ADVERTISEMENT

It's not a tax...

steffen91

Gator Great
Gold Member
Jan 17, 2005
4,352
3
38
We're only taking it back to the original levels.

Obama when talking about the SS Withholding tax last year.

Yea, they bumped it to the original 6.2% from 4.2%, but did anyone notice that they also increased the cap to $113,700?

Cork-suckers!

SSA table
 
Originally posted by steffen91:
We're only taking it back to the original levels.

Obama when talking about the SS Withholding tax last year.

Yea, they bumped it to the original 6.2% from 4.2%, but did anyone notice that they also increased the cap to $113,700?

Cork-suckers!
This isn't the last one, I assure you. SS is going broke so there will have to be other changes to keep it going. The question is, who will get stuck with it.
 
Originally posted by badselectioncommittee:

Originally posted by steffen91:
We're only taking it back to the original levels.

Obama when talking about the SS Withholding tax last year.

Yea, they bumped it to the original 6.2% from 4.2%, but did anyone notice that they also increased the cap to $113,700?

Cork-suckers!
This isn't the last one, I assure you. SS is going broke so there will have to be other changes to keep it going. The question is, who will get stuck with it.
they've turned it into a welfare program instead of a retirement program, that's why it's broken. I'd argue it was a bad idea to begin with because this was inevitable, as with all social programs like this they grow and grow until they become unsustainable. Our taxes will go up, business taxes will go up, and we will receive the boon of all the economic "benefit" that entails.

On top of that we have to finance things like Mr obama's syrian jihad. We'll be Greece writ large in 10 years.
 
Originally posted by BigOleNastyGator:

Originally posted by badselectioncommittee:


Originally posted by steffen91:
We're only taking it back to the original levels.

Obama when talking about the SS Withholding tax last year.

Yea, they bumped it to the original 6.2% from 4.2%, but did anyone notice that they also increased the cap to $113,700?

Cork-suckers!
This isn't the last one, I assure you. SS is going broke so there will have to be other changes to keep it going. The question is, who will get stuck with it.
they've turned it into a welfare program instead of a retirement program, that's why it's broken. I'd argue it was a bad idea to begin with because this was inevitable, as with all social programs like this they grow and grow until they become unsustainable. Our taxes will go up, business taxes will go up, and we will receive the boon of all the economic "benefit" that entails.

On top of that we have to finance things like Mr obama's syrian jihad. We'll be Greece writ large in 10 years.
BONG, I agree with you 100% (surprise, surprise) except for that last superfluous comment. AARP are the most dangerous lobby we have in existance today IMO. Second would be the gun lobby of course.
 
The gun lobby is what could end up being the thing that keeps you safest. I don't even like guns, but it is what it is.
 
Originally posted by BigOleNastyGator:
Originally posted by badselectioncommittee:

Originally posted by steffen91:
We're only taking it back to the original levels.

Obama when talking about the SS Withholding tax last year.

Yea, they bumped it to the original 6.2% from 4.2%, but did anyone notice that they also increased the cap to $113,700?

Cork-suckers!
This isn't the last one, I assure you. SS is going broke so there will have to be other changes to keep it going. The question is, who will get stuck with it.
they've turned it into a welfare program instead of a retirement program, that's why it's broken. I'd argue it was a bad idea to begin with because this was inevitable, as with all social programs like this they grow and grow until they become unsustainable. Our taxes will go up, business taxes will go up, and we will receive the boon of all the economic "benefit" that entails.

On top of that we have to finance things like Mr obama's syrian jihad. We'll be Greece writ large in 10 years.
Of course it's unsustainable. The worker-to-beneficiary ratio was in the neighborhood of 15-1 at the outset. What is it now 3-1, maybe? Wasn't the eligibility age at the outset on the far side of average life expectancy? Add to that the predicted effects of Obamacare (reduced work hours......"Let me be clear....if you like your plan, you get to keep it!") to go along with the millions who have dropped out of the labor market in recent years and the impending disaster has only been exacerbated.

But it's Republicans, especially those evil conservatives, who want to take SS away!
 
Bong, I feel you are being overly optimistic w/ the 10 yrs to Greece time frame. IMO we don't have 5 before the dollar is booted as the reserve currency.

LOL @ bad w/ his boogeyman gun lobby comment. Newsflash, good and decent citizens from all walks of life are what gives that ominous body is real power. Sure the gun industry loves an effective lobby, but the real sway in the NRA is w/ the sheer number of rank and file members. Who vote.
 
Originally posted by nastycracker:
Bong, I feel you are being overly optimistic w/ the 10 yrs to Greece time frame. IMO we don't have 5 before the dollar is booted as the reserve currency.

LOL @ bad w/ his boogeyman gun lobby comment. Newsflash, good and decent citizens from all walks of life are what gives that ominous body is real power. Sure the gun industry loves an effective lobby, but the real sway in the NRA is w/ the sheer number of rank and file members. Who vote.

I certainly agree. However, they'll get not a penny more from me until the unass Harry Reid.
 
Originally posted by Nastigators:

unass
confused0003.r191677.gif
 
To be fair...when social security was passed, the average life expectancy is 61 years old.

And at the same time, 50% people over the age of like 55 or maybe 60 were living in poverty. That's a pretty big deal.

They couldn't have know that, not only would the baby boom happen, but that life exoectancies would increase from 61 to nearly 80 at the turn of the century.

I say that because the life expectancy rate had sat pretty steadily in the late 50s early 60s range since the end of the Black Death. No way they could have known that in less than 80 years it would increase dramatically by 20 years in less than a century.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT