Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Agreed, it matters not what you made, or how much you earn, only what you paid in premiums. The amount of money extracted from SS by the truly wealthy (say, a million dollars a year ) is way less than a half percent of the total SS payout. Gamers, deadbeat, (undeserved) ex spouses collect way way more. In any year, there are roughly 250k people earning a mil a year, though less than a third earn that more than 2 years in a row. The true wealthy donate far more dollars than any other class of people. Many don't even file for their SS.
For even the top 10% (households) which is between $100k and $120k, SS IS a large part of their retirement income. Heck,for the top 5%, which is about $170k a year, it is still a very important part.
If they want to further means test it, then increase the max to contribute and cap the payout. Thats no different than only counting the top 35 years when you work and contribute 40 or more at max. Or better, increase LTCGs by a percent and direct it to SS. Then the truly wealthy are paying and not getting
My liking? I do get emotional about a lot of causes but this isn't one of them. This is just facts and math (liberal tools, I know).
From what I have read of your posts in this thread you are not dealing in facts at all. Simply your opinion as to how the SS pie should be divided. You are certainly entitled to that opinion. What you are not entitled to do is to suggest that the current SS formula isn't already skewed to the benefit of low wage earners and that means testing is already imbedded in the SS system. I am not making a value judgement as to the appropriateness of that fact: simply that is how the system works.
Should it be skewed even more to low wage earners? Should there be some level of income at which SS payments are eliminated? Should all recipients take a haircut in 2033 if nothing is done to augment SS fund?
Those questions, and many more surrounding SS, need to be discussed. But don't for a second think that discussion is about facts. It is all about opinions as to who should carry the burden.
Location: Living near our Nation's Capitol since 2010
2,218 posts, read 3,463,154 times
Reputation: 6035
Tax me as appropriate, but far as I can recall, I PAID into SSI.
I am so tired of "giving" to folks who didn't contribute and being threatened to be denied payment because of my frugality all my life. I made sure I put enough away ..with SSI when the time comes....to cover my needs.
I know a lot of folks would disagree, but I do not see SSI as an entitlement ..meaning some sort of a hand out.
I worked all my life expecting to collect. Give it to me.
Facts and math are tools which are neither liberal nor conservative. They could be better described as objective and rational tools.
True; I get frustrated sometimes. The facts of which I speak are how badly skewed income and wealth are with a handful of families at the top raking in more than the bottom half of the population combined. The math is that the skew of taxation is that with the money flowing that way the only way to get enough into the system is to divert a bigger piece of that flow.
Here is an opinion that sums up where things stand - I think the median discretionary income (without any assistance factored in) in the US is near zero right now. I am sure it is at or below zero in several states.
If you agree with a previous conservative and don't condone letting people starve then some of our programs are going to redistribute wealth. That doesn't mean take all from anyone or make everyone equal; it is notwhere close to that. You can't let people opt out because they don't need it; we have to have some people putting more in than they get out. There really is no getting around that.
If you do condone letting people starve then we will just have to keep cancelling each other out at the polls.
One of the reasons we differ is because I realize that wealth and earned income are two different things. Wealth and income are very different and we are all to often misusing them in todays society. A person can very easily have 100 million in wealth and pay no taxes. Yup none Nada and they shouldn't either. If they have that 100 million and make no money off of it they have no income. If they have 100 million invested with a ten percent return of 10 million they will pay taxes on that 10 million and probably have no contributions to SS as a result because it isn't income subjected to SS taxation. All of this angst about the truly wealthy and SS is sorta comical in a number of ways. I wonder how many of the truly wealth class have ever really worked or just earned from their wealth and managed those gains. Question for you or anyone. Do Hedge fund managers pay into SS since their income is carried interest?
One of the reasons we differ is because I realize that wealth and earned income are two different things. Wealth and income are very different and we are all to often misusing them in todays society. A person can very easily have 100 million in wealth and pay no taxes. Yup none Nada and they shouldn't either. If they have that 100 million and make no money off of it they have no income. If they have 100 million invested with a ten percent return of 10 million they will pay taxes on that 10 million and probably have no contributions to SS as a result because it isn't income subjected to SS taxation. All of this angst about the truly wealthy and SS is sorta comical in a number of ways. I wonder how many of the truly wealth class have ever really worked or just earned from their wealth and managed those gains. Question for you or anyone. Do Hedge fund managers pay into SS since their income is carried interest?
I know the difference quite well. The stockpiling of wealth by making money that doesn't count as income is one of the reasons it is getting so concentrated. We have everything so complicated; we have tried to use taxes to engineer society instead of just raising revenue and now you have to tweak it here and there and people try to figure ways around it like it is a game. We can't just step back and say "we need X$ to help people who can't make ends meet; sometimes it is their fault but usually not but anyway we are going to see to their basic needs. Most of our citizens don't have much discretionary income so we have to put most of the burden on those that do. The numbers still work so you can have way, way more than anyone else but we have to get more from you to make this work."
I know the difference quite well. The stockpiling of wealth by making money that doesn't count as income is one of the reasons it is getting so concentrated. We have everything so complicated; we have tried to use taxes to engineer society instead of just raising revenue and now you have to tweak it here and there and people try to figure ways around it like it is a game. We can't just step back and say "we need X$ to help people who can't make ends meet; sometimes it is their fault but usually not but anyway we are going to see to their basic needs. Most of our citizens don't have much discretionary income so we have to put most of the burden on those that do. The numbers still work so you can have way, way more than anyone else but we have to get more from you to make this work."
Am I reading you right? You want to seize wealth?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
