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.
SS ---is-- a govt program that TAXES every wage earner.
As citizens, we have a right to be concerned how that money is handled/mis-managed.
I take Mathjak's coments to mean-----------" don't voice an opinion about your state law on execution . Don't commit murder and it is none of your business"
---------ANY---govt tax'govt program IS the business of citizens like myself and the OP.
concerned is one thing, but doing nothing but complaining about it is fruitless. if it was something we could change great. but the reality is we individually can only voice our dis-pleasure and hope things change.
I am not envious of anybody.
However, after reading Mathjak107's posts for several years it appears he uses his posts to BRAAAAAAG about his wealth.
I am not impressed !
actually i don't brag , i try to encourage , motivate and dispel the old wives tales ,myths and financial ignorance that keeps americans from doing well.
i am very proud of my accomplishments but i am no rocket scientist and if i made it out of a nyc housing project successfully then anyone can.
if you want to call it bragging then i am okay with that. but if it makes one person take a look at their own lack of planning and goals and makes them say if that jerk mathjak can be a successful investor then i can too then i am happy.
believe me none of the things i have done , tried or even failed at were my own ideas. i just pick the brains of those way smarter then me and work with their thoughts and ideas .
Last edited by mathjak107; 02-18-2013 at 09:44 AM..
We need to have it means tested, that is if your Romney you don't get to draw from it. We need to take the tax up a small amount on it and even as is its good for almost 30 years. Medicare is a bit in need of help. Its a great program as is Medicare and we need to expand on it not shrink it.
The foreign interests will view too much inflation as a technical default. I have heard some therorize that unless the Fed bailed out the foreign banks, they may have already revolted from the dollar standard. So I think tax shifting from the FIRE sector and off industry, not just inflation, is more sound.
The thing is that almost all countries have too much debt, we all need to do the same thing. They would be correct. But our debts are valued in USD and they have gone along with the financial irresponsibility that lead to this current mess so they can deal with it. The way I set up this argument is about what to do about our domestically unfunded obligations. Upping taxes wont get a budget surplus. And I was talking about how to get a general budget surplus to start buying back the T-bills from the SS administration's fund. That is the big problem.
[/quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthStarDelight
Well, for one thing, we can do the obvious - reduce the number of people drawing Social Security by raising the retirement age, including the early option - I think 65/70 would be a good start, perhaps rising to 75/80 two or three generations hence.
My plan is to put the pay rate for
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthStarDelight
It's only fair we do this, as people are living longer, so we need to balance out the average years of retirement vs working years - if people are living longer, then they need to work longer in order to support the corresponding longer years of benefit draw-down.
The problem is that they aren't just living longer but they aren't having as good health when old as when young. Not as productive. We need those that are productive to work so they can carry those that aren't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthStarDelight
Another obvious way to cost costs is to reduce benefits, which we can do via inflation and reduced COLAs or just an outright benefit cut across the board, say 20% or so. The third method, and the one that has the greatest public support, is to lift the cap on Social Security earnings to unlimited instead of the $106k or so we have now - this would bring in additional revenue without raising the FICA rate.
Inflation particularly wage inflation is my ideal as it tend to bring with it high demand for labor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthStarDelight
What I DON'T want to see is an increase in the payroll levy, as that'd crush the economy - more people would be out of work (and not paying into the system), and those who do have work would have less to spend, cutting down the economy even further. That's why I wanna scream when certain a individual states that FICA needs to rise to 16% (32% total ) - now, that's insane, and would never fly - thank god. But even a 1% rise would suck, and should be avoided at all costs - let's do the other 3 alternatives I listed above first and see if that doesn't balance the books.
Upping wages are a tax on the rich. Taxing the economy more isn't what needs to happen.
Well, for one thing, we can do the obvious - reduce the number of people drawing Social Security by raising the retirement age, including the early option - I think 65/70 would be a good start, perhaps rising to 75/80 two or three generations hence. It's only fair we do this, as people are living longer, so we need to balance out the average years of retirement vs working years - if people are living longer, then they need to work longer in order to support the corresponding longer years of benefit draw-down. Another obvious way to cost costs is to reduce benefits, which we can do via inflation and reduced COLAs or just an outright benefit cut across the board, say 20% or so. The third method, and the one that has the greatest public support, is to lift the cap on Social Security earnings to unlimited instead of the $106k or so we have now - this would bring in additional revenue without raising the FICA rate.
