Universal Retirement: A Promise Without a Number

Ask Social Security what you will collect at 67, and it will give you a number. Ask the newest promise about American retirement, and you get no number at all.

That promise comes from two socialist organizations. The Democratic Socialists of America's 2026 program says "your retirement is publicly funded," and the Party for Socialism and Liberation promises a guaranteed pension. To anyone unsure if Social Security will be there, that sounds like relief. Whether it is a good deal depends on two blanks neither fills in: how big the check would be, and when it would start.

Start with today. Social Security already reaches nearly every older American: 56 million retired workers and their dependents draw benefits, against 61.2 million Americans aged 65 and over. Each check is tied to a career's earnings and funded mainly by a tax on workers' paychecks.

The real difference between today's system and a guaranteed pension is not who gets a check, but how big the check is, who gets it, and when they start getting it. Giving every American 67 and over today's average check of $2,071 a month would add only about $55 billion a year. Promise more than the average, and the price climbs fast.

Why 67? It is Social Security's “full” retirement age. Claim earlier and the check is smaller; wait until 70 and it is larger. Since the socialist promises are not defined, a good assumption about a guaranteed pension most naturally starts where the current system pays in full.

What is the “full” benefit? At 67 it is $4,152 a month, or just under $50,000 per year, paid to workers who earned at or above Social Security's taxable maximum every year from age 22. If you wait until 70, social security pays $5,181 per month.

Who gets that check? Should it be one per household or one per person: starting at 67 or, on the broadest reading, at 65? Every version examined would keep today's disability and survivor benefits.

If you are already retired, the promise touches a deadline you may have heard about. Social Security and Medicare hold their reserves as Treasury securities. When those reserves run out in the early 2030s, current law cuts benefits automatically to roughly four-fifths of schedule. Paying benefits from general revenue, the taxes that fund the rest of government, could cover that cut, but taxes would need to go up to replace it.

If you are still working, the order matters. The bigger checks would start at once, paid from general revenue (your taxes) every year. A 35-year-old taxpayer would help cover them for more than three decades before reaching retirement age

The fairest objection is that neither platform says what it would pay, so this may overstate the promise. A smaller check would cost less; the $55 billion figure shows how much less. But a promise of today's social security average is just slightly above the poverty level for a single adult, while a promise of the larger check costs up to $1.8 trillion a year. Until the platforms name a number, no one can tell which they mean.

Social Security can tell a 40-year-old today roughly what she will collect at 67. The new promise would have her paying for it through her working years without ever saying what she would get.