BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

[email protected]

On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:25:35 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 10:17:15 -0700, wrote:

On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 12:58:24 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 22:58:26 -0700, wrote:

On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 20:20:15 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:03:43 -0700, wrote:

I already told you, I expect a means test and raising the retirement
age more than they already have. (it isn't 65 anymore, in case you
haven't noticed)

And, several people have already said that the "means" test already
exists for SS in the form of taxes. Why are you saying this over and
over?

Boater also points out the means test only takes about 12.5 to 23% of
the SS if you make over 32k. I am talking about a means test that will
take a lot more of it as your income increases up to 100%

So you want a 100% tax on SS? That's just plain weird.

Sounds to me like you're not very familiar with regular income tax.
Maybe you've been out of it too long.

OK let me put this in a perspective you can understand. Do you think a
person making over $250,000 a year in retirement should still get all
of their SS?

I think people should be taxed on the money they make no matter the
source.

If someone makes $250K/yr and receives and is normally supposed to get
$24K/yr in SS (don't know how much SS gets you per year - feel free to
adjust to whatever number you want), you are taxed on it. Is that
really the big issue of our time?

The big issue of our time is cutting government spending and
increasing revenue, whether we will admit it or not.
At a certain point there will be some hard choices made, particularly
in entitlements, since that is the biggest non discretionary spending
outlay. I doubt there will be much discretionary spending going on.

I agree. What I disagree with is starting the hard choices with those
least able to deal with them.