Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 12-31-2012, 06:26 AM
 
Location: Just transplanted to FL from the N GA mountains
3,997 posts, read 4,142,915 times
Reputation: 2677

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by itlltickleurinnerds View Post
If you don't work and pay FICA you don't get SS. You pay property tax if you rent indirectly. Just because you don't pay it directly to the gov. does not mean you don't pay for it. You do. If that is the case that you don't then you don't fund drug gangs because your dealer is not in the gang. LOL thats just stupid reasoning.
It doesn't matter... property tax even if paid indirectly through your rent doesn't effect SS for the renter. The rental income the landlord makes would be taxed for SS. Why can't so many people understand that property tax is a completely different beast than Federal or State income taxes...

The services that property tax provide still have to be paid by someone. Why should the landlord's or homeowner's be the only one paying for schools, fire protection, local police? Or I guess we should just say.. "Okay if you rent those are more freebies for you?" I guess renter's don't have kids in school? Never need the police? Renter's by paying more in RENT (which yes does cover the property tax) are paying their share of LOCAL services.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-31-2012, 06:32 AM
 
1,520 posts, read 1,873,697 times
Reputation: 545
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil306 View Post
And? Who's fault is this? Why are we allowing people to breed like rabbits when they cannot afford the children they already have?

Its not my responsibility to provide for other people. If you care so much about the elderly, the sick etc why are you not living in a cardboard box, eating mac and cheese, and giving every single left over cent of your money to these people? Its easy to banter about saving people and being "good and decent."When you are doing it with other people's money.

How about we do something about the population and require birth control, etc. Let us STOP the problem before it becomes a problem. Until then, put YOUR money where YOUR mouth is and don't require me or others too. I for one am tired of supporting the sick, lame, and lazy.
Pretty Republican attitude. Which explains why they are no longer in the White House and will not be in 2016 either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2012, 06:34 AM
 
8,091 posts, read 5,911,189 times
Reputation: 1578
Quote:
Originally Posted by aus10 View Post
It doesn't matter... property tax even if paid indirectly through your rent doesn't effect SS for the renter. The rental income the landlord makes would be taxed for SS. Why can't so many people understand that property tax is a completely different beast than Federal or State income taxes...

The services that property tax provide still have to be paid by someone. Why should the landlord's or homeowner's be the only one paying for schools, fire protection, local police? Or I guess we should just say.. "Okay if you rent those are more freebies for you?" I guess renter's don't have kids in school? Never need the police? Renter's by paying more in RENT (which yes does cover the property tax) are paying their share of LOCAL services.
There should be no increase in tax for renting your property in the first place. It's nothing but Uncle Sam bending homeowners over.

EDIT: however there are loopholes (of course) like factoring in depreciation which offsets these increases. But it's still BS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2012, 06:51 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
37,803 posts, read 41,013,481 times
Reputation: 62204
Quote:
Originally Posted by C. Maurio View Post
As we approach the end of the year and the so called "fiscal cliff" and we are distracted by the holidays and our party plans, the politcians are back in DC in smoke filled rooms planning the ruination of your future. There is no doubt that they are going to try to force Obama into cutting Social Security and Medicare and raising the age to 70. This is what the GOP wants and I do not trust Obama to stand against them in the end. He has caved to the Republicans too much in the past. So it is really important that all of us call our Congressman and Senators and let them know that we do not want Social Security and Medicare TOUCHED! I called mine already. I did not get him but left a message with his office.
Nobody wants their program touched.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2012, 06:56 AM
 
1,520 posts, read 1,873,697 times
Reputation: 545
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
Nobody wants their program touched.
The funny thing is that I am probably less dependent on Social Security then many people are. Being a public employee, I have a pretty decent pension coming and a matched 401(k) that I max every year. Social Security will only be about 1/3rd of my retirement. For many, it will be their only retirement if they even get to retire. That is why I fight for it to be left alone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2012, 07:39 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,738,058 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher View Post
The GOP is leading the charge to cut SS. Obama has caved into their demands and they've settled on cutting benefits by linking COLA increases to chained CPI.
I don't see it as a partisan issue. SS is the easy fix. Medicare, not so much, given it has always partially relied on general revenues for funding.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2012, 07:53 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,738,058 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by C. Maurio View Post
The BEST option for dealing with Medicare is to offer it to every American regardless of age. That way you get younger and healthier people paying into the system and not taking as much out. The larger the pool, the lower cost per person. Right now we have this stupid system where private insurance companies get to profiteer off us while we are young and in good health and then Medicare takes over when we hit 65 just at the age we begin to need more medical services. That is a stupid way to do things.
That's true National Healthcare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2012, 08:02 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,738,058 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by wehotex View Post
It is unfair to take $$ from my wages and then use it for others' enrichment who contributed less than me or happen to luck out because they live longer. At least give me the option to will my contributions to a beneficiary that I designate should I die before entitlement age.
The cost of the medical care and feeding of the elderly is mutualized amongst the entire working population. Some live less than projections and some live longer.

Will that same beneficiary pay for your medical care and living expenses, should you live to a really ripe old age? If not, then who?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2012, 08:07 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,738,058 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post

How about if we reduce the excessive regulation and taxation of rental property, thereby reducing the COST of housing, and thereby make it feasible for burger flippers to save for their future?

I don't want more Social Security - how about giving me back the THOUSANDS of dollars I have paid in excessive unfair property taxes? Property taxes on my home are $1,500/yr more than on the house next door because mine is a rental and the house next door is owner-occupied.
I know and appreciate this is your hot button. Owning investment property is discretionary. Your property tax situation is a local municipal/ county issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2012, 08:20 AM
 
Location: Volunteer State
1,243 posts, read 1,147,058 times
Reputation: 2159
Quote:
Originally Posted by C. Maurio View Post
If you were born after 1960, the age is now 67 for benefits. If you were born between 1955 and 1959, the age is on a sliding scale from 65 and 1 month to 66 and 11 months. People seem to either forget that fact of they don't know it in which case they are going to get a rude wake up when they turn 65.
You're right. My posted numbers were for my state retirement. I forgot about the age increase. But there is a line on my statement that says if I stopped working at 62 I would receive $xxxx.xx. Is this the 'leveling' I hear about?
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top