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.
It would be for the (rather well-to-do) folks who would be subject to it. Let's remember though that while nearly all of these fears about SS running out of money are worthless crap, the question could be blown away altogether simply by raising the earnings cap to about $195K. And the larger question might be why there is a cap anymore to begin with. We got rid of the same cap on Medicare earnings years ago. Why is it still around for SS?
17thAndK, FICA's current tax rates and revenues are insufficient to sustain Social Security and Medicare to the level we promised.
Social Security and Medicare are direct net financial retired employees, retired employees' families; that reduces our nations numbers and extents of poverty incidences which is consequentially of net economic and social benefit to our nation.
No one stole or otherwise misallocated FICA funds. Aggregate cost increases for advancing medical technology and increased life longevity due to advancing technology have been outpacing our revenues derived from payroll taxes.
Eliminating the annual caps upon taxable wages wouldn't remedy the entire shortfall. I'm among those advocating that entire Medicare and no less than half of Social Security retirement should be funded by a federal general sales tax.
It's a very strange mentality that equates wanting to keep what one earns as selfish, but wanting to take what others have earned is actually occupying the moral high ground.
I'm not proposing to "take what you've earned". I'm proposing that everyone who has managed to become wealthy (I'm in this category), should share a greater portion of it with those who haven't. For the good of the whole.
It isn't moral, but rather realizing that a consumer capitalist system needs extensive taxation and wealth distribution in order to survive and thrive. The US has been heading in the opposite direction for the last 40 years and it's killing our economy.
This redress can happen a lot of different ways. Most developed countries start at the salary level. They are very heavily unionized and wages are controlled to reduce disparity. Unionization was never that extensive in the US, but it was enough to greatly influence wages. But those days are long gone.
BTW, my retirement is very well funded. Supposn's probably is as well. I'm not advocating changes in policy in order to make myself richer, but rather for the benefit of the whole.
Feel free to mail your donations in to the Treasury if you want to benefit the whole, just don't assume the rest of the country wants to do the same.
It isn't moral, but rather realizing that a consumer capitalist system needs extensive taxation and wealth distribution in order to survive and thrive. The US has been heading in the opposite direction for the last 40 years and it's killing our economy.
This redress can happen a lot of different ways. Most developed countries start at the salary level. They are very heavily unionized and wages are controlled to reduce disparity. Unionization was never that extensive in the US, but it was enough to greatly influence wages. But those days are long gone.
Actually this is what made the US more wealthy than places like Spain, Germany, France and Italy. Less market regulation led to greater prosperity. The only people advocating for more tax and unions are the people who have no chance or drive to earn more than average in their life.
No, you don't get to raise taxes on me to pay for the retirement benefits of people who retired and didn't pay as much taxes.
17thAndK, FICA's current tax rates and revenues are insufficient to sustain Social Security and Medicare to the level we promised.
Medicare is in worse shape than SS, but recent shortfalls against projected advances in extensions of human life expectancy are another indicator of why the claims above are in serious dispute.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn
Eliminating the annual caps upon taxable wages wouldn't remedy the entire shortfall.
Caps currently apply only to SS, and yes, it would wipe out a 75-year projected shortfall entirely.
Social Security and Medicare are net reducers of poverty and beneficial to our economy.
That is a common misconception.
Poverty is not resolved by redistribution of wealth.
If it did, let us wave our legislative wand, and deposit in EVERYONE'S Account, 22 billion billion quatloos - a substantial sum. Everyone is equally wealthy. Now, that everyone is "Set for Life," what happens next?
Everyone has "enough" money - so no one bothers to work, transport, trade, etc, etc, and civilization collapses. Even starving children are wealthy!
Money.does.not.generate.prosperity.
. . . "No one should suffer because they lack {fill in the blank}" should be prefaced with "No one should be compelled to labor for the benefit of another, so that..." because slavery is not an acceptable solution to the ills of mankind.
I have yet to find a socialist who wasn't generous with other people's money.
. . .
Don't be a "useful idiot".
Only "useful idiots" would champion enslaving people via compulsory labor for the benefit of another, and call it "Freedom" and “Social Justice.”
. . .
Prosperity is based on the production, equitable trade, and enjoyment of surplus usable goods and services. Doing more with less so more can enjoy is superior to doing less with more so few can enjoy. Prosperous people are prodigiously productive because that is what civilized people do. Predators and parasites are the bane of civilization, seeking to thrive at the expense of others.
Yes you are. Do you want to change what you wrote? Because what you wrote is very clear.
Quote:
I'm proposing that everyone who has managed to become wealthy (I'm in this category), should share a greater portion of it with those who haven't. For the good of the whole.
The wealthy already bear the major burden of taxes in this country. To continually expect them to take on more of the load is unjustifiable.
SportyandMisty, I consider any tax treatment that unnecessarily directly or indirectly favors incomes derived from other than incomes derived from employment, or greater favor to those other incomes' earners, as generally being contrary to our nation's best economic and social interests; (i.e. they're undesirable tax loop-holes).
For examples, deep discounted tax rates for long-term capital gains incomes and dividend incomes.
Let me guess -- you'll be the arbiter of "unnecessarily," right?
You have not described a tax loophole. You have described an intentional incentive to invest in capital. This is a matter of public policy. Investment in capital is the primary vehicle by which we drive our standard of living upward. Investment in capital has yielded such things as the computer you are reading this upon, the smartphone in your pocket, and countless improvements in our quality of life and improvements in GDP.
You do want the standard of living to go up, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn
Investors can sell their paper looses of Ford stock and purchase similar low priced GM stock, thus retaining their U.S. auto industry investments while profiting from a tax deduction for what's effectively no actual loss. Frankly I don't see anyway we can remedy that ploy.
Let's see the charts of F and GM for the past year:
Ford is up about 1.98% while GM is up 40%.
If you know anything about "reversion to the mean" you'll know it is more likely that GM will decline while Ford improves than the other way around.
Regardless, periodic rebalancing of a portfolio is an important vehicle to maintain the optimal asset allocation in your portfolio, which in turn allows private sector savers and public sector pensions to provide for future retirement.
You are in favor of allowing people to save for retirement, aren't you?
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.
