|
|
|
|
On 15 Feb 2005 19:13:10 -0800, wrote:
John H wrote:
That last paragraph is nicely done. Of course, it has no bearing on the
voluntary investment of 3% of social security withholdings.
A lot of words, Chuck, nicely written and all, but with no bearing on
the
question.
******
Certainly it bears on the question. Why must one be allowed to reduce
the contribution to a fund that is designed to sustain, widows,
orphans, the disabled, and the indigent elderly in order to invest 3,
4, 5, 10, 15, or 20% of an income on Wall Street? You yourself said
that SS taxes did *not* prevent you from investing amounts beyond those
impounded by the govt. for social security.
"...20% of an income on Wall Street?"
From whence came that tidbit? What percent of the current withholdings goes to
support the WODI's you mention above? Remember, if 3% is personalized, the other
97% is still there to provide the same support.
If the parents of the WODI had been allowed to invest some of their SS money in
a decent manner and pass it on when they died, perhaps the indigent wouldn't be
so indigent.
John H
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!
"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes
|