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.
If someone making $100,000 per year pays the 13.5% (or whatever it is) per year, so can someone making $200,000 per year. Fairness will win out in the end, whether you like it or not. You can pretend to be "vilified", stop playing the victim.
No they don't play victim they play politics pushing and supporting conservative agenda's cutting programs and benefits for folks being led down a redistribution path by political sorts of a different mindset. Just look around and smell the roses and remember elections have consequences especially at the state and local level. If you want to push an agenda that punishes couples expect them to vote accordingly. Oops wait they did in the last couple of state and local elections. Have you looked at state governor and legislative office holders lately?
Eliminating the shortfall, or even increasing benefits, by asking for fair taxation is FAIR. People who make a lot of money should pay the same social security tax rate for their entire earnings, just as people below the salary cap of around $118,000 do.
Eventually sanity will come in to play. According to David Stockman, we have a strong recession on the way. I agree with him. Probably many incumbents will get removed from office Nov 2016.
No they don't play victim they play politics pushing and supporting conservative agenda's cutting programs and benefits for folks being led down a redistribution path by political sorts of a different mindset. Just look around and smell the roses and remember elections have consequences especially at the state and local level. If you want to push an agenda that punishes couples expect them to vote accordingly. Oops wait they did in the last couple of state and local elections. Have you looked at state governor and legislative office holders lately?
You are the one for punishing couples AND singles by not adopting fair taxation of income for social security. Which eliminates the long term shortfall. Then you state the exact opposite, saying having a fair tax application "punishes couples". Then are you making a veiled threat to elect more Republicans?? Oooh, I am really scared.
Can you make one valid argument as to why someone who makes $118000 per year, and pays the same total social security tax, but Twice the tax rate of someone making $236,000 per year, how is that fair?
You are the one for punishing couples AND singles by not adopting fair taxation of income for social security. Which eliminates the long term shortfall. Then you state the exact opposite, saying having a fair tax application "punishes couples". Then are you making a veiled threat to elect more Republicans?? Oooh, I am really scared.
Can you make one valid argument as to why someone who makes $118000 per year, and pays the same total social security tax, but Twice the tax rate of someone making $236,000 per year, how is that fair?
Fair or equitable and which is in the constitution? Is it fair or equitable for the person paying 236k to pay twice as much for the same benefit? Many operate in their own self interest and not others. Some may consider that ideology but it is also reality. There are good arguments for raising the cap not sure fairness is high on the list for high income earners
There are good arguments for raising the cap not sure fairness is high on the list for high income earners
That convolution of words hints at the weakness of the underlying sentiment. You're correct that equity isn't always a clear-cut issue. The question then is what should happen even when there are several, allegedly equally-valid but contradictory perspectives? I haven't seen anyone stand up and wave the banner saying that the comfort and luxury of the rich is society's priority, society's most critical need. I have seen practically every recognized source of answers to the questions that have no objective answers say that society's default obligation is to its most vulnerable members. So in the matter of ditching the cap or not, given that there are equally good arguments for and against, the fact that the cap exists and remains is evidence that the decision is being made via unjust exploitation of excessive power.
That convolution of words hints at the weakness of the underlying sentiment. You're correct that equity isn't always a clear-cut issue. The question then is what should happen even when there are several, allegedly equally-valid but contradictory perspectives? I haven't seen anyone stand up and wave the banner saying that the comfort and luxury of the rich is society's priority, society's most critical need. I have seen practically every recognized source of answers to the questions that have no objective answers say that society's default obligation is to its most vulnerable members. So in the matter of ditching the cap or not, given that there are equally good arguments for and against, the fact that the cap exists and remains is evidence that the decision is being made via unjust exploitation of excessive power.
That is another argument with more support than rate equality which is a slippery slope that to some would suggest a flat tax rate for all regardless of income. It never bothered me that when I hit the cap that someone else had months earlier.
Another inequity: in many states, SS spousal and survivor benefits are drastically slashed for anyone who chooses a career as a public school teacher. Yet stay-at-home spouses receive full spousal and survivor benefits.
My sister is a retired teacher. Her husband just died and she gets none of his social security. He only got his for 4 years.
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.
