Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


(31,493 posts)
8. It used to be that rich people felt an obligation to give back to the society that helped make them
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:13 PM
Apr 2013

rich. The key word is "felt". So let's put the measurement of the "what rich is" goal post on wheels so the rich can move it should they ever be accused of not feeling like they should give back something to society. So let's keep debating what rich really is ....cause that's working out so well for all of us. For those who don't know ...some of us can only wish we had money for an IRA ...instead we are hoping we won't be out on the street when we are 80.

Is that limit per account, or per individual. nt Xipe Totec Apr 2013 #1
Not fair? Laelth Apr 2013 #2
IRA funds are already taxed ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2013 #5
Absolutely correct. still_one Apr 2013 #13
It's a limit of the tax advantages given for saving for retirement muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #3
I remember that sort of logic customerserviceguy Apr 2013 #7
Is it "without reference to inflation"? muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #10
All I can tell you is customerserviceguy Apr 2013 #11
I agree with your assessment. On one hand you encourage people to save, then say that you still_one Apr 2013 #12
That's progressive taxation muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #14
There was a policy reason for expanding IRA's back in the 1970's customerserviceguy Apr 2013 #15
The most Social Security pays per year is about $30,000; $3 million buys an annuity of $200,000 muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #16
You pay taxes on IRA money when it is withdrawn. If you are referring to Roth Iras, you cannot even still_one Apr 2013 #17
People who can accumulate more than $3m in a retirement plan are not middle class muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #18
It takes 40 years to accumulate that at 10%. It is doable. This won't pass anyway, but it punishes still_one Apr 2013 #21
Close to 11%, and that's *above inflation* muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #22
$5,500 limit? You're missing some options FreeJoe Apr 2013 #24
You can contribute to a Roth regardless of income FreeJoe Apr 2013 #25
the reason was to help kill defined benefit pensions & SS & replace them with crappy alternatives. HiPointDem Apr 2013 #33
The best solution would be limiting IRA investments to cash or publicly traded stocks and bonds. dawg Apr 2013 #4
"at between a 10 and 11% average annual return." = lol. HiPointDem Apr 2013 #34
How can it not be fair if someone has that kind of money? treestar Apr 2013 #6
It used to be that rich people felt an obligation to give back to the society that helped make them L0oniX Apr 2013 #8
They can still save as much as they want for retirement Ruby the Liberal Apr 2013 #9
We already Cap rate of Investment, now we admit to being full of excrement One_Life_To_Give Apr 2013 #19
Pleas read the link in #19, and explain why a retirement income of more than $205k needs a tax break muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #20
We all will pay for the accountants to manage this little change One_Life_To_Give Apr 2013 #26
I'm sorry, but you make no sense muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #27
Two Parts One_Life_To_Give Apr 2013 #30
It can be checked in the same way that they check you're not exceeding the yearly limits muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #31
Indexed? FreeJoe Apr 2013 #23
Yes, it's indexed muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #28
A bad solution to a problem purposely created to legalize outright theft of worker's Egalitarian Thug Apr 2013 #29
romney had iras with millions in them. is he saving for retirement? HiPointDem Apr 2013 #32
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»So the President is propo...»Reply #8