Greenspan to Congress: Cut Social Security Benefits

[David Floyd]

Sure, but only mine is correct.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
We need to do this NOW. The longer you wait the harder it is to fix a long-term problem like this.

Sadly, this isn't going to happen. The Republicans are too greedy to do it, and the Dems to cowardly to do it.

[Stuie]

Actually I agree that there should be some method of defining need. Watching my father-in-law and his wife drawing SSR while maintaining a rather large house in New Hampshire and a three month time share in Hawaii is rather sickening.

However, that should be offset by some sort of reward/penalty system based on how much an individual is saving toward retirement during their wage-earning years. If you're making less than $87,000 and you are not saving, you pay more SS taxes. If you are making more than $87,000, everything above $87k is taxed at 7.65% and you're never going to see a dime of it. How's that for encouraging lower income workers to save while redistributing the wealth of higher income workers?

[pchang]

The $87K figure is indexed at the same inflation rate as the benefits.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Sava
remove income cap on the amount taxed... currently, the highest amount people are taxed on SS is $87,000 or so... that means... someone making $10,000,000 gets taxed as if they made $87,000.

That is terribly regressive and not fair.

But there is a maximum to what anybody can get back... so that's why there is a ceiling. What's not fair is asking for even more money from some people only to give them the same amount as people paying in less.

[pchang]

Originally posted by Ming


But there is a maximum to what anybody can get back... so that's why there is a ceiling. What's not fair is asking for even more money from some people only to give them the same amount as people paying in less.

But that is a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of social security. It is not a retirement program or a savings program. It is a charitable program to make sure the elderly don't live too far below the poverty line. Once the electorate understands that, I think reformss will be much easier to undertake.

[Ming]

Originally posted by pchang


But that is a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of social security. It is not a retirement program or a savings program. It is a charitable program to make sure the elderly don't live too far below the poverty line. Once the electorate understands that, I think reformss will be much easier to undertake.

I understand that... and i'm willing to pay my fair share. I also am not counting on being able to live off of what I get back from social security. However, I'm glad there is a limit, because I already contribute a large amount of money into the system... and I need to put some money safely away for my own retirement

[pchang]

So, what is your opinion of the fact that Medicare does not have an income limit?

[rah]

Well since my medicare deductions are less than 25% of my SS deduction, it's really not as big of a deal.

[Shi Huangdi]

Franklin D. Roosevelt intended S.S. to be a temporary program. Let's make his wish come true and start phasing it out.

[rah]

Just as soon as we start phasing out old people.


Hmmm, wait, I'm an old person.

[chequita guevara]

rah, your light is flashing.

[pchang]

Ming to Rah

What is this? Some sort of shift change?

[Ming]

Re: Ming to Rah

Originally posted by pchang
What is this? Some sort of shift change?

[Whoha]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Social Security is an anti-poverty program. That's its purpose. Those who aren't in poverty do not need it.

And Floyd is slightly correct. I don't buy libertarian morality. It's evil.

yet we are all forced to pay into it.