Replies

This is one situation where the federal government can be of great help.

By doing MUCH LESS.

Much less regulation, much less interference, much less paperwork, much less spending, much less taxation—but here is where it gets interesting.

Tax cuts can be targeted to wean the public off the largess of Social Security, Medicare, and even a lot of pension benefits.

It’s a simple idea, really.

The public loudly objects to the idea of “means testing” to receive benefits, because that is money they paid into “the system”, and they want it back. And, they’re right.

So the way around this is to offer those “of means” a better deal. If they are still earning taxable money, offer them tax breaks that are somewhat *larger* than the money they would have gotten from the government.

That is, you can *choose* to take your Social Security checks amounting to $1,000 a year (for example), OR, you can get tax breaks on your NEW income worth an *actual* $1,500. So, by NOT taking the government check, you actually get $500 MORE.

Incredibly fair, because if you don’t have income, and are dependent on that SS check for $1,000, you still get that money. *Your* choice.

But the end result is that a lot of pressure is taken off the SS system, without screwing anybody.

At the same time, doing tax cuts this way is a great stimulus to the economy. So instead of just one good effect, the economy gets two good effects.