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.
Living in NY city is different than living in the middle of Kansas as different as it would be living in California.....heck even little ole Charlotte.
That's a good point, but how do you suppose the red-blue/urban-rural divide will break down over the idea of reflecting that on your 1040?
That's a good point, but how do you suppose the red-blue/urban-rural divide will break down over the idea of reflecting that on your 1040?
Perhaps they could use the data that's been collected on cost of living ratios of different cities.. and then furhter expand on that for outlying areas ?
It should be taken into consideration with the current tax system. Being from NY and particularly LI I agree with the posters statement. . $100K here is not the same as $100K in Kansas .
And you conveniently forget the other pages in the very thick federal budge that have nothhing to do with welfare or social programs.. I thinkn Sanganista said it best we she said that it is only couple of pages in the federal budget...
But those in the upper bracket keep forgetting that there is so much more to the government and the U.S for that matter than the welfare programs.. or they conveniently leave it out so that they can falsely claim wealth redistribution for their argument.
RE: the federal budget. I happen to have the entire history in Excel. I have created a graph for you to make it simple. Last year, national defense was 20% of the total budget. Human Resources, which is primarily SS, medicare, medicaid, and welfare programs, was 63%.
While the heavily taxed benefit from these programs (primarily SS), they benefit at a lower rate than those who were never taxed or taxed at a much lower rate! To put things in perspective, if I could opt out of SS, and save the add'l 6.2% of my salary myself, at retirement I would have a far larger income stream from that annuity than I will collecting the maximum SS benefit. SS is not a personal savings account. It is a pool-based, wealth redistribution system. If you do not understand this basic concept, you are not worthy of this Great Debates forum.
To put things in perspective for you, during WWII, defense was 84% of the budget. Human Resources was a small percentage of the budget. The environment and parks got more money than HR programs! Since FDR's great New Deal, and LBJ's Great Society, HR programs have skyrocketed! Despite all the whining about the cost of the war, defense is a small percentage of the total budget. Smaller today than the majority of the last 50 yeas. The majority, by far, is social programs. End of story!
RE: the federal budget. I happen to have the entire history in Excel. I have created a graph for you to make it simple. Last year, national defense was 20% of the total budget. Human Resources, which is primarily SS, medicare, medicaid, and welfare programs, was 63%.
While the heavily taxed benefit from these programs (primarily SS), they benefit at a lower rate than those who were never taxed or taxed at a much lower rate! To put things in perspective, if I could opt out of SS, and save the add'l 6.2% of my salary myself, at retirement I would have a far larger income stream from that annuity than I will collecting the maximum SS benefit. SS is not a personal savings account. It is a pool-based, wealth redistribution system. If you do not understand this basic concept, you are not worthy of this Great Debates forum.
Then why don't you opt of of Social Security. You can you know.
If you are capableof taking care of yourself at retirement and do not need Social Security..then go right ahead.. that' is your perogative.
However, without SS you would have many people in their old age living on the street. As it is SS is not enough to sustain someone.. depending on where you live.
SS is also based on how much you contribute..so while you contributed more and someone didn't contribute at all (the poor) they will get the minimum.. you the maximum.
Do I agree with all the differnet type of social programs that the government has no.. and that's because I know that people abuse the system.
But I do understand that our country does need them for society as a whole... and if it helps one person in need I wouldn't sacrafice it. Of course non of us are happy with it because of the waste.. but then we need to elect government officials that will fix it , mainstream it and eliminate the waste in it. It's still soemthing that is a good thing at the end of the day..just needs to be run more efficiently.
And simply because I do not agree with your "wealth redistribution" comments does not mean I do not understand what social programs are. However, you are using wealth redistribution to imply that what is taken from you is given to others to make them equal to you .. or to equalize out the equation and that you are no longer wealthy as a result.. which is a false satement. You are in no way diminished from your status in society by paying yoru taxes, and I am in no way lifted to your level by your tax contribution and so on.
Because we don't agree does not mean I am not worthy for the Great Debates forum.
RE: the federal budget. I happen to have the entire history in Excel. I have created a graph for you to make it simple. Last year, national defense was 20% of the total budget. Human Resources, which is primarily SS, medicare, medicaid, and welfare programs, was 63%.
While the heavily taxed benefit from these programs (primarily SS), they benefit at a lower rate than those who were never taxed or taxed at a much lower rate! To put things in perspective, if I could opt out of SS, and save the add'l 6.2% of my salary myself, at retirement I would have a far larger income stream from that annuity than I will collecting the maximum SS benefit. SS is not a personal savings account. It is a pool-based, wealth redistribution system. If you do not understand this basic concept, you are not worthy of this Great Debates forum.
