close
close

Trump, Harris’ stance on Social Security poses long-term threat to US economy, financial expert warns

Trump, Harris’ stance on Social Security poses long-term threat to US economy, financial expert warns

The growing US national debt remains a major concern for lawmakers, especially presidential candidates who are in the home stretch of the 2024 race.

While both former President Trump and Vice President Harris have laid out their economic visions, one financial expert said “both camps are doing America a disservice” by ignoring the “enormous cost” of Social Security.

“I’m a little upset that both Harris and Trump said there will be no changes,” “What should I do with my money?” Author Brian Kuderna spoke to Fox News Digital.

FINANCIAL EXPERT WARNING ABOUT THE ‘ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM’ THAT HARRIS HAS BEEN SILENT ABOUT

“There will be no cuts to social security. “I think it’s reassuring to our older voters, but it ignores some of the long-term implications for the U.S. economy and the gigantic deficits we have.”

National debt has exceeded $35 trillion For the first time in the country’s history, the US surpassed the $34 trillion threshold in July, which the US surpassed in early January.

Trump and Harris’ economic agenda is expected to add trillions of dollars to the pot. Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRRF). Trump’s plan could add about $8 trillion to the debt by 2035, up from about $4 trillion under Harris.

Social Security is one of the largest items in the US budget. They accounted for 22% of fiscal year 2024 spending, according to Treasury financial data.

“If you look at the inflows and outflows, they are so out of balance, as opposed to what Social Security was originally intended to do, which was to be an additional source of income for a very short period of retirement. ” Kuderna said.

Concern about Social Security has been growing for years, but no leading political candidate has taken up the issue.

“Trump, even before he ran for president, was very vocal about reforming the welfare system. To return it to a state of balance. And the obvious way to do this was to index the normal retirement age, which has happened before.”

SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS ARE INSUFFICIENT. THE PROBLEM MAY SOON EXIST

When the Social Security Act was signed into law in 1935, the original basic retirement age was 65. Some nine decades later, the retirement age has increased by just two years to 67.

“So if you look at this from 1945, when the normal retirement age was 65, and now we fast forward to 2024 and see how many Americans and how long we live, everything you’ve done is an indication that with 65 to 67 years old,” Kuderna noted.

Trump and Harris have both promised to protect Social Security. On the former president’s campaign website, he pledged to “fight and protect Social Security and Medicare without any cuts, including no changes to the retirement age.”

The former president called for eliminating taxes on Social Security benefits as part of his plan to cut taxes and government regulation. However, the CRFB notes that this proposal alone would lead to an estimated $1.30 trillion in revenue reduction by 2035.

Money is melting under the image of Trump (left) and Harris (right)

Financial advisor Brian Kuderna expresses his concerns about former President Trump and Vice President Harris’ stance on Social Security. (Getty Images/FOX Business/Fox News)

The vice president’s campaign promises to “defend Social Security and Medicare from the relentless attacks of Donald Trump and his extreme allies.” Harris also plans to “strengthen Social Security and Medicare over the long term by making millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share of taxes,” a key aspect of her economic vision.

Neither campaign offered concrete solutions to the threats facing the program.

Kuderna said the “logical” solution would be to raise the normal retirement age to 70.

“It makes a lot of sense, especially when you’re talking to younger generations, millennials and Gen Z, many of whom are thinking, ‘Hey, when I retire, Social Security won’t even be there.’ If you tell them, “Yes, it will be there,” but you’re not going to take payments at either age 62 or 67—you may have to wait until age 70 to get the full benefit—I think that’s a fair offer. and I think it can immediately relieve a huge liability to the social security system.”

START A FOX BUSINESS ON THE MOVE BY CLICKING HERE

FOX Business’ Eric Revell contributed to this report.