The RICH are costing Social Security $150 Billion a year.

Who will produce the wealth that workers benefit from when there is no more incentive to produce wealth?

These dumb **** little communists think the **** appears all by itself. Flick a switch, lights come on. Always has been, always will be

 

For most people its choosing between working for an employer or homelessness. There is ideal freedom and then there is practical freedom. 99% of all jobs are for big corporations, there aren't enough jobs in small businesses for everyone to take. We have to provide for our families even if we take a crappy job where corporations set our wages. It doesn't help that companies aren't upfront about their wages and benefits to prospective job seekers.

 

Oh geeze, the helpless crap again

 

That is dead wrong. The biggest company I ever worked for grossed 50 million a year, the fortune five hundred in total accounts well less than 5 million people world wide and probably less. There are over 18 million businesses in the US alone. 5/6 of them have lass than 50 employees.

 

The RICH are costing Social Security $150 Billion a year.

This is some Left-Wing Bleeding Heart Democrat idea that the rich are somehow "costing" SS. Anyone making $132,900.00 or more a year is paying $16,479.60 per year into SS. That is the max amount required. No one will be able to draw more than the max SS payment ($2,861 in 2019). So a person who made 150K a year will get $2,861; a person who made 150 million will get $2,681. How is this costing me anything? Social Security was designed for the poor and stupid so they would have some money in old age. If I made over 130K a year I would never need the small amount SS would pay me. Collection of Social Security from the rich is just another way for the Democrats to get money for the poor. Anyone making over 130K shouldn't even have to pay into SS.

 

Wow, how pathetic. I'm sad for you.

 

The mods here are hilarious

 

The rich bear most of the cost of this civilization as is. It will be that way whatever tax policy you use.

 

We should cap FICA taxes at $1,000,000

 

The fact that the top 10% richest Americans control 81% of all the wealth makes me say yes it is fair.

 

Of course there is a reason. As another poster already pointed out (and seemingly was ignored!), Social Security is NOT welfare. It is an individual retirement supplement, and it is run on percentages -- i.e. everyone does not get the same benefit amount. The program was not designed to be punitive to some, but to be helpful to everyone in providing a minimum income to supplement one's retirement, based upon income earned during one's life of employment. It caps out because there is a maximum payout with the formula, and the program is NOT designed to collect beyond that percentage proportionate amount which would generate the maximum payout. The program is designed so that no one pays more proportionally than they can potentially collect. That is how the system was set up and designed.

Whether it is time to CHANGE the system, due mostly to Congress' historical inability to keep its hands out of the SS money pool, and in a minor way because of changing demographics, is another (and perhaps valid) question. Even though I am a conservative, I would prefer changing the program rules and allowing a higher cap even without raising the max payout percentage, because we need to do something to keep SS solvent and the alternatives are raising the retirement age or decreasing benefits, neither of which is more palatable IMO. A lot of people do jobs where physically they can't cope with a raised retirement age, and frankly, 40+ years of working is enough for most people. And cutting benefits isn't a good option because too many people have failed to adequately save on their own. What those who promote class warfare don't understand (or just don't care because they are lower level earners) is that it is not "THE RICH" who are harmed by any of these alternatives, but normal middle class earners. $132000 isn't rich. $200000 isn't rich. A large amount of people earning between $132K and $250K are people who have worked hard and been upwardly mobile thru their careers and are now in their 40s and 50s, and have not been earning at that level for many years. They usually have families with teenagers and college students and are just now beginning to see some significant growth in their 401Ks due to compounding. NOT rich, but they ARE those who seem to do the vast majority of carrying the "less fortunate" via taxes.

 

taking care of our elderly and disabled via social security is the right thing to do

why do Republicans hate Social Security so badly?

if 90% of the country can pay the tax on every dollar they earn, the 10% can too, stop being so darned greedy

if it will save Social Security to raise it, then raise it already

"due mostly to Congress' historical inability to keep its hands out of the SS money pool"

agree, the baby boomers gave us extra money, that should of been saved away as now the boomers are retiring and not enough babies being born

 

SS OASI pays out in proportion to what you pay in during your best 35 years. It's all based on taxes up to the max you have a complaint with. Reason would say that SS OASI is an annuity you and your boss contribute to and you annuitize when you want to collect benefits. So, if you want to tax every dollar, you will have to pay out based on every dollar.

OASI will be paying out $900B this year. DI and SSI total a little over $200B. It would be more reasonable to argue that a payroll tax on every dollar above the current maximum should cover DI and SSI, roughly 20% of the 12.4% currently contributed to the trust fund on every dollar up to the maximum.

If you just consider OASI a tax, you can never reach a reasonable solution.

How about self employed RICH people who employ others and contribute to the SS Trust Fund in their name, not receiving a dime in benefit?

 

Quote; "due mostly to Congress' historical inability to keep its hands out of the SS money pool"


THE BIGGEST ROBBERY OF ALL TIME!

In the 1990's, Canada, Norway, Korea, Denmark, Taiwan, and many more foreign central governments were investing their worker's excess contributions into stocks, bonds, real estate, and infrastructure world-wide, (I've studied them all), and sadly back then, Republicans and Democrats were just arguing about reforming SS.

Example; Motorists who use the Chicago Skyway toll road are in fact contributing into Canada's social security trust fund, WTF?

 

So, you want them to contribute, yet they dont draw off the program?

More wealth redistribution non-sense.

People that earn that much dont need you social programs conveniently disguised to "save them". They are doing just fine without your help.

Let's be honest... what burns your chaps is you cant gr their money to fund the program for the benefit of others.

 

How are they penalized? They actually see a return on their contributions and for those would claimed the EITC didn't contribute at all or just partly during those years. The highest earners who contribute the max lose money on their contributions.

 

And raise the benefit accordingly.

 

If there is a surplus of contributions they are invested in a special Treasury Bill. In what would you propose they be invested?

 

If the Canadians, Europeans, Brits, Scandinavians, Australians and Israelis can pull it off, why can't America?

They spend less and have better outcomes than we do.

 

I have a bipartisan solution that would permanently fix SS within a few years, and won't cost anyone an extra dime

Hint; Study how several industrialized nations have managed to increase their percentage of population employed above 52% versus 48% in the U.S.

In other words, if we had an extra 5 million contributors, here's the math;

Current revenues $3.23 trillion/156.7 million employed X 5 million = $103 billion

And according to EPI;

“Removing the cap entirely, thereby imposing a flat tax of 12.4 percent on all earnings — essentially a $100 billion a year tax increase on the wealthy — would more than completely close the funding gap.”

https://www.epi.org/publication/webfeatures_snapshots_20050217/

 

We are them. Nor do I have any reason they have a retirement system I would want to participate inane would do better in.

 

Excess FICA contributions have vanished.

Once again, In the 1990's, Canada, Norway, Korea, Denmark, Taiwan, and many more foreign central governments have all played the capitalist game with their worker's excess contributions. How they did it?

Simply put, they've chartered GSE's, hired money managers, paid them a decent salary, NO COMMISSIONS.

 

They will in future unless some reforms are made but again, if not invested in the special Treasury Bills they are invested in what where would you want the funds invested?

So where would you want the excess SS funds invested? Stock index funds.........all for it with a cash reserve in those T bills. Or better yet you get to invest some of your OWN money into an index fund.

 

They want your additional money but they don't want you to get the additional benefit

 

Why do you need to lie to make your points?