U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-10-2014, 05:03 PM
 
16,704 posts, read 18,933,830 times
Reputation: 6804

Advertisements

I always like to get rid of it and have people use their own money to pay for SS and Medicare ... What's that? You want other to pay for yours... Why am I not surprised...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-14-2017, 04:02 AM
 
1,037 posts, read 561,875 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie View Post
I always like to get rid of it and have people use their own money to pay for SS and Medicare ... What's that? You want other to pay for yours... Why am I not surprised...
Evilnewbie, I suppose you’re aware that a great many people, possibly, our population’s majority are not financially able to entirely fund care for their medical or for their old age needs; you cannot admit such unmet needs are also detrimental to their nation’s economic and social wellbeing.

When aware persons utter such despicable opinions, I suspect that they cannot acknowledge or confess to their lack of self-respect. They compensate by lashing out at others. Opinions such as yours do not shock or surprise me. I pithy you.

Last edited by Supposn; 08-14-2017 at 04:11 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2017, 05:25 AM
 
33,046 posts, read 20,740,810 times
Reputation: 8928
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
FICA is not a tax. It is insurance. FICA stands for Federal Insurance Contribution Act.

Everyone should pay the same for the insurance. Paying a different amount for a product based on your income or color of your skin is morally wrong.

Imagine, for example, going to the grocery store to buy a gallon of milk. You get to the checkout line, and there is one person in front of you. She, also, is buying a gallon of milk. The clerk charges her, say, $3.00 and she pays & leaves. The clerk rings up your gallon of milk, and says, "That will be $5.58" What??? This is the same SKU as the woman who just was charged $3.00. "Yeah -- but you make more money than she does, so it's only fair to charge you more for the same product, because you can afford it."

People would go postal.

The REAL problem with FICA, of course, is that some on the left want to redefine it as a welfare benefit rather than an insurance product. Once they redefine it as a welfare benefit, they will want to means test it so that high income & net worth people won't be able to collect on the insurance they've dutifully paid premiums their entire life.

Then be sure to explain this to Congress, as it is a generally understood and accepted that proceeds of insurance paid for with after-tax dollars NOT be taxed.

Good luck!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2017, 07:07 AM
 
4,229 posts, read 1,909,438 times
Reputation: 3787
Here is what is generally understood and accepted --

Sixteenth Amendment
: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2017, 08:15 AM
 
1,037 posts, read 561,875 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
FICA is not a tax. It is insurance. FICA stands for Federal Insurance Contribution Act.

Everyone should pay the same for the insurance. Paying a different amount for a product based on your income or color of your skin is morally wrong. ... The REAL problem with FICA, of course, is that some on the left want to redefine it as a welfare benefit rather than an insurance product. Once they redefine it as a welfare benefit, they will want to means test it so that high income & net worth people won't be able to collect on the insurance they've dutifully paid premiums their entire life.
SportyandMisty, Social Security retirement originally was conceived something akin to a tontine that at retirement age transforms to be a lifetime annuity; despite the name of the tax, Social Security retirement never was an insurance policy except in the sense that it provides lifetime income for retirement.

Due to medical technology advances, life-times have been extended. Unfortunately, quality of lives has not kept pace with their extended longevity and that longevity has greatly increased the costs of both plans.
It’s generally accepted that both Medicare and Social Security retirement are not sustainable as they’re currently funded.
For most of USA’s population, funding their entire medical care or retirement costs is unfeasible.

I do advocate Social Security retirement monthly benefits should continue to be: Related to individual employees’ payroll tax contributions, (i.e. a past means test?); their maximum capped; and their amount annually cost-of-living-adjusted.
I do advocate no limitations upon additional incomes of Social Security retirement recipients.
I do advocate that FICA payroll tax of employee plus employers should provide no more than half of tax revenues earmarked for Social Security retirement, and the remainder of such funding should be derived from a more general tax revenue source. I’m not opposed to that source being a federal sales tax.

I’m absolutely opposed to any payroll tax funding for Medicare. It should be funded by a more general tax revenue source. I’d reluctantly yield to political reality and accept a sales tax, but I’m absolutely opposed to even its current partial funded by a payroll tax upon employees.

Medicare is and should remain an entitlement with no means test.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2017, 08:45 AM
 
8,301 posts, read 3,463,333 times
Reputation: 1588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
SportyandMisty, Social Security retirement originally was conceived something akin to a tontine that at retirement age transforms to be a lifetime annuity; despite the name of the tax, Social Security retirement never was an insurance policy except in the sense that it provides lifetime income for retirement.

Due to medical technology advances, life-times have been extended. Unfortunately, quality of lives has not kept pace with their extended longevity and that longevity has greatly increased the costs of both plans.
Itís generally accepted that both Medicare and Social Security retirement are not sustainable as theyíre currently funded.
For most of USAís population, funding their entire medical care or retirement costs is unfeasible.

I do advocate Social Security retirement monthly benefits should continue to be: Related to individual employeesí payroll tax contributions, (i.e. a past means test?); their maximum capped; and their amount annually cost-of-living-adjusted.
I do advocate no limitations upon additional incomes of Social Security retirement recipients.
I do advocate that FICA payroll tax of employee plus employers should provide no more than half of tax revenues earmarked for Social Security retirement, and the remainder of such funding should be derived from a more general tax revenue source. Iím not opposed to that source being a federal sales tax.

Iím absolutely opposed to any payroll tax funding for Medicare. It should be funded by a more general tax revenue source. Iíd reluctantly yield to political reality and accept a sales tax, but Iím absolutely opposed to even its current partial funded by a payroll tax upon employees.

Medicare is and should remain an entitlement with no means test.
Unrelated to the OT, as a doc I have participated in and witnessed great improvements in the quality of life for those over 70 years of age since I began with patient care back in the 1970's.

And now as a wealthy senior myself, I think it great that I finally get a break on something. Like the cost of my HC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2017, 09:20 AM
 
2,775 posts, read 1,506,869 times
Reputation: 2173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
Unrelated to the OT, as a doc I have participated in and witnessed great improvements in the quality of life for those over 70 years of age since I began with patient care back in the 1970's.

And now as a wealthy senior myself, I think it great that I finally get a break on something. Like the cost of my HC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2017, 09:31 AM
 
4,229 posts, read 1,909,438 times
Reputation: 3787
Being a wealthy senior is fun in its own right. Therefore, never try to live in the Bay Area. We have all seen what happens even in their younger years to people who do that.

Last edited by Pub-911; 08-14-2017 at 10:44 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2017, 10:13 AM
 
Location: Chicago area
8,197 posts, read 12,434,032 times
Reputation: 14774
Social Security isn't really a tax, it is a retirement annuity run by the federal govt. If you want to see regressive taxation, come to Chicago with property taxes, sales tax, restaurant, soda, bag, parking, cellphone, and bottled water taxes.

Democrats: always a friend to the working people...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2017, 10:59 AM
 
4,229 posts, read 1,909,438 times
Reputation: 3787
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchemist80 View Post
Social Security isn't really a tax, it is a retirement annuity run by the federal govt.
Reality: SS is a tax-funded social insurance program. It most notably insures against the risk of outliving an ability to work and thereby generate income, but it also includes substantial life and disability insurance cover (including dependent and survivor benefits) at no additional cost.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top