And our Debt.. If we cut EVERYTHING other than Social Security, Medicare, and Defense, we still wouldn't balance the budget. So if people are actually serious about cutting the debt, look at those programs.
the thing that people who want to cut social security forget that social security is SELF REPLENISHING. people on SS die every day and people are added to the rolls everyday and the population continues to pay into it every day. it is a BENEFIT program.. if social security was left alone and not taken out of that account to pay for things like wars there would be no issue with social security ever running out.
I agree with you. It is a benefit program. Lock Box baby. Also, I think employees, not employers should be able to opt out. If I want to be responsible for my income when I retire I should be able to keep the 6.2% of my income and add it into the accounts I want, or maybe lower the tax rate to 1% so that I am still contributing for the betterment of society. You can keep the employer payroll tax (maybe shrink it for opt out employees) so that it is there to pay the poor and disabled. That may help with the ability to keep it solvent for years to come. Sure there would be less money coming in, but it might be more incentive for employers to offer better retirement contributions for their employees as well as keep people who don't need it from collecting on it after they retire.
But to Blockhead, What is the point of this thread? I don't think you can convince anyone this is a good idea. I mean there are so many arbitrary aspects to it. Only about half the population has any tax liability...you do realize that in most elections about that many actually vote, which ones do you think are voting? the unemployed/under employed person who wants to get back on their feet or the system leech?...
I would be fine with instituting a candidate test. As in a person who votes should have to spell out a basic knowledge of the elections he/she plans to vote for...that would be a far more useful change to voting structure. Which would you rather have?
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
And our Debt.. If we cut EVERYTHING other than Social Security, Medicare, and Defense, we still wouldn't balance the budget. So if people are actually serious about cutting the debt, look at those programs.
the thing that people who want to cut social security forget that social security is SELF REPLENISHING. people on SS die every day and people are added to the rolls everyday and the population continues to pay into it every day. it is a BENEFIT program.. if social security was left alone and not taken out of that account to pay for things like wars there would be no issue with social security ever running out.
I agree with you. It is a benefit program. Lock Box baby. Also, I think employees, not employers should be able to opt out. If I want to be responsible for my income when I retire I should be able to keep the 6.2% of my income and add it into the accounts I want, or maybe lower the tax rate to 1% so that I am still contributing for the betterment of society. You can keep the employer payroll tax (maybe shrink it for opt out employees) so that it is there to pay the poor and disabled. That may help with the ability to keep it solvent for years to come. Sure there would be less money coming in, but it might be more incentive for employers to offer better retirement contributions for their employees as well as keep people who don't need it from collecting on it after they retire.
But to Blockhead, What is the point of this thread? I don't think you can convince anyone this is a good idea. I mean there are so many arbitrary aspects to it. Only about half the population has any tax liability...you do realize that in most elections about that many actually vote, which ones do you think are voting? the unemployed/under employed person who wants to get back on their feet or the system leech?...
I would be fine with instituting a candidate test. As in a person who votes should have to spell out a basic knowledge of the elections he/she plans to vote for...that would be a far more useful change to voting structure. Which would you rather have?
the point of the thread is to inflame and troll - and he got some fish to bite.
And our Debt.. If we cut EVERYTHING other than Social Security, Medicare, and Defense, we still wouldn't balance the budget. So if people are actually serious about cutting the debt, look at those programs.
the thing that people who want to cut social security forget that social security is SELF REPLENISHING. people on SS die every day and people are added to the rolls everyday and the population continues to pay into it every day. it is a BENEFIT program.. if social security was left alone and not taken out of that account to pay for things like wars there would be no issue with social security ever running out.
I agree with you. It is a benefit program. Lock Box baby. Also, I think employees, not employers should be able to opt out. If I want to be responsible for my income when I retire I should be able to keep the 6.2% of my income and add it into the accounts I want, or maybe lower the tax rate to 1% so that I am still contributing for the betterment of society. You can keep the employer payroll tax (maybe shrink it for opt out employees) so that it is there to pay the poor and disabled. That may help with the ability to keep it solvent for years to come. Sure there would be less money coming in, but it might be more incentive for employers to offer better retirement contributions for their employees as well as keep people who don't need it from collecting on it after they retire.
But to Blockhead, What is the point of this thread? I don't think you can convince anyone this is a good idea. I mean there are so many arbitrary aspects to it. Only about half the population has any tax liability...you do realize that in most elections about that many actually vote, which ones do you think are voting? the unemployed/under employed person who wants to get back on their feet or the system leech?...
