[drbuzzard]

>That’s where I’m coming from - “means testing” is no different from “tax the rich”.

>Exactamundo.

I hate to break it to people, but we’ve had a progressive income tax system for quite some time now. It’s now a bolt from the blue that such things exist. Making a broke program slightly less broke by means testing is not taxing the rich. The safety net provided by said program will still provide for them in case their assets are wiped out.

[abb]

I hate to break it to people, but we’ve had a progressive income tax system for quite some time now.

So that makes it OK to do MORE YET of the same?

[FreeReign]

I hate to break it to people, but we’ve had a progressive income tax system for quite some time now.

I hate to break it to you but I don't think there is a person here who doesn't know that.

It’s now a bolt from the blue that such things exist. Making a broke program slightly less broke by means testing is not taxing the rich.

You can think what you want, but means testing SS is like taxing the rich.

[skeeter]

Making a broke program slightly less broke by means testing is not taxing the rich. The safety net provided by said program will still provide for them in case their assets are wiped out.

At least you're not overselling your idea.

Tell me, do you really think there will be ANY incentive to do away with SS tax once the government has adopted Lindsey's plan?

On the contrary, once they've converted it to a pure welfare program it will be even more difficult to reform, now that it will have become better suited to the statists' favorite style of political demagoguery.