To put things in perspective for you, during WWII, defense was 84% of the budget. Human Resources was a small percentage of the budget. The environment and parks got more money than HR programs! Since FDR's great New Deal, and LBJ's Great Society, HR programs have skyrocketed! Despite all the whining about the cost of the war, defense is a small percentage of the total budget. Smaller today than the majority of the last 50 yeas. The majority, by far, is social programs. End of story!
And isn't "human resources" just a little too broad.. that can cover administration on all sections of the government that includes other things besides social programs.
Then why don't you opt of of Social Security. You can you know.
If you are capableof taking care of yourself at retirement and do not need Social Security..then go right ahead.. that' is your perogative.
However, without SS you would have many people in their old age living on the street. As it is SS is not enough to sustain someone.. depending on where you live.
SS is also based on how much you contribute..so while you contributed more and someone didn't contribute at all (the poor) they will get the minimum.. you the maximum.
Do I agree with all the differnet type of social programs that the government has no.. and that's because I know that people abuse the system.
But I do understand that our country does need them for society as a whole... and if it helps one person in need I wouldn't sacrafice it. Of course non of us are happy with it because of the waste.. but then we need to elect government officials that will fix it , mainstream it and eliminate the waste in it. It's still soemthing that is a good thing at the end of the day..just needs to be run more efficiently.
And simply because I do not agree with your "wealth redistribution" comments does not mean I do not understand what social programs are. However, you are using wealth redistribution to imply that what is taken from you is given to others to make them equal to you .. or to equalize out the equation and that you are no longer wealthy as a result.. which is a false satement. You are in no way diminished from your status in society by paying yoru taxes, and I am in no way lifted to your level by your tax contribution and so on.
Because we don't agree does not mean I am not worthy for the Great Debates forum.
One cannot opt out of SS. Moderator cut: personal attack The only way to opt out is to file a form 4029 and claim that you object on religious grounds. The IRS will then examine your life with a microscope to see if you really practice a religion that is "conscientiously opposed to accepting benefits of any private or public insurance that makes payments in the event of death."
Trust me, if there was an opt-out, I would, and many people would get nothing at retirement. Hard fact.
Since SS is mandatory;
since;
I will have less at retirement contributing to it than I would saving for myself;
since;
many people will have more at retirement by my contributions than they would have if they had saved for themselves;
then it is, in fact, undisputable wealth redistribution through taxation.
Moderator cut: not allowed
Last edited by Jammie; 09-19-2008 at 10:30 AM..
Reason: We are never allowed to tell someone their ignorance is showing any place on this forum.
That's a good point, but how do you suppose the red-blue/urban-rural divide will break down over the idea of reflecting that on your 1040?
They either move and take lower paying jobs or move to where they drive further using more gas....but go to the same job.
Moving further keeping the same job increase monthly cost and at the same time they are about to be heavily taxed under the Obama plan.
They move and take lower jobs....well that's what happened when you raise taxes people revert back to comfortable positions and don't take as many risk.
And isn't "human resources" just a little too broad.. that can cover administration on all sections of the government that includes other things besides social programs.
Superfunction:
Human Resources
Total: $1.759 TRILLION
Subfunction(s)
SS and Income Security
Total: $951.9 billion
Medicare and Health Programs
Total: $640.7 billion
Veterans Benefits
Total: $72.0 billion
Education, training, and Other
Total: $93.4 billion
Seems that other stuff is about 5% of the HR budget. Good call on your part...way to go!
Because we don't agree does not mean I am not worthy for the Great Debates forum.
You are not worthy because you argue on emotion rather than fact and logic. Just because you keep saying "its not wealth redistribution, its not wealth redistribution" does not alter the facts. If you want to post some hard facts, or make a logical stance, then there is room for disagreement. I can accept, and respect, that. I cannot respect one who argues a point in the face of the obvious facts, and refuses to concede when they are so blatantly wrong. I would rather you just say "thanks rich guy for making my life better", than to sit there and say "you are not any worse off because you still have lots of money", which I believe is the premise of your argument.
However, without SS you would have many people in their old age living on the street. As it is SS is not enough to sustain someone.. depending on where you live.
SS is also based on how much you contribute..so while you contributed more and someone didn't contribute at all (the poor) they will get the minimum.. you the maximum.
1. SS has only been in existence for 50 years. For the 300 years prior to that, how did the poor Americans survive without it?
2. The maximum is capped. It is not a true annuity calculation. In fact, many of the baby boomers will find that SS is the best investment of their lives, returning an imputed return on investment of over 25%, depending on which study you read. Many of today's recipients paid less than 10 cents for every dollar they are receiving; that is why the system is going broke. There are not enough guys like me to pay for all the people who put nothing or very little relative to their receipts.
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.