I would be fine with instituting a candidate test. As in a person who votes should have to spell out a basic knowledge of the elections he/she plans to vote for...that would be a far more useful change to voting structure. Which would you rather have?
I think in theory the bold part sounds good, but there would have to be some sort of regulations that you have to invest it. A lot of people otherwise would opt out, then not invest it and end up needing some sort of gov't assistance when they are retired and broke.
It's like protecting us from ourselves, but it is also helping protect other tax dollars from helping you in retirement. Lock box it up, and move on to the next political hot potato.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Thats the whole point of SS... Its just another fund for the gov.
Why would anyone think that the gov. taking your money, only to give it back to you when you retire is a good program.
because you are not paying the government. you are paying the government to distribute those funds to the elderly and infirmed that would surely die without that money. the government is not profitting from it. it is an investment that you will get back at age 65 or if you become disabled or if your spouse dies, or whatever. if the government left it is a lock box like gore so famously wanted to do, it would be solvent for a hundred years. but since we are stealing from it to pay for wars and make sure a budget might balance on paper it is in some trouble. if we left it alone and the rich and corporations paid their share we would be fine.
but yeah, lets not let those people who receive it vote... :roll:
That's not technically accurate. The Treasury can't "steal" from SS per se. Rather, those that manage SS are required to "invest" in Treasury bonds, much as any money market fund that you personally participate in would. The moral hazard at play is in the fact that those who decide to invest in those Tbonds are the same or similar folks that decide how to spend the proceeds from said Treasury auctions.
Maybe just give the people who pay the most in income taxes more time.
They don't have to wait in line at the DMV for example, premier lines.
They can drive in the carpool lane solo.
I think that those who don't pay an income tax should be disqualified from voting, or, alternatively, those on public assistance should be DQed from voting.
If you don't agree, Why?
Please take into account the point of a system in which people not paying taxes and getting free money, simply vote to keep the system in place and growing. Leaving a party an easy platform of wanting the growth of "entitlements"...
Everyone in this country pays some sort of tax. The really poor are actually hit the hardest through sales tax, inflation, etc. I have no problem with the poor paying no income tax. I'd be all in favor of raising the income level on which people pay no income tax.
Instead of focusing on how you think they are ruining our economy, how about focusing on the real crooks in our gov't that are paying their friends in banks/wall st/corporations.
Maybe just give the people who pay the most in income taxes more time.
They don't have to wait in line at the DMV for example, premier lines.
They can drive in the carpool lane solo.
Comments
I agree with you. It is a benefit program. Lock Box baby. Also, I think employees, not employers should be able to opt out. If I want to be responsible for my income when I retire I should be able to keep the 6.2% of my income and add it into the accounts I want, or maybe lower the tax rate to 1% so that I am still contributing for the betterment of society. You can keep the employer payroll tax (maybe shrink it for opt out employees) so that it is there to pay the poor and disabled. That may help with the ability to keep it solvent for years to come. Sure there would be less money coming in, but it might be more incentive for employers to offer better retirement contributions for their employees as well as keep people who don't need it from collecting on it after they retire.
But to Blockhead, What is the point of this thread? I don't think you can convince anyone this is a good idea. I mean there are so many arbitrary aspects to it. Only about half the population has any tax liability...you do realize that in most elections about that many actually vote, which ones do you think are voting? the unemployed/under employed person who wants to get back on their feet or the system leech?...
I would be fine with instituting a candidate test. As in a person who votes should have to spell out a basic knowledge of the elections he/she plans to vote for...that would be a far more useful change to voting structure. Which would you rather have?
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
the point of the thread is to inflame and troll - and he got some fish to bite.
I think in theory the bold part sounds good, but there would have to be some sort of regulations that you have to invest it. A lot of people otherwise would opt out, then not invest it and end up needing some sort of gov't assistance when they are retired and broke.
It's like protecting us from ourselves, but it is also helping protect other tax dollars from helping you in retirement. Lock box it up, and move on to the next political hot potato.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Not that I support Blockhead's position on this.
They don't have to wait in line at the DMV for example, premier lines.
They can drive in the carpool lane solo.
Woot
Everyone in this country pays some sort of tax. The really poor are actually hit the hardest through sales tax, inflation, etc. I have no problem with the poor paying no income tax. I'd be all in favor of raising the income level on which people pay no income tax.
Instead of focusing on how you think they are ruining our economy, how about focusing on the real crooks in our gov't that are paying their friends in banks/wall st/corporations.