-retirement income than today’s OASI does by itself for most Americans. This expansion of the public
share of the average American’s retirement income would make both tax-favored employer-based pensions and tax-favored
individual savings accounts less necessary, allowing federal tax expenditures for those private programs to be reduced or
eliminated. Combining major reductions in tax-favored private retirement savings programs with a substantial increase in the
public portion of the American security system would make the retirement security system as a whole more progressive, more
efficient, and more stable. Designed properly, a new retirement security system could substantially boost public retirement
benefits for most Americans without increasing the percentage of GDP devoted to the combined public and private elements of
our nation’s retirement system as a whole.

I like the idea, as long as those of us who have tiny pensions in states that didn't pay into Social Security aren't screwed over.

It shouldn't be the case if the money came out of general revenues.