Scrapping the cap is the easiest and fairest way to keep Social Security solvent and fully funded going forward.

going into the pockets of fewer and fewer people. If those people are paying into Social Security on only a tiny portion of their income, it should be obvious that Social Security is going to become weaker and weaker.

Actually pay into Social Security. I know you pay on earned income, but is their income earned or is it something like dividends? I don’t know, but it would be interesting to find out.

I usually hit the cap in late October, and I agree…it should be lifted. There’s no Medicare cap, why isn’t it the same for SSA?

Leave the cap where it is for people earning just over the limit, leave a hole for breathing room, and require people making OVER a certain LARGE amount (say, a million? Two?) to pay in to SS again - on the amount earned above that.

You could make an argument that in some excessively high cost of living areas (silicon valley, Seattle, NYC) that $400k is still somewhere in the middle class.

Let the cap rise to close the donut.

Would still protect social security and have the rich pay a fair, if not complete, share of their earnings.

6.2% and applicable to employee and employer alike on the same dollar of earned income. Make it simple. Apply it to all earned income, no limit, no donat holes. If that exceed revenue targets, lower the rate a bit, but don't over complicate. That's where the US system gets into trouble. A lot of mischief occurs in the rules and exceptions. Just don't go there.

And if you really want to fund Social Security properly, apply the SS to capital gains, particularly carried interest. The most pernicious tax dodge of all.

Undercuts the argument about fairness.

detached from being an insurance/individual benefit.
start paying bennies out of someone else’s money and it becomes a major target. (and yes, i realize current wage earners r paying my benefits.)
i fear the roots of the program r about to b lost and forgotten.

SS was originally meant to be social insurance, i.e. a way to mitigate the risk of poverty in old age.

It's widely popular but support will drop if it becomes explicitly a program for transfer payments.

Just like your car, life and homeowners insurance are household costs no different really from your mortgage, rent and groceries. The nomenclature is meaningless. A supposition on my part, but if you think there's some kind of "lock box" somewhere, you're sorely mistaken. Pissed me off every time Al Gore even mentioned those words. Each generation pays the retirement of the prior generation and so on and so on and so on. It's fair and it works. Excess funds are invested in US government securities by law, drawing interest on the debt from general government operations.

This is a change whose time is long overdue!

Keep the employer cap but eliminate the employee cap. Or you could cut the FICA tax in half for people over the cap so they receive a cut.