Skip to main content

View Diary: Gibbs: Simpson stays (296 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Means Testing (4+ / 0-)

     

    The simple solution is: Write smaller checks to rich people. If that's all you want to know, stop here. If you want to understand how the gears work, keep reading.

    Another slippery slope.  Social Security is successful
    because everyone has a tie to it.  Today the means
    testing might be those with one million dollars in
    assets or savings, tomorrow it will be squeezed to
    those with $250,000, and the next time...

    What you put into this program will be a formula as to
    what you get out of it.  The only positive I can see is
    if people start learning about what social security is
    and what it isn't.  

    •  Why would that proposal differ from (0+ / 0-)

      progressive taxation?

      With the progressive income tax, you're taxed 10 percent of your first dollars, 15 percent of your next dollars, 25 percent of the dollars after that, and so on. People who earn more pay a higher tax on their last dollar. Social Security mirrors that idea. People who have earned less receive a higher percentage of their last dollar. After Social Security calculates your average monthly earnings in today's dollars, it pays back 90 percent of the first dollars, 32 percent of the next chunk and 15 of everything up to the max. Remember, just as there's a ceiling for taxed wages, there's also a ceiling for monthly benefits.

      The upshot is that poorer workers get a higher percent of their wages, and richer workers get a lower percent. The payout should be progressive, because middle-class workers pay Social Security on most of their income, and upper-class workers don't. But with Social Security straining under its obligation to pay full benefits after 2030, people are thinking about shaving those benefits for richer retirees.  

      I don't find a problem there.

      Slavery is the legal fiction that a person is property. Corporate personhood is the legal fiction that property is a person. -Jan Edwards

      by SoCalSal on Mon Aug 30, 2010 at 09:35:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Who is rich? (0+ / 0-)

      No one posting here, I'll warrant (or wager at least).

      Still I don't see how you make the cutoff.

      The hungry judges soon the sentence sign, And wretches hang, that jurymen may dine.

      by magnetics on Mon Aug 30, 2010 at 11:28:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site