spineless politicians or soulless immoral Americans?

LadyJazzer wrote: Gee, that must be it... It must be the fault of the "47%"...again....After paying all that money into the system, (including the retirees, the elderly, the disabled, the veterans, the active-duty military), they expect to get what they paid for...and "get to keep sucking on the socialist teat."

[sigh] The AynRandroids are at it again... I guess they'll never learn... By the way, did you guys get the memo? YOU LOST THE ELECTION with that drivel....

:crying2: I admit there needs to be a two-sided solution, but to pay debts created when we haven't had people pay in enough to fund Medicare, Medicaid, and SS, you are just going to run out of money or have to print it like Zimbwabe.

Sure, you get $1400 per month Social Security benefits, but that $1400 only buys one week of groceries.

:faint: Even today people are whining that they are going to have to start paying 2% to Social Security, well, it you want it when you are 67, you have to pay for it now.

FredHayek wrote: Even today people are whining that they are going to have to start paying 2% to Social Security, well, it you want it when you are 67, you have to pay for it now.

And I don't disagree with that... In fact, it's been my position for YEARS that ALL income be subject to SS payment taxes... You've heard me say it over and over. Get rid of the $106,800 limit. The system would pay for itself for a couple of hundred years.

LadyJazzer wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Even today people are whining that they are going to have to start paying 2% to Social Security, well, it you want it when you are 67, you have to pay for it now.

And I don't disagree with that... In fact, it's been my position for YEARS that ALL income be subject to SS payment taxes... You've heard me say it over and over. Get rid of the $106,800 limit. The system would pay for itself for a couple of hundred years.

Wow what a way to start off the new year I find myself agreeing with LJ :clink:

Now if I can just get her to come around on a couple of other issues

:clink:

FredHayek wrote: [ :crying2: I admit there needs to be a two-sided solution, but to pay debts created when we haven't had people pay in enough to fund Medicare, Medicaid, and SS, you are just going to run out of money or have to print it like Zimbwabe.

Why people? Why not corporations Fred? Why not the super rich?

In the 1960's and 70's corporations paid $1.50 in taxes for every dollar PEOPLE paid...Now they pay .25 cents for every dollar a taxpayer pays..Understand?

We have to turn back the clock, they have to pay more, and the Conifer Chamber of commerce recently suggested here a corporate tax holiday for a year or so.....Retards!

And furthermore, we had a maximum wage here in America during the glory years between 1930 and 1980...Thats when the middle class was created..Everything over a couple million dollars was taxed at 96%...Understand? You got be filthy rich, but everything OVER a couple million was not yours and corporations and the wealthy went along with it- and do you know why? Because we were about to go communist after the great depression and that was a lot better deal than the communists were gonna offer them...FDR created, and corporations payed for social security, unemployment insurance, job programs...etc..etc..etc..Capitalism had to fix the depression because capitalism created it..Well here we are again..Corporations need to fix it, or lose it all..They are gonna pay to fix this mess...again- not the PEOPLE..

LadyJazzer wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Even today people are whining that they are going to have to start paying 2% to Social Security, well, it you want it when you are 67, you have to pay for it now.

And I don't disagree with that... In fact, it's been my position for YEARS that ALL income be subject to SS payment taxes... You've heard me say it over and over. Get rid of the $106,800 limit. The system would pay for itself for a couple of hundred years.

lol More soaking the rich? Very fair LJ. Especially when they are looking at means testing. "Yes, rich people, we want you to pay Social Security taxes on all your income, and if you do that, you won't get to actually use it when you retire."
(Unless you manage to spend all you have before you reach 65.)

And VL? Corporations and employers were paying their matching Social Security taxes the years that Americans weren't. So they were holding up their end.

CinnamonGirl wrote:

a

Good picture... I like to see a man who's happy knowing that he is winning....

FredHayek wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Even today people are whining that they are going to have to start paying 2% to Social Security, well, it you want it when you are 67, you have to pay for it now.

And I don't disagree with that... In fact, it's been my position for YEARS that ALL income be subject to SS payment taxes... You've heard me say it over and over. Get rid of the $106,800 limit. The system would pay for itself for a couple of hundred years.

lol More soaking the rich? Very fair LJ. Especially when they are looking at means testing. "Yes, rich people, we want you to pay Social Security taxes on all your income, and if you do that, you won't get to actually use it when you retire."
(Unless you manage to spend all you have before you reach 65.)

That is right, it is not so simple as raising the SS 106K limit. You would also need to revise and limit the payout calculation for higher earners to make it work. That will probably be the way it gets fixed eventually. When the crisis hits. No need to fix it now!