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

Personally, I would like to see Social Security and Medicare taxes folded into the general taxation rate, the Social Security and Medicare payouts re-termed "Welfare for the Middle Class", and income tax withholding eliminated. Make everyone pay their taxes every year by April 15th, so they can see just how much the federal government is ****ing them over.

 

I think most know they will not be wealthy at retirement. I don't really care if people are pursuing adequate retirement plans. You do realize that SS was created because people were thought too ignorant or too stupid to save money on their own? If SS was insurance it wouldn't be mandatory. If it wasn't mandatory people wouldn't buy it and we would be right back to those too ignorant or stupid to save on their own. It is sad that people lost their homes but many I saw losing their homes had overspent to buy them in the first place. People spend when they could and maybe should be saving. Also a home should never be considered an investment. It is a home, it is where a person and their family live. No one should live in their investment. If a person is lucky enough to sell at a profit when they retire and decide to downsize then that is great but a home should never be looked at as a retirement investment. Invest in real estate? Yes. Invest in your home? No. People can crap out, that's why we have SS as that safety net. I have a friend who was disabled in an work related accident who at the age of 45 started drawing SS. It was not the greatest money for a 45 year old with a family but he got by. Thinking one is invulnerable at 20 or 30 is called youth.

With means testing you can't be suggesting that people who make less pay a lower percentage into SS?

Not sure I understand this comment:

 

The reason for withholding is that most people are not capable of hanging onto enough money throughout the year to enable them to pay come April.

 

The "system" was designed to support the lazy on the backs of the industrious. That's not how things should work. I haven't done a detailed analysis, but a quick back of the envelope calculation says that my recently deceased father didn't even get all of his money back, much less any ROI, or any thing left for his heirs. That's such a good deal. The government makes a profit, the actual profit earner and his heirs get screwed. Please, PLEASE, take you and your wealth confiscatory ideas elsewhere. You're not welcome here.

 

Oh yeah? What if their expenditures were $12B. Should they pay taxes on a net income of -1B? Is it finally sinking in? Probably not.

 

That, and once the people realized how much they were actually paying (as opposed to being nickeled and dimed from check to check) there would be an all out revolt. Most people have no idea how much they're actually paying even though the numbers are right there in front of them. On average, people are stupid. They think a reduction in their tax refund means their taxes went up.

 

And to prevent a revolution when The People realize just how much they're actually paying.

 

SS is a retirement program, a defined benefit program. You want to turn it into a welfare program. And what serious problem with 401k plans? Its one of the few government programs that actually work for the middle class and how I created the wealth I will use in my soon to come retirement. And now you want to means test my SS based on my wealth that I created?

 

Imagine the clamor to reduce taxes in that case.

 

Yes. There's no real difference between a "defined benefit" program and a "welfare" program if there's no actual connection between the money you pay in and the money you take out, and there isn't. SS is a Ponzi scheme and always was. The money paid in this year is paid out this year. The people who are paying in today have their money transferred immediately to other people who paid in years ago. The people who are going to collect years from now will have to have money transferred from other people paying in then. When SS started, only one out of ten people made it to age 65 and there were 42 people working for every retiree. Now nine out of ten people make it to age 65 and there are just 2.5 people working for every retiree. It's not a sustainable system.

The f'ing Republicans screwed up the chance to make SS means tested. Bill Clinton opened the door by suggesting that anyone making more than a million dollars a year shouldn't be getting SS, and the Republicans slammed it shut again. Damn fools.

 

FDR's original Old Age Survivors program was pretty reasonable with the mission to get old folks who were used up by their lifetime of work from that point to their death, without homelessness or begging for bread.

There ain't supposed to be any such for the young -- who are responsible to stand on their own two feet and struggle until they are used up by a lifetime of work -- and so then get some benefits from the federal treasury.

 

Tax reduction will never happen in America. The "ruling class" has managed to make the "serfs" too dependent on handouts.

 

Its not rich proples responsibilty to support poor people in their old age

 

That max is based on how much they pay in. If the max allowed to pay in goes up, the max would go up as well.

 

So you are advocating forcibly taking more money from people? And because you're not already doing so, you regard these people as costing you something?

 

Too late for you!! SS benefits are significantly more complex than that.

The serious problem with 401k is that a significant percent of people take the money out - even when they have to pay penalties AND taxes.

I do believe there is a level of income above which SS payouts are no longer warranted. If in retirement you're making a quarter million a year, I'd suggest not writing you an SS check. Sorry. You already won!

SS was designed to help those who were eating cat food in unheated tenements - not those choosing what color Mercedes to buy this year.

 

Wow!!!! A government program didn't work out as intended? Holy effing moly!

 

Do you know what "net" means?

Do you know what "profit" means?

Please let me know so I can help you out.

 

No, SS is not like that.

If someone doesn't work, they aren't going to get SS in retirement.

And, the same thing happened with your father's automobile insurance. He didn't get his money back. Instead, it went to paying for other people's accidents.

SS is not designed as an investment plan. It's much more like insurance against the possibility of retiring with unreasonably low income.

 

Which of congress's legislative powers, as enumerated in article I, section 8, allow it to create such an insurance plan?

 

No they are pretty straight forward. And no I have no reason to believe "significant percent of people take the money out", they can simply loan it to themselves if they need it for a temporary purpose. And it's not whether you or anyone else believes they are "warrant" to someone else who paid into the system all their lives, it is warranted BECAUSE they did so and for you to think you can just rip them off over it because you want is outrageous. They did't win, they earned and in fact already lost money on SS while those at the bottom already make money off of it.

 

Even today we have huge numbers of citizens who have no retirement savings - or plans to save.

My bet is that calling them all stupid doesn't solve anything. Maybe you get to feel superior?

Insurance most definitely CAN be mandatory. Check out your state's automobile insurance law.

And, you SHOULD care! The thing is, when people don't save for retirement, they become part of the millions dependent on social safety net services! Surely you care about that, don't you?

Well, I happen to agree that large numbers of people made mistakes here. But, their mistakes were not as bad as you suggest.

Remember that our financial system changed dramatically. When I bought my first house, the mortgage company did an analysis on my income, my bank account, my job, my wife, my car, the house I wanted to buy, etc. Then, they decided how much house I could afford. And, they didn't try to sell me on some adjustable rate mortgage crap, because they were invested WITH me, and needed ME to succeed.

In the early years of this century, things had fallen apart to the point where CountryWide and others did not even slightly care about who they wrote mortgages for - they just wanted to write as many as possible and then dump them.

That was a SERIOUS switch for people who had purchased houses in the past - people who used to see mortgage companies as needing to care about their success.

And, remember that they were selling to many who didn't take finance in school and don't know how to calculate a mortgage, how to do quality financial planning, and otherwise were DEPENDING on the professionalism and fiduciary responsibility of financial institutions - who, it turns out, were trying to RAPE them.

By means testing I mean that people who are earning a million bucks a year after retirement don't really need to collect SS payments - they already won. I see SS as being like insurance against the possibility that a person craps out before retirement - their retirement account is lost somehow or for some other reason they've worked their whole life and end up with not enough to retire on.

I'm glad they can take advantage of their SS, rather than simply being supported by our social safety net - which I pay for.

 

SS is a major success.

 

So, sue them!

Oh wait - you may not be the first to try that!

 

SS was designed to help those who were eating cat food in unheated tenements - not those choosing what color Mercedes to buy this year.