What I DON'T want to see is an increase in the payroll levy, as that'd crush the economy - more people would be out of work (and not paying into the system), and those who do have work would have less to spend, cutting down the economy even further. That's why I wanna scream when certain a individual states that FICA needs to rise to 16% (32% total ) - now, that's insane, and would never fly - thank god. But even a 1% rise would suck, and should be avoided at all costs - let's do the other 3 alternatives I listed above first and see if that doesn't balance the books.
Indexing the retirement age based upon a worker/retiree ratio in the real world instead of a fixed age is just too sensible I guess.
The thing is that almost all countries have too much debt, we all need to do the same thing. They would be correct. But our debts are valued in USD and they have gone along with the financial irresponsibility that lead to this current mess so they can deal with it. The way I set up this argument is about what to do about our domestically unfunded obligations. Upping taxes wont get a budget surplus. And I was talking about how to get a general budget surplus to start buying back the T-bills from the SS administration's fund. That is the big problem.
Upping taxes where it is rent seeking would produce very large amounts with none of the side effects. Sure you can inflate some of the way there but it must be wage inflation. However doing both is much more sound.
actually i don't brag , i try to encourage , motivate and dispel the old wives tales ,myths and financial ignorance that keeps americans from doing well.
i am very proud of my accomplishments but i am no rocket scientist and if i made it out of a nyc housing project successfully then anyone can.
if you want to call it bragging then i am okay with that. but if it makes one person take a look at their own lack of planning and goals and makes them say if that jerk mathjak can be a successful investor then i can too then i am happy.
believe me none of the things i have done , tried or even failed at were my own ideas. i just pick the brains of those way smarter then me and work with their thoughts and ideas .
Do you realize that financial wealth nets to zero? Its critical who plays the role of the debtor. In other words if there were no stocks, bonds or cash then would have the same material but everyone would be financially broke. A financial security is nothing other than accounting for obligation otherwise known as debt. Now what is the ideal finance model?
bonds?
stocks?
public debt?
private debt?
Because right now, if the middle class is going to have massive mortgage debt, they are playing the role of being the security and not everyone can have net financial wealth.
If its stocks then business can play the role of a debtor that can at least adjust its payment.
If its corporate bonds then business can play the role of the debtor, but its more difficult to pay the fixed amount.
Lastly if the public takes on the role of the debtor then yes every private citizen can have financial wealth.
Don't really matter how you think it plays out. As long as the bills get paid then the current method works . So far in 146 years, retirement planning theory has done the trick for every generation of retirees.
If ever the bills stop being payed because im broke we can have this little economic discusion.
Last edited by mathjak107; 02-18-2013 at 11:07 AM..
The thing is that almost all countries have too much debt, we all need to do the same thing. They would be correct. But our debts are valued in USD and they have gone along with the financial irresponsibility that lead to this current mess so they can deal with it. The way I set up this argument is about what to do about our domestically unfunded obligations. Upping taxes wont get a budget surplus. And I was talking about how to get a general budget surplus to start buying back the T-bills from the SS administration's fund. That is the big problem.
My plan is to put the pay rate for
The problem is that they aren't just living longer but they aren't having as good health when old as when young. Not as productive. We need those that are productive to work so they can carry those that aren't.
Inflation particularly wage inflation is my ideal as it tend to bring with it high demand for labor.
Upping wages are a tax on the rich. Taxing the economy more isn't what needs to happen.[/quote]
Basically SS was setup to make goverment use the exccess not paid out in the first palce by only allowing it to borrow mnaey at rates they set. But its either raise rates or cut benfits or cobinatio of both especailly with numbers of contributors contimnusig to drop .One can read about all the schemes suggested in the Breaux commission testimony years ago. Any measure will only save current program for a period tho with demograpic ahead.I don't see any boomer 2 generation coming in the future .
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.
) - now, that's insane, and would never fly - thank god. But even a 1% rise would suck, and should be avoided at all costs - let's do the other 3 alternatives I listed above first and see if that doesn't balance the books.
