Posted on 10/12/2011 7:56:16 AM PDT by Kaslin
You gotta show me a link before I believe that one.
I don’t believe that 15.3% is the right number. The social security portion is 6.2% from you, and 6.2% from your employer. But if it suddenly vanished, it doesn’t mean that your employer would raise your pay by 6.2%. No, your employer knows that you live on your take-home pay. If SS were to vanish, he would pocket the money. He would have no incentive to give you a raise.
Your employer has all sorts of costs due to you. More electricity, office supplies, uniform, training, benefits, whatever. The rule of thumb is that an employee costs an employer about 150% of his wages, of which 6.2% is SS. Yeah, cost of business, but a cost of business that American employers have learned to deal with. Eliminating SS would only gain you personally 6.2% (less additional income taxes) which you’d barely notice. Did you notice Obama’s famous “tax cut” when he reduced SS withholdings from 6.2% to 4%? I didn’t notice it.
Bottomline anyway is that SS will never be eliminated, it is just not practical. Hate it if you will, it’s like a drug addiction. We can’t quit cutting checks to retirees, and we need the withholdings to fund those checks. No one has come up with a practical way to break the cycle. (All those private investment schemes are both really, really socialist, unnecessary because we already have IRAs, and funded by brand new borrowing in a brand new entitlement program.)
So quit whining and accept it - you’ll lose 6.2% of your wages to it as long as you work, and after you retire you’ll get back something like 33% of your wages (42% was promised, but that promise may not be met if you are young). Deal with it.
I’d like to tell them to give me back all the money I paid in and I will invest it on my own. Certainly cannot do any worse. They are nothing but thieves.
Must be “you don’t want to believe it”.. then..
All mannar of supposed disabled on on this system..
Its the catch them all socialist trap..
Surely if this shocking fact is true you can provide something other than your opinion to support it?
They cannot give you back what they don’t have..
SAA has gone to the General Fund for decades now..
Its like the lottery in the States was for education(they said)..
ALL States just use lottery funds for general fund needs..
Once they have “your money” its used for socialism..
That makes “YOU” a socialist..
True.. “its hard to admit” but it is true..
“WE” are all socialists..whether we want to be or NOT..
AND we elect folks like Romney and McLaim who are masked as “conservatives”..
Serves “US” right.. we have the federal government “WE” deserve..
Romney, Perry, and probably Caine are all socialists..
NEWT has the ONLY Plan to change things..
Did I say “ONLY”... ah yes I did..
Caines 9/9/9 plan could and WILL easily become 12/12/12 or 33/33/33 in time..
Rope-a-Dope don’t work on ME..
I don't believe that is always true. We recently had our health insurance premiums reduced because of a low claims rate, and the difference was given to the emplyees as an increase in take home pay. Most employees with contracts have such arrangements spelled out.
I, and many other Freepers are self employed, and we know for a fact, that ALL of that money comes out of our pockets, not some mythical ‘employer’.
If you want to believe that uncorns exist, and that the marketplace for employees wouldn’t force employers to give that money to employees, be my guest. The health insurance they provide for employees is also free.
It’s your kind of thinking that has caused many of the countries financial problems.
http://www.nasi.org/learn/socialsecurity/who-gets
http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/Issues/2002/Dec/WhoGetsSocialSecurity.htm
http://misunderstoodfinance.blogspot.com/2011/03/who-gets-more-than-they-paid-into.html
** You’re lazy!... Are you a democrat?..
These links TOTALLY conflict with your statement LOL.
34/54 does not equal 1/3
34/54=.63
1/3=.33
Actually, if you did that, you'd be in prison - for failing to pay income taxes.
That was the case when Dad died in ‘08 at 86. His SS monthly payment was more than Mom’s, so her amount was dropped and she received his amount.
BTW, it’s 7.65% paid directly by the employee, plus 7.65% withheld from the employee by the employer.
Total, 15.30%
It’s disappointing that you, and so many others, have such a limited understanding of how capitalism works.
It’s the ignorance that Liberals thrive on.
“Also, military spouses are cut in half.”
Oh, but don’t forget, we have to PAY for that. It’s called the Survivor’s Benefit Plan. it costs hundreds of dollars a month.
My husband and i did the math and it would be cheaper for us to buy him a $1,000,000 life insurance policy at age 41 than to buy the SBP.
The best part? Once my husband dies (IF he goes first) and his military retirement check is cut in half, I STILL HAVE TO KEEP PAYING hundreds of dollars a month to keep that little bit coming in. (I believe that it’ll work out to about 30% of what I would be getting. So I have to pay 30% of my benefits in order to keep my benefits. That’s what I get for giving up college and a career to follow him around the planet during my prime earning years.)
There are no free rides in the military any more. We pay for our benefits, and we pay a LOT.
My bad. I just checked and they changed the rules since I last looked into it. i won’t have to keep paying if hubby dies.
Does this mean my long gone ex can only max out at 50% of my benefit? The last ten years thinking she would get my benefit rate if she outlived me has really ticked me off.
Let me put my 12.4% plus the 15% into an IRA, and I'll be better off.
Because I'll have almost 83% more in my IRA.
That’s good.
You are right, but the American people don’t believe that. They genuinely believe the employer pays “his” half in your name, and you will never convince the sheeple otherwise.
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.