Posted on 05/16/2013 8:34:20 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
If the bottom 50%, who probably barely paid into the SS system, would give up their checks, they could save Social Security too. See, two can play the class warfare game.
Better still....welfare parasites of all sorts (AFDC/SSDI,etc) can get off their a$$es and get jobs.And wetback parasites can go back to the Fourth World cesspools from which they came.
Reality? The 200 Billion would get spent on Solar Companies, Chevy Volts, and other boondoggles.
Same old ‘They’ve got alot of money, so they shouldn’t mind when we take it’ argument.
“Today’s wealthiest Americans have the same opportunity to put their country’s interests before their own. Politicians should not shy away from asking them to put forth not their lives but what are, for them, their modest Social Security checks.”
So, if a person lives frugally, works hard for 30-40 years and takes responsibility for their own retirement, then they just should sit back while their 13% of their earnings be redistributed. It is patriotic after all!
Yet if you never plan, spend more than you earn and fail to act like an adult, then you get rewarded by the government.
“You are going to get flamed by Freepers who fail to read that this is HIS RECOMMENDATION, LOL!”
HAHA! I almost picked up a hammer to pound away!
;-)
It's 85 percent maximum taxable. On an adjusted gross income under $50,000 no less. I pay the 85 max at the progressive rates. The wealthy may get a break there if their income is in investments rather than other types of income.
What was I thinking? Of course the government can manage money better than I.
Why should young people be forced to contribute to your retirement fund? That’s an excellent question.
This is the worst regressive tax - taxing people who are poorer to pay for people who have far more than them.
“Otherwise don’t ask me to give up what I have been paying into for over 38 years at my current age of 54.”
So what you’re saying is you’re willing to force others to work 38 years to pay for your retirement fund.
It was wrong to do to you - but you’re perpetuating the wrong by forcing others to do the same.
“Yet if you never plan, spend more than you earn and fail to act like an adult, then you get rewarded by the government.”
Some folks would think that a 1:1 worker/retiree ratio is unsustainable without sky high taxes (think close to 100 percent).
Are you willing to bankrupt America just to *get* what you’ve got owed?
“I remember reading that those over 65 own over half the wealth in America.”
So? What’s your point? The older a person gets, the more wealth that they SHOULD have. I certainly should be have more savings than my children. The longer one is earning, the more that the should have.
Which is why Obamacare is so evil. It actually redistributes wealth from the young to the old.
Yep. Take out the emotive references to "The Wealthy" and you find this claim to be simply that if 1% of the current beneficiaries gave up their benefits, we'd see savings. Sure we would. If 1% of the population is left-handed, brown-eyed people with six toes and they gave up their benefits, it would amount to exactly the same thing.
In practice one finds, however, that this sort of program changes behavior, and that "1% wealthiest" group tends to change when it is penalized for being so. This is, recall, based on "household income". Find a way to reduce household income and you're out of the group. And that, in practice, is precisely what happens.
That is not to say that some sort of means testing will not be instituted - it's inevitable. The system is inherently redistributive and so inherently unfair. This sort of tweaking will prolong its survival - one definition of "sustainable" - but sooner or later it will crash. And more to the point, in the meantime it will change the behavior of the people who currently support it. That is always a risky and unpredictable thing to do.
I’m not advocating the enslavement of others, I was citing the destructive behaviour that is being rewarded.
what will define rich?
anyone over 50k ala europe?
anyone not getting ebt freebie cards?
This is just a means test tax.
Jim Roumell, Founder of investment management firm Roumell Asset Management LLC.---Some investment manager/business man this dimwit is.
"The rich can save Social Security, by giving up their checks"---
Giving up their checks would give them less to invest with his firm. Some of those checks might even be direct deposit to accounts with his firm.
JC if giving an option to get out at 54 and save my contribution I would do it in a heartbeat. But I don’t have that option. I can fend for myself going forward as I have learned to save and live within my means with out any entitlements. But if the Gov wastes my tax dollars and SS payments on others who have not contributed then I too want my entitlement that I paid for over my working career.
What is rich? A person may have assets that aren’t easily turned over that make them millionaires but have no cash flow.
A million is rich now but when I was growing up someone who had 100K was rich soon you won’t be rich unless you have a billion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.