Scott Galloway Urges 'Means-Testing' For Social Security – 'I Make $16M A Year, I Shouldn't Get A Check'

Most people know that Social Security alone won't be enough for a comfortable retirement. The numbers don't lie—the average monthly benefit in 2025 is around $1,976, adding up to about $23,712 a year, according to the Social Security Administration. 

That's why so many Americans rely on personal savings, 401(k)s, and IRAs to bridge the gap. But there's still a big debate about how Social Security should work and how people should be investing for their future.

Don't Miss:

• The average 401(k) balance soars to a record-breaking high – Here's how to know if your nest egg is keeping pace.
• Can you guess how many retire with a $5,000,000 nest egg? The percentage may shock you.

Should Social Security Be Means-Tested, and How Should You Invest?

According to T. Rowe Price, a widely accepted guideline is to aim for a retirement income that replaces approximately 75% of your pre-retirement salary. 

That's why employer-sponsored 401(k) plans and IRAs have become such an important part of retirement planning—they help people grow their savings and take control of their financial future.

But the way Social Security benefits are handed out has become a hot topic, and some experts think it's time for a change.

Trending: ‘Scrolling To UBI' — Deloitte's #1 fastest-growing software company allows users to earn money on their phones. You can invest today for just $0.26/share with a $1000 minimum.

Scott Galloway, an NYU professor and host of "The Prof G Pod" podcast, believes Social Security should be means-tested—meaning wealthier individuals shouldn't receive benefits just because they paid in. He argues that he pays the same amount in Social Security taxes as someone making $160,000 a year. 

"So I have analysts working here at ProfG who make 160 grand. So they make, or they pay $9,000 in social security tax. I make 16 million and I pay $9,000. Why on earth are the rich not paying their share to support our seniors? So if you’re going to continue to transfer this much money to seniors and you think it’s a good idea, fine," Galloway said.

His take? Social Security is a tax meant to support those who need it, and high earners like himself don't necessarily need the extra money.

Not everyone agrees. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, means-testing could actually weaken Social Security. One of the program's biggest strengths is that it's universal—everyone pays in, and everyone gets something back. 

If benefits get cut for high earners, Social Security might start looking like a welfare program, making it an easier target for budget cuts down the line.

See Also: Maker of the $60,000 foldable home has 3 factory buildings, 600+ houses built, and big plans to solve housing — you can become an investor for $0.80 per share today.

Beyond Social Security, Galloway has strong opinions on retirement investing. In his book, "The Algebra of Wealth," he warns that putting too much money into risky investments—like growth stocks and derivatives—can be a huge mistake. 

"Diversification is the kevlar that protects you—with it, bad decisions will still hurt, but they won't prove fatal," he said, arguing that if all your savings are in just a few risky assets, a bad bet could wipe you out. He stresses that the goal isn't to chase the biggest returns—it's to build long-term security.

Still, some experts think a little risk is necessary. Per Vanguard, a well-balanced mix of stocks and bonds tends to generate the best long-term returns, and having some exposure to growth stocks can actually boost wealth over time.

Read Next:

• 69% of Millionaires Never Earned A Six-Figure Salary – Here Are 2 Things They Do To Get Their First $1 Million, According To Dave Ramsey
• Many are using retirement income calculators to check if they’re on pace — here’s a breakdown on what’s behind this formula.