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 08-24-2017, 02:01 AM
 
1,029 posts, read 560,388 times
Reputation: 300

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
... As SS is currently configured in this country low wage earnings are weighted a bit heavier (IIRC) when calculating benefits from employment records. Not to mention since the truly "poor" elderly can receive both Medicare (from SS contributions) and Medicaid (general tax revenue funded), in some instances what is being proposed already happens.
Refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_dual_eligible

Dual eligibility is legal and some people use it, but I suppose itís uncommon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-24-2017, 02:17 AM
 
1,029 posts, read 560,388 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
... ONLY applies to those WHO LIVE LONG ENOUGH. Low-wage workers have shorter longevity than higher-income workers. Some people have said that black men get the worst deal from Social Security because their life expectancy is about 65 and many pay in for years without living long enough to get back wheat they paid in.
It aint all that different.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
Life Expectancy at Birth (in years), by Race/Ethnicity | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

USA, 2009 years of Life expectancy ďat birthĒ by race.
I donít yet know what these statistics would be if it were for after date of birth or post infancy.

White
Americans:78.9

African
Americans:74.6

Latin
Americans:82.9

Asian
Americans:86.5

Native
Americans:76.9
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 02:28 AM
 
1,029 posts, read 560,388 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nonesuch View Post
And how long before we realize that the government needs to take more of our money to fund SSA or medicade and just ratchets FICA back up again?
NoneSuch, After this proposalís enacted, FICA would no longer fund Medicare, and it would fund no more than half of Social Security retirement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 07:27 AM
 
708 posts, read 446,785 times
Reputation: 1155
Interesting concept but still think it is unfair for us that paid in to FICA for last 50 years. Now we would have to keep paying through sales tax without any benefit, unless they would give us more SS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 08:47 AM
 
1,029 posts, read 560,388 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willistonite View Post
Interesting concept but still think it is unfair for us that paid in to FICA for last 50 years. Now we would have to keep paying through sales tax without any benefit, unless they would give us more SS.
Willistonite, if fire insurance prices were suddenly cut in half, you would complain that “it’s unfair. The younger generation has a better deal. Our generation paid more for insurance throughout our entire lifetimes".

I don’t understand what you perceive as inequitable?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 09:00 AM
 
437 posts, read 198,844 times
Reputation: 449
Once you open the door to a general national sales tax, it provides a new path to congress to then increase it for other things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 09:49 AM
 
1,029 posts, read 560,388 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
Any national retail sales tax on consumption is an unconstitutional excise tax that extends into states. ...
... Oh, and abolish socialism, while you're at it.
. (FICA / Socialist InSecurity)
Throughout history humanity has suffered due to illness, injuries, birth defects. Our elderly where among the most impoverished segments of our populations. People and their nations strive to improve.

The proportion of fools among conservatives do not greatly differ from the liberal segments.

Fortunately, conservatives continue to be defeated when they seek to undermine Social Security retirement or Medicare. But only in the USA is that a primary goal among a nationís conservatives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 10:19 AM
 
1,029 posts, read 560,388 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim1921 View Post
Once you open the door to a general national sales tax, it provides a new path to congress to then increase it for other things.
Jim1921, I'm somewhat in agreement with the conservatives' supporting the "Fair Tax" concept.

[quote=Supposn;42426114]Incremental enactment of a fair tax.

USAís progressive income tax rates are actually much less progressive due the greater opportunities for wealthier tax payers to understate their incomes and additionally so much of their incomes are legally classified as subject to lesser than tax rates upon ďordinaryĒ incomes.
In many cases higher income taxpayers are paying lesser rates than those earning incomes of much lesser annual amounts.

Rather than reported taxable incomes, consumer purchases are a more accurate indication of individual taxpayers and their dependents' net incomes in proportion to each other. ...

I believe it that itís imprudent to attempt replacing all federal taxes upon incomes with revenues based upon a sales tax in a single step. I also believe that it is politically unfeasible to pass and enact such a federal act.
Iím among the proponents for incrementally transferring portions of our federal tax revenues from taxes upon net incomes to a federal sales tax. ...
... Replacing any portion of the FICA payroll taxes with a sales tax would increase federal tax revenues, be economically advantageous to our nation and would be particularly advantageous to our working poor.
The FICA taxes upon payrolls are our most regressive federal taxes.

I believe that after one of the federal sales tax incremental increases, the tax rate will approach an unacceptable rate and further transformation of our major federal tax revenue sources will have to cease.
We will then have a federal sales tax that all enterprises and individuals will pay, and a remaining progressive income tax with a high starting income tax bracket that will only be paid by individuals and corporations of greater incomes.

If Iím incorrect, all federal taxes upon net incomes will be abolished.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 10:35 AM
 
437 posts, read 198,844 times
Reputation: 449
[quote=Supposn;49298855]Jim1921, I'm somewhat in agreement with the conservatives' supporting the "Fair Tax" concept.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
Incremental enactment of a fair tax.

USAís progressive income tax rates are actually much less progressive due the greater opportunities for wealthier tax payers to understate their incomes and additionally so much of their incomes are legally classified as subject to lesser than tax rates upon ďordinaryĒ incomes.
In many cases higher income taxpayers are paying lesser rates than those earning incomes of much lesser annual amounts.

Rather than reported taxable incomes, consumer purchases are a more accurate indication of individual taxpayers and their dependents' net incomes in proportion to each other. ...

I believe it that itís imprudent to attempt replacing all federal taxes upon incomes with revenues based upon a sales tax in a single step. I also believe that it is politically unfeasible to pass and enact such a federal act.
Iím among the proponents for incrementally transferring portions of our federal tax revenues from taxes upon net incomes to a federal sales tax. ...
... Replacing any portion of the FICA payroll taxes with a sales tax would increase federal tax revenues, be economically advantageous to our nation and would be particularly advantageous to our working poor.
The FICA taxes upon payrolls are our most regressive federal taxes.

I believe that after one of the federal sales tax incremental increases, the tax rate will approach an unacceptable rate and further transformation of our major federal tax revenue sources will have to cease.
We will then have a federal sales tax that all enterprises and individuals will pay, and a remaining progressive income tax with a high starting income tax bracket that will only be paid by individuals and corporations of greater incomes.

If Iím incorrect, all federal taxes upon net incomes will be abolished.
It is doubtful that our Congress would ever abolish a tax.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 12:03 PM
 
1,029 posts, read 560,388 times
Reputation: 300
[quote=Jim1921;49299057]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
Jim1921, I'm somewhat in agreement with the conservatives' supporting the "Fair Tax" concept.



It is doubtful that our Congress would ever abolish a tax.
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