View Single Post
  #128   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
[email protected] emdeplume@hush.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,021
Default Obama endorses slavery

On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:57:28 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:19:15 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...


up we have a whole bucket full of IOUs, promising the government will
pay out the benefits. They just have not said where the money will
come from. Let me say this again slowly

WE ARE SPENDING 166% OF REVENUE.

There is no money left to pay out that $2T


Don't play stupid.
The SS revenue shortfall is a tiny, tiny percentage of the budget.
How many time do I have to tell you that $2T is payback over 26 years,
IF NOTHING HAPPENS TO INCREASE SS REVENUES!
Pretty obvious you view SS as a commie conspiracy to sap our precious
bodily fluids.

I was only guessing that they would means test SS through the tax
code, simply because that is the easiest way but I do bet they will be
means testing it.


No, you said you were already being means tested because you paid some
tax on SS benefits.
I already explained SS benefits are income, and subject to the
progressive income tax system.
You cut that out so you could continue with a lame argument.


It is not the number that is important, only the direction it is
moving. When Clinton was bragging about a budget surplus, he did it in
the back of a $80 Billion Social Security tax surplus that has been
used to prop up the general budget since 1968. That is gone now, never
to return.


That's not clear that it's done. SS will turn around in the next few
years as employment and the economy improve.

You're just crying about taxes, when a while ago you wanted them raised.

I still do.
I was just talking about how they are already chipping away at the SS
promise. It was always said that SS would never be taxed. Now it is,
based on your means.


There you go again - as RR would say.
Claiming you are being means tested, when you're not.
Means testing is actually a difficult solution.
It requires a determination of net worth.
Even the IRS can't do that without adding 100,000 auditors.
They should probably call it income testing, which is how it would work
if they ever do it.


The government has never looked at net worth when they determine
"means", they only look at income.


Feel free to try and change this. I guess when someone's home drops
50% in value then their SS checks should go up?


For example, they set the cutoff at $150k income.
Anything over $150k the SS income is taxed at 100%.
As it is now only 85% of SS income is taxed at marginal rates once
income hit $44k. SS income is NOT taxed at all until income hit $32k.


That is now, we don't know what will happen in the future but there
will be a push to deny SS to "rich" people.
The current tax is just the first swing at it.


Most "rich" people don't need it. Define rich. I think there is a
large group that could do without.

BTW, nobody buys your claim "It was always said that SS would never be
taxed." I knew as a kid it could be taxed, and I also knew if you work
while collecting, your benefits could be drastically reduced while
working. Exactly the opposite of what you're saying.



You must be young.
It was always taken as fact that SS would never be taxed since you put
in "after tax" money. That was the excuse they gave us about why FICA
was not deductible.

Reagan was the one who screwed seniors on that one. (1983)


Reagan did a lot of other screwing of people in general. Thanks for
acknowledging one of the things.