Posted on 08/26/2020 12:18:05 PM PDT by rintintin
Repealing the payroll tax as proposed by President Donald Trump without putting in place a new source of funding for Social Security would mean disability payments would end in mid-2021 and payments to the elderly would stop in 2023, according to the program’s chief actuary.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
Deep State strikes again.
Bump
Use the payroll of all those worthless overpaid freeloaders up on the hill. 535 members of the house and senate with their combined staff.
If President Trump can work for free, they can too.
We can argue over how incorrect I might have been, but I don’t think we disagree that for the last 50 years (if not the last 90) SS has been a pay as you go system. It’s not segregated from general funds in any meaningful way.
“They scrap federal tax and leave fica”
FICA is the payroll tax. It’s the tax that Trump is talking about scrapping. FICA - the payroll tax - funds Social Security
See:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fica.asp
Why Trump would talk about eliminating the funding source for Social Security just before an election, is beyond me
I have a friend who actually thinks that there is a separate Social Security fund. She's all upset about this tax cut. <
Of course it's the media that's pumping her full of this nonsense.
What an idjit.
“ How many times do the administration people have to say this: they want to defer the payroll tax and when they find a suitable replacement, forgive the tax that was deferred”
I wish you were right. But Trump said explicitly he wants to eliminate the payroll tax permanently when he is re-elected. I didn’t read that - I heard and watched it with my own eyes and ears, during one of his press conferences within the last two weeks
I was astounded, because that raises big uncertainties about Social Security funding- and he’s talking about this during the runup to the election. Not politically smart IMO
“Repealing the payroll tax as proposed by President Donald Trump without putting in place a new source of funding for Social Security would mean disability payments would end in mid-2021 and payments to the elderly would stop in 2023, according to the program’s chief actuary.”
Why is the payroll tax being included in the social security tax. Two separate taxes which should never touch each other. Wasn’t that the reason for the “lock box?”
It never was.
No matter what the claimed reason for social security was back in the day it was really about getting Congress more money to spend right then and there so they could, in the words of The Gov from Blazing Saddles, secure their phones baloney jobs.
Typical of progressive money grabs (like those generous public employee retirement funds) those who benefited from instituting it would be long gone before the piper came around for his due.
It’s THE SOCIAL CONTRACT.
It’s an involuntary contract which means it’s invalid.
Which, I don’t remember signing by the way.
Dig up LBJ so he can explain to you why SS is an obligation of the General Fund.
As I understand it, fica is only SS and Medicare, and Trump’s EO only defers the employee paid portion. Employers would still be liable for their part. The federal income tax as well as state and local taxes would still be in place.
Why is the payroll tax being included in the social security tax
Because the payroll tax (otherwise known as the FICA) tax IS the Social Security tax. It’s the payroll tax - 7.5 percent taken out of every dollar you earn and an equal amount paid by your employer - that funds Social Security and Medicare.
See: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fica.asp
Maybe you’re confusing the payroll tax with the income tax, something that not all workers pay and that isn’t earmarked for social security
Phoney baloney ... darn autocorrect!
Well it really started in the 2000 campaign when both candidates started talking about a “lockbox” completely ignoring the fact that there was already jurisprudence saying such a thing was not possible. And of course the media’s regular harping on when SocSec will “run out”. I means it is fund accounting, the fund can run dry, and if Congress really wants to make sure none of them get re-elected than they could toss up their hands and say “oh well, socsec is dead”. But they’ll play fund accounting magic and “move” the money from other funds.
The federal income tax as well as state and local taxes would still be in place.
Right, but since it’s the payroll tax (FICA) that funds Social Security, eliminating the payroll tax would scrap the main source of revenue for Social Security.
I think many people are quite confused.
Yes, the President said, and I saw it, that he wants to eliminate it, which is saying he wants to eliminate Social Security.
Not a good idea.
“It was a fiction the instant the program started.”
When Social Security started, it was the norm for retirees to move in with their kids/grandkids and help raise those kids.
That was when there was large tight knit families.
Social Security was designed to be a supplemental income, it was never intended to be what people think of it today as being something to live independently.
It’s the byproduct of the liberalization of society. Breaking up families, fostering a sense of entitlement, etc.
It’s been a while since I saw a pay stub, but if I remember, there were separate deductions for federal income tax, state income tax and fica. The former two paid solely by the employee and the latter paid 50/50 employee/employer.
When Social Security started, it was the norm for retirees to move in with their kids/grandkids and help raise those kids.
When Social Security started, tens of millions of seniors were in poverty from the depression. It was a response to major economic dislocation
By the way, an overwhelming majority of Republicans in both the Senate and the House voted for the Social Security legislation
And once if it’s most prominent supporters later was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower
These days, it is the main source of income for a big percentage of seniors, especially given the rampant age discrimination in the workplace where older people are the first to be laid off, and find getting a job nearly impossible. (Do you know any employers who hire people in their 60s?)
The GOP gains NOTHING today by opposing Social Security.
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.