Text here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Includes raising the retirement age for Social Security an indeterminate amount (The Hill<\/a>). See expenditure reduction in the table below:<\/p>\n Source:<\/strong> RSC (2024)<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n Not sure I understand where the 10 year cumulative $1.5 trillion outlay reduction is coming from. Here\u2019s the relevant paragraph (from page 108):<\/p>\n For instance, the RSC Budget would make modest changes to the primary insurance amount (PIA) benefit formula for individuals who are not near retirement and earn more than the wealthiest PIA benefit factor. It would also make modest adjustments to the retirement age for future retirees to account for increases in life expectancy. Finally, for these individuals, it would limit and phase out auxiliary benefits for high income earners.384 Again, the RSC Budget does not cut or delay retirement benefits for any senior in or near retirement. Additionally, the RSC Budget would promote trust fund solvency by increasing payroll tax revenues through pro-growth tax reform,385 pro-growth energy policy that lifts wages,386 work requirements that move Americans from welfare to work,387 and regulatory reforms that increase economic growth.388<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n I think this is akin to a magic asterisk, wherein supply side reforms induce massive wage growth providing lots of additional revenue, so a \u201cdynamic scoring\u201d on steroids (but not specificually enumerated in any spreadsheet I see\u2026)<\/p>\n All is this is unsurprising<\/a>. Consider alternatives using a CRFB interactive here<\/a>.<\/p>\n On other fronts, see NBC News<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n <\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/econbrowser.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/RSC_2024_table.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n\n