Yes, people are now living longer than when the program was created
No, this will disadvantage low income seniors whose life expectancy is lower than wealthier seniors
Yes, but I would prefer to privatize it instead
No, eliminate the income cap on taxable earnings and stop spending current funds on other programs instead
Yes, and eliminate the income cap on taxable earnings

Historical Results

See how support for each position on “Social Security” has changed over time for 3.9m America voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

See how importance of “Social Security” has changed over time for 3.9m America voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from America users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.

 @8D7X8VB from Pennsylvania answered…4yrs4Y

No, but Social Security should begin a 30-40 year phase-out program. this would allow those with immediate needs to obtain needed benefits while allowing those 30-40 years younger progressively paying less to zero into social security and allowing them time to make their retirement plans.

 @48MPJZTfrom Florida answered…3yrs3Y

Social security funds should be distributed at an age based on a formula that accounts for increased age of life expectancy. Future Options should exist not to pay social security and rather invest that money into a personal retirement fund or pay a tax on funds if you choose to cash them in ahead of scheduled retirement age. Not the government's job to make sure there is money for people to retire with, that responsibility should fall to each individual citizen

 @5L4VXDNfrom Ohio answered…3yrs3Y

The retirement age should be based on the health of the senior in question. The healthier the senior, the retirement age should be raised. It should not be raised for seniors who are not healthy.

 @48RLWN9from Virginia answered…3yrs3Y

Social Security was not intended to be a retirement program. Give every child at birth an account worth $5,000 and let it grow toward a retirement nest egg. Do NOT allow the government to be able to spend that money. Taxes would be paid on the original $5,000 when the senior retires and at a reasonable tax rate.

 @48QYZ62from Minnesota answered…3yrs3Y

No - many people are finding it difficult to continue physical labor type work even to the existing retirement age. Raising the retirement age will result in many more people filing for disability instead.

 @48RBMZSfrom Maryland answered…3yrs3Y

NO, and we should transition Social Security funds into privately managed retirement accounts and away from congressional access and IOU's. Social Security withdrawal should be optional so that those who don't need it are not forced to take it, instead they should receive a tax credit for each year that they don't take it.

Latest News

Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Social Security” news articles, updated frequently.

Other Popular Questions

Explore other topics that are important to America voters.