You're right, the proper statement is "you can't count _all_ payroll taxes as lost income." Your numbers still aren't accurate. You're also going higher than the initial income you mentioned ($100k), and you've switched from household income to individual (a two income family with $75k and $45k will look quite differently).
And you can't make the point without disability income. As shown lower down in the thread, your claims are hyperbolic even including DI of $31k!
It's funny..I agree there is a problem here. I just think we need someone intellectually honest to do the numbers properly. And that person is obviously not you.
My point was simply to show the maximum range of possible outcomes, which is why I showed from $10k to $120k. I wasn't trying to tie it back to any particular scenario. Even in the absolute best case, the SSI program is clearly not about providing individual ROI for your tax dollars. It's about your incremental work supporting others. Which is fine... to a point.
The 'retained future income' portion of FICO payments, lets say with a 4% discount rate (ARR), is pennies on the dollar even in the best parts of the income curve where your earnings count the most toward achieving benefits.
Using 'danans' numbers he came up with $35k of marginal utility from $115k of household income. Those numbers were obviously overly conservative, but did include an average SSDI of $24k. There are many, many benefits that danans did not include, which I enumerated in my reply downthread, but I'm willing to settle on $35k of utility from $115k of work as a starting point.
Now showing it without SSI/SSDI and just relying on food stamps, Medicaid, EITC, and other means-tested programs you still get horrible outcomes like the $24k - $30k example from 'chipotle_coyote' but I agree it won't be a straight-out loss up to $100k.
But I hear you -- if I believe enough in making an irrefutable point, I should just code up the site and accept pull requests on Github.
I have always shown my math and quoted my sources, so you might not agree with the methodology, but I've tried to be accurate with the numbers, and cite sources of inaccuracy where-ever possible. I'm sorry you found it dishonest.
And you can't make the point without disability income. As shown lower down in the thread, your claims are hyperbolic even including DI of $31k!
It's funny..I agree there is a problem here. I just think we need someone intellectually honest to do the numbers properly. And that person is obviously not you.