[gentle music]

The conventional story around Social Security solvency starts, I think, many times with demographics, where people say, "Oh, there are too many people retiring, too many people getting benefits, and so we need to figure out a way to make it affordable." And really, the first place they look, because they've misdiagnosed the problem as one of demographics, is they think, "Well, we just need to cut the benefits.

We need to make sure that we are spending less." But really, the question is, why? How did we get to this point? And that's what Roosevelt's work is focused on.

That's what my work is focused on, is really getting to the correct diagnosis.

'Cause if we can't diagnose the problem, we're not going to treat it.

And the underlying diagnosis is a weaker economy, one that was battered by the Great Recession, and one in which earners are not really participating as much as they could in the economy.

I don't know if you saw the recent report out that a quarter of the American workforce is, uh, functionally unemployed, means they are involuntarily working, you know, part-time hours, that they are earning poverty wages, and that directly contributes to the long-term health of Social Security because the money comes from wages.

Right

So are you telling us, Nick, that you don't pay social security on most of your income? No, no.

No.

So Nationwide put out this survey.

They had a really good piece out where they asked kind of true and false questions about Social Security to the respondents.

And they asked whether or not they thought a person earning $200,000 a year versus earning a million dollars a year if they're paying the same rate in Social Security tax.

And only 34% of the respondents correctly identified that as true.

which is part of the problem.

Yeah.