"John H" wrote in message
...
On 15 Feb 2005 19:22:13 -0800, wrote:
P.Fritz squealed:
The liebrals are too afraid people may be able to take care of
themselves
without the 'big daddy guvmint" they strive for.
************************************************ *
This liberal thinks you darn well better plan to take care of yourself,
and doesn't need "Big Daddy" government to give me a 3% "allowance" to
invest.Social Security supports widows, orphans, the disabled, and the
indigent elderly. If I need to turn my financial back on that segment
of society in order to save for retirement, there's something screwed
up (and in a major way) with my personal finances.
Did you know that if they took the "cap" off of Social Security
earnings, the rate could be reduced from about 15% at present (split
between employer/employee or paid as self employment tax) to something
closer to 6-7%? There you go, several percent saved by both employee
and employer- more for investment. :-)
How is allowing the voluntary investment of 3% of an 18 year-old's
withholdings
going to hurt widows, orphans, the disabled, or the indigent elderly?
Come on, Chuck. You're spreading the same kind of panic one would expect
from
Kennedy or Pelosi, or Reid (who thought this was a good idea a few years
ago -
wonder what changed his mind?).
Of course he conviently forgets that congress has no constitutional
authorization to establish a social security system in the first place.
WRT the cap of SS earnings, once again liebrals used flawed static
thinking...........anybody with any sense at all knows that removig the cap
will result in a movement from "wages" to another source of income......like
dividends to avoid the tax increase.
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