Question

Should the age at which citizens are eligible for full Social Security retirement benefits remain static or change gradually in response to the longevity of the population?

Answer 1

Ans) First established by Congress in 1935 as a basic safety effort for the disabled and retired workers and their dependants, is now quite commonly referred to as the Four programs financed through Social Security. It shall include retirement pensions, survivors insurance, disability insurance, and Medicare for the ages and disabled.

Over the years we have experienced a rapid growth in population, which saw a considerable number of active workers engagement towards payment of taxes. But, an upward trend since 2010 is seen, with an increase in the retirement of workers, making it difficult to compensate for the security benefits from the taxes being deducted.

The US has forever seen a considerable growth in the population, but certain factors have also possessed a constant threat to the solvency of Social security, one of them being the ever growing per person cost of living adjustments , increase in the costs of medical care and increase in life expectancy.

Another factor posing a threat of the increasing number of retirements in comparison to the declining number of active workers. The population is growing or is constant but similar is not the case with the engagement of workers. Also, increasing number of immigrants is a major factor of increase in population of US over the years.

Looking at these factors, it would not seem unfair if we say that the age should gradually keep on increasing but on the other hand, there are several cons to it, one of the main factor being the possibility of being able to survive until that particular age.