Jeremiah

Now the commenter replies, it looks very different if you look at it by the household level instead of individual.

A meaningful share of the increase in total costs comes from composition.

As women shifted from spouse-only benefits to worker or dual entitlement, more households now receive two lifetime worker benefits rather than one worker plus a spousal benefit.

Average household payouts rise as a result.

This creates bifurcated outcomes.

Households with two lifetime earners receive higher total payments, while single-earner and spousal benefit households account for a smaller share of distributions and directly affected by cuts.

Individual averages are skewed by survivorship and changing household structure.

The result is a shift in where social security dollars go.

A larger share of total payouts now flows to higher lifetime earnings households, which also tend to have lower fertility on average, affecting the system-wide distribution of a fixed payroll tax base.

Basically, the ratio of working to pay not for your own parents, but someone else's parents who are quite possibly richer than your own, has gone up quite a bit.

End quote.

Tunnel Guy writes, quote, Section 3 missed that the 2025 tax bill literally has a tax deduction for seniors.

Link to a Wikipedia article here.

Often called no tax on social security, but that's not entirely accurate.

Agree with the conclusion overall, though.

End quote.

Andy G writes, quote,

Why do so many people believe that old people have discovered a vote-themselves-infinite-benefits hack?

I'm a tail-end boomer myself, and I mostly agree with your overall take.

But the above-quoted concern is actually valid when it comes to the old-age entitlements.