+

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 393k California voters.

32%
Yes
68%
No
22%
Yes
61%
No
6%
Yes, people are now living longer than when the program was created
7%
No, this will disadvantage low income seniors whose life expectancy is lower than wealthier seniors
4%
Yes, but I would prefer to privatize it instead
0%
No, eliminate the income cap on taxable earnings and stop spending current funds on other programs instead
0%
Yes, and eliminate the income cap on taxable earnings

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 393k California voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 393k California voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from California voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @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.

 @5L4VXDNfrom Ohio  answered…4yrs4Y

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…4yrs4Y

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…4yrs4Y

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.

 @48MPJZTfrom Florida  answered…4yrs4Y

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

 @5B6J9Z4from Washington  answered…4yrs4Y

Stop allowing people to collect at age 62. They have stopped paying in at a younger age and this further depletes money from social security. There are too many young retirees

 @48PQCWTfrom Florida  answered…4yrs4Y

The social security program no longer functions as was intended. It was suppose to be a safety net for those whose retirement plans failed. Now people are using it as their retirement plan. They should eliminate it.

 @487BQ3Tfrom North Carolina  answered…4yrs4Y

Social security is a clear and perfect example of a ponzi scheme. This program should be phased out as quickly as possible and retirement planning should be up to the individual. This will increase financial literacy and further promote a strong capitalist marketplace.

Latest News

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