social security

[jpwhite]

We as democrats have to do something to fix social security that does not involve turning it all over to the whims of the stock market. The best way to ensure that social security never goes broke is to raise the limit on the FICA tax from 90,000 to one million dollars. :think:


Let me say that again in my bad Dr. Evil voice, "One.....million.....dollars..."


The social security program is what Al Franken and others call a legacy tax. Our parents paid into it for their parents and we pay into it for our parents. When the time comes our kids will pay into it for us. It's a great system and as long as we raise the FICA limit there should be no shortage for social security.

James
[e-mail]

ps. Why is it that if your kids have kids then that makes you grand, and if those kids have kids then it makes you great?

:hi:

[Union Thug]

1. I agree completely. Why should the rich be exempted from

contributing their fair share to the most basic social insurance plan this country has to offer? This is the least that we can do for our elderly and our disabled.

[lpbk2713]

2. And now that we have a Dem Congress .....

Rehire the IRS auditors that Monkey-Boy had fired whose specific job it was to audit the wealthy taxpayers. He was looking out for his friends when he had them fired.

[Selatius]

3. While we're at it, could we tell the IRS to lay off the poor people for once?

They seem more interested in going after poorer people for back taxes than rich people when they abuse tax shelters and attempt to hide money from taxation using loopholes and other accounting gimmicks.

[Sadie5]

5. I agree

to a certain point. The level should be raised, but until the SS fund is set aside from the general fund, and politicians are forbidden from stealing from the fund for their wars and other pet projects it will never be fixed.

[Greyhound]

4. Why leave any cap at all?

What is the logic of a small business owner that grosses a million in a given year paying exactly the same amount as Warren Buffet, T. Boon Pickens, or Bill Gates?

If taxes are the price we pay for civilization, why should those that benefit the most from the system be excused from paying all of their share to support it?

[LSK]

8. because it would anger the rich so much that it would not pass

You have to do is slowly and in increments.

Although I agree with your basic premise, I just also like to think of things realistically.

[Selatius]

10. Well, poor people can get very angry, too

And poor people have the votes. Nothing strikes more fear into monopoly capitalists than angry workers.

[LSK]

11. but poor people cant write $500,000 checks to the GOP

[Greyhound]

13. and they do and will continue to for the foreseeable, so what is to lose

by making them pay?

[Warpy]

6. Raising the laughably low limit will have to be done, but

40% of our OASDI payments go into the general fund along with income taxes in order to mask the true costs of tax cuts to billionaires and corporations.

Until we get overpayments out of Congress's greedy hands, raising the limit, raising the tax rate, or other fixes will just be another back door income tax on the poorest, just like it was when Reagan raised the rate six times to fudge the books on his reckless tax cuts.

We know how to fix it. We just need Congress to let go of it first.

[LSK]

7. I agree, although I dont know if we need to go up to 1 million

I dont think it would pass because the big money would be screaming. Maybe get there slowly thou.

I do agree that the answer is to raise the FICA limit.

[fasttense]

9. NO, NO, No

Ever since the Raygun DOUBLED, yes doubled, the baby boomers Social Security tax, we have been paying BOTH for our parent's retirement AND our own retirement.

That was little Raygun's Social Security reform.

The Baby Boomers were the first generation to do both. Which caused the creation of the SS trust fund (otherwise we would not need a trust fund and our current SS dollars would be paid out directly to our parents), that allowed Raygun, Clinton and the bushes to borrow from the SS trust fund (and hide the true size of the budget deficit).

We do have a Social Security crisis. Our trust fund is gone. The money the government was saving for our retirement has been spent (or borrowed) by the government. We need to balance the budget, truly and for real. If we had a real balanced budget we would not need to up anyone's taxes.

And after the Baby boomer's retirement, you should have to pay HALF the Social Security Tax you are currently paying.

[Nite Owl]

12. I agree , it may not even have to go that

high but raising the cap would solve a big problem. And we have to make sure it doesn't keep getting raided for everything else they want to spend it on like financing their wars and tax cuts for those who aren't in need.

[Rosemary2205]

14. Relax

If we can get Al Gore's "lockbox" social security really only needs some minor tinkering. Problem is the US gov't depends on SS taxes to pay off all the bloat they spend money on. If SS is going to continue to go into the general fund then we are going to have to jack up taxes somewhere AND slash spending EVERYWHERE.

All the hype about SS being in deep cheese was pure propaganda designed to make people WANT to trust Wall street instead of Uncle Sam.

Quite frankly Medicare and the Pension insurance program is what is in deep doodoo.

[jpwhite]

15. I agree about not using SS money for other things

Yes, we need to stop SS money from being used for anything else but helping seniors and those who are handicapped. Someone mentioned that this would hurt the poor. That isn't true. Those who make less than 90,000 a year won't pay more into the social security fund. Only those who make more than 90,000 will. Let me give you a small example.

Let's say the percentage is 5% for the FICA tax. If a person makes 90,000 dollars they pay 4,500 into the social security fund. If they make 300,000 dollars they still only pay 4,500 dollars because only the first 90,000 of that person's income is taxable. If the limit was 500,000 then all of that person's income is taxable. So the person who makes 300,000 would then pay 15,000 dollars into the social security fund. Big difference.

We need to raise the limit and keep congress from dipping into the SS fund for other things. That fund is for our elderly and disabled. NOTHING ELSE!!!

James
[e-mail]

[lumberjack_jeff]

18. The Reagan SS tax hikes were a clever scam

The Reagan ss tax hikes were marketed to avoid the situation where a small number of workers would be supporting their baby boomer parents. It was a trojan horse wrapped in an appeal to younger workers better nature. In reality, as others have mentioned, they were used as a general fund windfall to allow Republicans to cut income taxes on corporations and the wealthy.

The money is invested in bonds that bear the words "backed by the full faith and credit of the United States of America". I intend to hold the corporations and the wealthy to whom it was loaned to that promise.

The Social security fund "crisis" has always been 20 years away. It never gets here. Why? Because the projections of the social security trustees are chronically pessimistic. 'Everyone lives to 100', 'Interest rates will be low', 'inflation will be high', 'no one will be employed', etc, etc.

I think that the likelihood of insolvency is overstated, and I also disagree with the idea that the only possible fix is yet another tax increase on workers. A worker making $100k/year is still a worker.

One risk of eliminating the earnings cap subject to tax is that if those making $900k/year don't get proportionately higher benefits, then it will (with some justification) be percieved as welfare.

[Target_For_Exterm]

16. What really irks me about Social Security is that back in

the 70s when I started working, they implemented a "forever fix" to solve the Social Security crisis. They upped our SS contributions so we were paying for current retirees, plus funding a baby boomer account in advance. In effect, we're paying double. Now the Republicans say SS should be scrapped and done away with. So we pay double, and get nothing. How, exactly, is that not the biggest no-return income tax American citizens have ever been stuck with? And the supposed "no-tax" Republicans are behind this?

The reason why we're now in this huge SS mess is because some politico many years ago decided that SS trust fund dollars designed to pay baby boomer costs should fund the deficit as a way to reduce foreign buying of US debt. But you have to pay the piper sometime, and that's where the problem comes in. Now the debt comes due and the babyboomers who have paid DOUBLE all these years now want to draw their money out. Out of the general fund. Where all those Republican earmarks get shipped back home to ensure the next round of elections goes the "right" way. And threatens that huge Republican tax cut for their rich cronies.

This is just a really, REALLY big Republican scam to rob from the poor and give to the rich.

[Norquist Nemesis]

17. ummm...that politico was Ronald Reagan

and the person that advised him to do it was Alan Greenspan.