The Real Wealth Gap--The 'death tax' for the other 98 percent of us - Social Security

techcentralstation ^ | 02/19/2003 | David Boaz

[SJackson]

the whole thing is moot to me, anyway. I only got in about 20 years of work, before becoming permanently and totally disabled by a spinal condition.(which went misdiagnosed for 18 years, as i suffered with incredible pain) but if privatization means that what I get will have to be reduced to pay for it, i'm against it. I get SSD, not SSDI, so my amount is based on what I paid into the system.

I think your concern is caused more by the fearmongering done about privatization plans than the plans themselves.

First, the status quo, there WILL be a reduction in benefits in a couple of decades. Will they reduce benefits across the board, slowing the growth, increase the retirement age, or means test it, denying benefits to the “rich”, as Clinton essentially did by taxing social security, I’d guess the last two. If you’re “rich”, your benefits could go down under the present plan, as they did under Clinton. If you’re not “rich”, they probably wouldn’t.

None ot the privatization plans I’ve seen (or that would have ANY chance of passing) would reduce benefits for the disabled (I know that’s not you), or for American’s over about 50 or 55 today.

Essentially they’re designed to provide younger workers to effectively offset that decrease that IS coming with higher market returns.

Using a highly simplistic example of your example of the $50,000 worker, he might divert a quarter of his contribtributions ($800 of $3,200 per year), accepting for example a 35% reduction in his “guaranteed” retirement income, in the expectation that over time his private account will offset the reduction in income which is coming.

The big problem with these plans politically isn’t financial, they would work, it’s the fact that politically it forces us to stare the eventual insolvency of social security in the face, a task neither party has been up to as yet. And, of course, there's no reason privatization couldn't be completely voluntary, probably the fairest alternative for those in the 40 to 60 age range.

[Area51]

Perhaps instead of calling names you ought to check your facts.

There is Case Law where Idividuals have filed suit against the Government for claims against SSI and the Courts have ruled that The Government has NO Obligation to pay you a dime. Politically yes, Legally no.

[Area51]

And for the record, again SSI IS A TAX. NOT A PENSION PLAN.

[SamAdams76]

And half the tax is concealed by pretending that the employer pays it. But economists agree that a tax on wages ultimately comes out of the worker's pocket.

Good point. And I might add that when companies subsidize health care coverage for their employees, it comes out of the worker's pockets as well. When I first went into management 10 years ago, the "fringe" benefits for each employee was 28% of their salary. Now it is 40% of an employee's salary. What this means that if an employee receives a salary of $40,000, he is actually receiving $56,000 in salary, because the employer is paying $16,000 of it in the form of FICA, health and dental, insurance, etc. For those who wonder why wages appear to be stagnant, this is why.

[Area51]

The Case For Responsible Social Security Reform.

http://www.forourgrandchildren.tv/
To ensure that Social Security is there to provide for our children, grandchildren and the generations to come, The Committee For Good Common Sense, a non-partisan civic group, has created For Our Grandchildren. This new initiative is committed to saving and strengthening Social Security by giving today's workers the option to invest a portion of their Social Security payroll taxes into a Personal Retirement Account (PRA).

The need for such reform has never been greater. According to the 2001 Social Security Trustee's Report, the cornerstone of a secure retirement for millions of Americans is about to run out of money. In the year 2015, when the Baby Boomers begin to retire, Social Security will start spending more money than it takes in. And by 2038, Social Security will completely broke. No one wants to see taxes raised, debt increased, or retirement benefits cut or eliminated, but it could happen. The Supreme Court has ruled that any money paid into Social Security belongs to the government -- and not the taxpayers. In fact, none of us has a legally protected right to our benefits, and Congress is free to reduce or even eliminate benefits for any group of Americans.

A Project of The Committee for Good Common Sense P.0. Box 3539, Washington, DC 20007 202-337-4990 Copyright © 2001, The Committee for Good Common Sense

You apology is accepted in advance! :)

[Free the USA]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[staytrue]

the wealth gap between rich and poor grew wider as the stock market boomed in the late 1990s.

Seems to me during the 2000-2003 the wealth gap should have shrunk by about 8 trillion dollars. I think it should be time to have a "rich-aid" charity concert to help all the rich people who have become poor in the stock market melt down.

[SJackson]

If you were to check the IRS Website you'll note that employers withold FICA TAXes from their employees, which they send to the IRS along with thier own FICA TAX payment. The selfemployed, of course, pay the Self-Employment Tax. Like income tax, or the medicare tax, FICA is a TAX.

[ThinkDifferent]

OK, name me something, anything that costs less now than it did 30 years ago.

Computers, TVs, and many, many other technological products.

[hobbes1]

You beat me to it. I spoke with an African-American friend of mine a while back about this. I pointed out to him that a white woman who worked with him could expect to collect 120 more SS checks than he would. I asked him how fair did he think that was. He was convinced of the need for a privatized SS system after.

ROTFL...I go school at Night (Political Sci. major) And my uber liberal Prof is totally against the idea, but my entire clas save me and three others is Black.

Once I put the life expectancy facts out, they were all Convinced.

[hobbes1]

EVERY person that I know that has paid into S.S. recieves it when they retire.

And the black man that dies at 65 ?

[FITZ]

Wrong, SSI is a TAX. The US Government is under NO obligation to pay you a penny irregardless of how much you paid in.

People seem to forget this, SS is just a welfare program and what we pay into it is just another very big tax. It isn't our money once the government confiscates it, Bush can decide to send it to Mexico if he chooses and leave us with none of it.

[FITZ]

Now you're just getting silly. EVERY person that I know that has paid into S.S. recieves it when they retire. (or prove that they have become disabled, etc.) You can't say the same for private pensions or the stock market.

That's why S.S. is a tax & welfare plan not a retirement plan, if you choose to work until you're 75, you won't get "your" money, they won't give it to you unlike a private pension or stock market.

[hobbes1]

Actually, Joe, most things are less dear now, than they were thirty years ago.

Bread, Milk, Gasoline etc.....That's what a Rising standard of living means. A person can produce said good for their own consumption using a smaller aggregate amount of their labor.....

[hobbes1]

Presuming he has dependants, otherwise his money is stolen....