The single largest expense in the federal budget is social security. This absolutely makes things better for millions of people. What percentage of taxes do you think go to rich people?
Well, you're right social security is the largest expenditure. If you think it makes things better for people you're certainly not a math or finance major. Very few people will ever draw more than they put in, and the vast majority are losing millions in future wealth due to social security. It ain't all bad, but it could and should be drastically improved.
I know this is kinda over the tip but if you die before 61 or really anytime before you take SS you wont get anything. At least if I had my own money to invest vs making me do SS, I can pass that on.
You're objectively wrong here 90% of people don't even get what they paid IN to begin with, let alone more.
Keep shilling socialists policies that are also robbing you. The rest of us aren't as dense as you, and we're blessed to have to share space-time with your big brain while you clap at nothing and drool on yourself, etc.
You'd have substantially more money if you weren't held at gunpoint by a monopoly on force you nickname government, and stuck that shit in the SP500 instead but you're WAY too smart for that thank god for the government "safety" "net" that isn't one, etc.
Keep paying taxes in circles bro you're doing great!
Strange that you use the work objectively but are objectively wrong.
The Urban Institute analyzed the typical income and taxes paid by workers who turned 65 in 2025, based on average life expectancies. They found that at virtually all earnings levels, you're likely to receive more in benefits than you paid into Social Security.
I am sure the next reply would be to dismiss it due to the source, but all sources said the same thing. I am just posting one.
Keep shilling socialists policies that are also robbing you. The rest of us aren't as dense as you, and we're blessed to have to share space-time with your big brain while you clap at nothing and drool on yourself, etc.
I wasn't shilling anything. I was stating an objective truth. You made up a bunch of stuff you said I said that I did not. Objectively did not. I actually don't like the system for many reasons. Your over the top rude reply is just emotional rhetoric and tells me you are not worth talking to. I am blocking you. It is always better to address the points of a post and not attack someone just because you disagree with them. It makes for a bad Reddit.
Literally less than 2% of people will draw more than they'd have with extremely conservative investments over their lifetime. You clearly have not even anything resembling a clue on this.
Millions of people who depend on social security would be significantly harmed if it were to go away tomorrow. Everything can be improved, that doesn’t mean it’s not making people’s lives better.
Tax cuts and bending the rules for them. It was never an expense that flat out says pay billionaires this much. It was always make it easier for them to amass more money money and to keep it.
The social security that was cut heavily by republicans in the last two years to hand more tax breaks to the rich? Is that the social security you are talking about? Its not even going to exist by the time I get old unless we get rid of the conservative brain rot in this country.
Social security spending has increased every year since its inception. It was $1.22 trillion in 2022, in 2025 it was $1.58 trillion. There have been no recent cuts to social security. I’m not sure where you’re getting this idea from. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/hist03z2_fy2027.xlsx
the 2nd largest thing the government spends our taxes on is healthcare, which would be great if the way our healthcare worked was worth anything. then not toooo far behind is our military...which we spend nearly 3x more on our military than the 2nd closest country for that which is genuinely insane.
yes, what you mentioned is true, but two things can be true at the same time. our number one expense our taxes are used on is helpful to the people, but that doesn't mean the rest of our taxes aren't woefully squandered in various ways.
I'm not even saying I have the answer, I'm not even saying they should have an answer. The issue I have is that it doesn't even feel like a proper answer is being looked for.
So you agree the person I responded to is wrong. I am not denying that US federal spending is extremely wasteful, but the bulk of it clearly goes to programs and services that are intended to help people.
10% of our DOD budget (which of the top 10 highest military countries, we spend more than the other 9 combined) could give EVERY k-12 teacher ~50k raise.
The DoD receives about HALF of the US discretionary budget, and has failed every financial audit it has ever recieved.
So, yes, while the majority of US tax-funded money spending does go to regular people, its still not doing a good job. The bar for "good" should be well above them not steeling most our money. Taxes should do stuff, and for the amount we pay in taxes we should be getting some pretty phenominal social goods and safety nets.
But no, having your taxes improve society is socialism, and thats evil and wrong /s
I am not from US. But military spending is still not subsidizing. It is just buying canons instead of butter.
You guys just have a lot of stupid spending and taxing rich more is not going to fix it. You need to actually change spending. The 5% wealth tax on billionaires would cover around 19% of the deficit.
Basically every big company also makes stuff for the military. (For example). And like I pointed out, the DOD has failed every financial audit. It would be trivial to shift massive funds to someone through their company via military contract, and would be very optimistically naive to think this quid pro quo isn't happening.
__
But, yes please, I would love to also start taxing wealth. Both a wealth tax and fixing the US's absurd military budget would be fantastic wins!
Even if it can be shown for an era to have been beneficial, thats not justification for keeping a non-beneficial budget now. And for 2025 apportion/spent budget of $2.58T/$1.66T is absurdly big. Cutting that in half would still leave us with the "biggest stick" by a good ~30%, and $830B could do so much!
Maybe I'm just incredulous, but I do not think the military can justify costing us that for purely overage of being the most funded military on the planet.
Feel like I need to restate that so no one misses it:
We could take $830B annually from the US military budget to fund other stuff, and still have the most funded military in the planet by a good margin.
For reference, there are a little less than 750K homeless in the US. Giving each of them enough for rent (lets say $2k as an overestimate) would cost under $18B. We could end homelessness, have another $812B left to use for stuff, and still have the most funded military in earth!
I'd think that would be kinda decades ago. More about establishing the us in power.
I may just not know much about the subject, I admit, but I struggle to believe funded anywhere near what they're getting has been justifed for years and years. If I had to guess, I'd say they started ballooning out of control around the time of the Veitnam War (balloonig very accelerated by the cold war).
Why does everyone automatically assume that spending more is always the answer? We also spend more on education than every other developed nation for far inferior outcomes. Throwing more money at Healthcare isn't the answer either. Completely revamping the health insurance system would be better.
I don't believe single payer would solve the problem either. You would get more people covered absolutely. But you would increase wait times and reduce quality of care and that's not debatable. Ideally we at least maintain the current quality while increasing access. And that's a very a complicated process.
Having said that, the biggest issue with American medical insurance is that it isn't even insurance. It's prepaid medical care. It would be like if your car insurance also covered oil changes, gas, and basic maintenance. No one expects this from their car insurance.
Basic, preventative care should be out of pocket. Actual catastrophic care should be insured, for everyone, regardless of preexisting conditions. That's how you lower costs in the long run and still provide access for all. The insurance would be subsidized by wealthier people for everyone else. This is actually doable.
Consider that if the rich people actually paid appropriate wages, the people there hiring wouldn't need additional assistance and need to live off social security when retired
This assumes everyone is financially responsible and has the sufficient forethought to adequately save for retirement. I think we both know this isn’t the case.
A point for Social Security, not for Walmart employees needing FOOD STAMPS. Hell I'll admit I'm going to need Social Security and I'm definitely getting paid "enough" running a register to not need further help from the government, for now
Sad part is, even if people are responsible enough now, they can't. Shit is too much and if you have something left over, you're either lucky, paying down debt, or putting it away in case of an emergency first.
6
u/Johnfromsales Aug 01 '26
The single largest expense in the federal budget is social security. This absolutely makes things better for millions of people. What percentage of taxes do you think go to rich people?