|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
denem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 02:41 PM Original message |
Why not fund Social Security by a Carbon Tax? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RC (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 02:45 PM Response to Original message |
1. HELL NO! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
denem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:00 PM Response to Reply #1 |
7. There's nothing to stop retaining a separate fund, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
avaistheone1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 02:50 PM Response to Original message |
2. Either raise the cap or elimate the cap altogether on Social Security |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NightWatcher (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 02:58 PM Response to Reply #2 |
6. Raise the cap from 106,000 to 250,000 and it's fine |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
denem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:01 PM Response to Reply #6 |
8. It's not fine, the wealthy don't make much of their income from a wage. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
demosincebirth (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:35 PM Response to Reply #6 |
20. Thats what I say, except remove the cap all together. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 02:54 PM Response to Original message |
3. Social Security it the most solvent program ever run |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
deaniac21 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:06 PM Response to Reply #3 |
9. Educate yourself: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
badtoworse (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:08 PM Response to Reply #9 |
11. +1 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:43 PM Response to Reply #11 |
25. You're not serious, are you? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:19 PM Response to Reply #9 |
15. Stop with the nonsense. This argument has been debunked |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:57 PM Response to Reply #9 |
29. One more thing ~ |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 05:17 PM Response to Reply #9 |
31. the rich borrowed from the workers for 30 years, but when it's time to repay "the money |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
denem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:08 PM Response to Reply #3 |
10. I'm suggesting we invest in our grandchildren's future, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:22 PM Response to Reply #10 |
16. I don't know what you are trying to say. Could you be more clear? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PoliticAverse (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 05:36 PM Response to Reply #3 |
32. The "social security trust fund" was a scam... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
deaniac21 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 06:23 PM Response to Reply #32 |
33. You can't convince someone paddling their boat down the Nile. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 09:11 PM Response to Reply #32 |
34. In 1983, there was a serious shortfall in the SS fund V what it had |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PoliticAverse (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 09:49 PM Response to Reply #34 |
35. I encourage people to read what I wrote, what you wrote... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-22-10 01:56 AM Response to Reply #35 |
36. Fair enough! n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-22-10 02:04 AM Response to Reply #35 |
37. Fair enough. That's what I did and found that all those |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Motown_Johnny (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 02:56 PM Response to Original message |
4. additional funding is needed, so payroll tax plus something else |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
denem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:12 PM Response to Reply #4 |
12. Isn't the easiest way to get a Big New Tax (Carbon) is scrap |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
badtoworse (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:16 PM Response to Reply #12 |
13. Benefits are tied to what you have paid into the system... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
denem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:19 PM Response to Reply #13 |
14. You can tie benefits to the income record |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
badtoworse (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:29 PM Response to Reply #14 |
18. I'm not trying to sell the idea; I want to kill it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
denem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:33 PM Response to Reply #18 |
19. That "fundamental nature" is a hallucination. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
badtoworse (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:38 PM Response to Reply #19 |
22. As a practical matter, you could fund SS with any kind of tax... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Motown_Johnny (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:39 PM Response to Reply #18 |
23. which is why I suggest additional funding, not a change over |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RC (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:47 PM Response to Reply #18 |
28. Listen to this guy, he know what he is talking about.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:44 PM Response to Reply #13 |
26. Thank you! n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
denem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:27 PM Response to Reply #4 |
17. OK. The cost free carbon pollution now |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:42 PM Response to Reply #4 |
24. Ending the Bush tax cuts would have helped reduce the deficit, which |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Democrats_win (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 02:57 PM Response to Original message |
5. Fine by me. Yet our current national philosophy would definitely not allow it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dkofos (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:36 PM Response to Original message |
21. It's not broke, don't try to fix it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 03:44 PM Response to Original message |
27. The same reason we shouldn't fund it with tobacco taxes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
doc03 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-21-10 05:03 PM Response to Original message |
30. A carbon tax is dead, why do you think the energy industry |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheKentuckian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-22-10 09:31 AM Response to Original message |
38. Never fund something you need with a revenue stream you want to be extinct |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Wed Apr 24th 2024, 04:33 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
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