|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
inna (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:43 AM Original message |
Need your feedback on Social Security taxation & caps!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DesertFlower (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:45 AM Response to Original message |
1. yes. bill gates pays the same. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProgressiveProfessor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:54 AM Response to Reply #1 |
6. Not really |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 02:02 AM Response to Reply #1 |
16. Bill doesn't get WAGES. He get CAPITAL INCOME. He doesn't pay a dime of FICA, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 02:45 AM Response to Reply #16 |
23. That too could be changed. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 03:28 AM Response to Reply #23 |
34. It could. You let me know when you see that proposal floated by any politician. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ChicagoSuz219 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:49 AM Response to Original message |
2. They need to lose the FICA cap... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tonysam (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:54 AM Response to Reply #2 |
5. Better yet, abolish state "opt out" of paying into Social Security |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DaveinMD (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:55 AM Response to Reply #2 |
9. Dems should propose |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
inna (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 03:09 AM Response to Reply #9 |
30. +1,000! However... you won't believe what kinds of objections are being floated |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 03:27 AM Response to Reply #30 |
33. Yes, it's a *wonderful* idea to give the feds more money to borrow into the general budget. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Enthusiast (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 06:40 AM Response to Reply #33 |
36. This is exactly the situation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DaveinMD (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 11:43 AM Response to Reply #30 |
39. if I ever |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProgressiveProfessor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:58 AM Response to Reply #2 |
14. Not necessarily true |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 02:46 AM Original message |
Social Security and perhaps Medicare taxes should apply to capital |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProgressiveProfessor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 02:47 AM Response to Original message |
25. Its the difference between earned and unearned income |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Enthusiast (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 06:42 AM Response to Original message |
37. Whiny Republicans will say |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WatchWhatISay (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:51 AM Response to Original message |
3. The only exception would be for a self-employed person |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ChicagoSuz219 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:55 AM Response to Reply #3 |
8. OK... I'll make an exception for them. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ChicagoSuz219 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:56 AM Response to Reply #8 |
11. ...by half. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 03:34 AM Response to Reply #8 |
35. why? if they get over $106K in wages, why should they be taxed at a lower rate than |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WatchWhatISay (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 10:25 AM Response to Reply #8 |
38. Well, don't feel too sorry for them |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Lydia Leftcoast (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:55 AM Response to Reply #3 |
10. For self-employed people, "self-employment tax" (combined SS and Medicare) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Obamanaut (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:59 AM Response to Reply #3 |
15. Some say the employee pays for everything, just as the self employed |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dysfunctional press (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 08:22 PM Response to Reply #3 |
46. why should they get an exception? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProgressiveProfessor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:53 AM Response to Original message |
4. Sort of... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slipslidingaway (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:55 AM Response to Original message |
7. True, but there is also a cap on what is paid out to an individual. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PBS Poll-435 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:57 AM Response to Original message |
12. I prefer Al Franken's "Doughnut Hole". Keep the existing cap with annual index, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 02:07 AM Response to Reply #12 |
17. If you're going to lift the cap, the rationale for not including income between |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PBS Poll-435 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 02:13 AM Response to Reply #17 |
18. Based on my personal experience, you are wrong |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 02:19 AM Response to Reply #18 |
19. SS already taxes 90% of total wage income in the US. This leaves just 10% over |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PBS Poll-435 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 02:24 AM Response to Reply #19 |
20. Some links to the data that you have cited would be useful. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 02:41 AM Response to Reply #20 |
21. bottom of page 313. in footnote. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PBS Poll-435 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 02:43 AM Response to Reply #21 |
22. Try harder |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 02:46 AM Response to Reply #22 |
24. excuse me? "By 1983, 90% of wages were subject to the tax. Since then the fraction |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PBS Poll-435 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 03:05 AM Response to Reply #24 |
29. Labor? Shill? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 03:20 AM Response to Reply #29 |
31. Why? If SS taxes about 90% of covered wages, the proportion is ipso facto |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:57 AM Response to Original message |
13. Bill Gates doesn't pay one dime. He doesn't get a salary anymore. He makes his money from CAPITAL |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 02:49 AM Response to Reply #13 |
26. Subject capital gains income to Social Security and Medicare taxes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 02:59 AM Response to Reply #26 |
27. SS was set up as a self-funded program so it couldn't be hit with the "welfare" label. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
amborin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 03:04 AM Response to Original message |
28. explanation here; also a scary older Krugman article: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 03:24 AM Response to Reply #28 |
32. I believe that's a graph of what % of retirement income each component is. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
amborin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 04:51 PM Response to Reply #32 |
43. it is; it goes w/ one of K's posts re: soc sec |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 12:16 PM Response to Original message |
40. Don't raise cap on SS, raise income tax by an equivelent amount. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 12:58 PM Response to Reply #40 |
41. thank you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 01:20 PM Response to Reply #41 |
42. No thank you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slipslidingaway (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 08:15 PM Response to Reply #41 |
45. Thanks for your posts on this issue... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
inna (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 09:52 PM Response to Reply #41 |
47. Hannah Bell, thank you! And... What # 42 and 45 said. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 09:58 PM Response to Reply #47 |
48. ?? I thought you favored lifting the cap to over $250K? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
inna (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 10:23 PM Response to Reply #48 |
49. Currently, I 'favor' ELIMINATING the cap ALTOGETHER, but that had nothing to do |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 10:38 PM Response to Reply #49 |
50. not trying to be difficult or start a fight, but it's my recollection that you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
inna (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 10:59 PM Response to Reply #50 |
51. :bangs head on laptop repeatedly: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 11:50 PM Response to Reply #51 |
52. hmm. well, it's my recollection you implied something like that, & that's what you were referring |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slipslidingaway (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-10-10 08:12 PM Response to Original message |
44. kick nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sat May 04th 2024, 05:57 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC