I just don't see why people who make over 100K should be exempt for that earned past 100K but people below that have to pay.

So I think people who make say 50K or less should be free, but we tax over 100K.

__________________
Questions are a burden
and answers a prison
for oneself.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Again, that's fine, but it changes the concept of social security.

__________________
Don't Give Me a Defensive Player Who Can't Tackle . . . What Am I Going to Do With Him ? --- Bill Belichick

How do you figure? I'm just looking for people to pay their share. And there are a lot of people who don't, but there are also a lot of people who pay more than they can really afford.

__________________
Questions are a burden
and answers a prison
for oneself.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Social security is based just on the top $90K you make. The more you make the more you get out but it's capped at $90K. If you wanted to remove the cap for contributions then to keep the current concept you would also need to remove the cap for what you receive.

http://www.fairmark.com/retirement/socsec/pia.htm

So if I made, say, $500K, right now I don't contribute from my last $410K but the calculation for my benefits also doesn't take the last $410K into account. If you want me to pay SS tax on all $500K then you have two choices :

1) also increase my benefits to continue the more in more out concept.
2) cap my benefits based on the $90K and consider what I pay additional as a tax not a SS

__________________
Don't Give Me a Defensive Player Who Can't Tackle . . . What Am I Going to Do With Him ? --- Bill Belichick

That's what I was saying--because social security should be means tested.

__________________
Questions are a burden
and answers a prison
for oneself.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I have no problem with that as long as people realize the concept of it would change - it would become another tax as opposed to an insurance policy of living a long life which is what it is now.

__________________
Don't Give Me a Defensive Player Who Can't Tackle . . . What Am I Going to Do With Him ? --- Bill Belichick

I've always thought of it as a tax anyway.

__________________
Questions are a burden
and answers a prison
for oneself.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

They're going to like you even less now because "I Agree With Every Thing You Said" and I am considered an old Racist, Right Wing Nut.....

__________________
Stupid Harry Boy

It really isn't, it's like insurance. Everyone pays the same percent up to the limit and the more "insurance" you buy with your contributions, the more you get back if you need it by reaching a certain age. Personally I would prefer to cut the % and means test it (as opposed to you wanting to raise taxes on the rich ) but then it's just another slice of the welfare pie. Which is fine if that's what you want but it's straight welfare once it's means tested.

__________________
Don't Give Me a Defensive Player Who Can't Tackle . . . What Am I Going to Do With Him ? --- Bill Belichick

Well...I've essentially always been self-employed, so I've always had to pay double, and so I've always found it a particularly onerous thing.
And I've always thought of it as welfare anyway. You should see how pissed off my grandmother gets at me when I mention her monthly "welfare check"...or when she starts in with the "all we've done for you" and I ask her how many people have to work so she can cash her welfare check...LOL.

What I would rather do is empower people to be responsible for their own retirements, but I don't see that happening any time soon.

And it might as well be means tested, there's no reason for Buffet (Jimmy or Warren) or Perot or McCain to be getting social security checks.

__________________
Questions are a burden
and answers a prison
for oneself.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.