25-02-2004 22:50									#1
	Greenspan to Congress: Cut Social Security Benefits Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: “This dramatic demographic change is certain to place enormous demands on our nation’s resources — demands we will almost surely be unable to meet unless action is taken,” Greenspan said. “For a variety of reasons, that action is better taken as soon as possible.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4371103/


I guess I will have to increase that ole 401k contribution.

	25-02-2004 23:01									#2
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

What? You were seriously counting on getting money out of Social Security?

Wraith
"Unquestionably, there is progress. The average American now pays out twice as much in taxes as he formerly got in wages."
-- H. L. Mencken

	25-02-2004 23:03									#3
	Put an end to popups!

Wraith siting!!!!

	25-02-2004 23:05									#4
	Tired of ads?

There are lots of things they can do to save SS, but cutting benefits across the board for future retirees is NOT one of them.

	25-02-2004 23:09									#5
	Remove this text

What? There were still welfare benefits in the US? What, are you commies or what?

	25-02-2004 23:13									#6
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara There are lots of things they can do to save SS

and these would be?

	25-02-2004 23:13									#7
	eligibility dates Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

SS was supposed to cover people in their waning years, back when people who made it to 65 had another 13 or so years to live on average. Nowadays, people who make it 65 have another 18 or so years to live. The eligibility ages should be indexed to life expectancy just as the benefit levels are indexed to inflation.

Also, the overall life expectancy back in 1940 wasa only about 64 (which some will note is less than 65).

	25-02-2004 23:15									#8
	Re: eligibility dates Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by pchang SS was supposed to cover people in their waning years, back when people who made it to 65 had another 13 or so years to live on average. Nowadays, people who make it 65 have another 18 or so years to live. The eligibility ages should be indexed to life expectancy just as the benefit levels are indexed to inflation.

Personally...I would still prefer to retire at 65. I want to enjoy my "golden years"

	25-02-2004 23:22									#9
	Re: Re: eligibility dates Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by PLATO Personally...I would still prefer to retire at 65. I want to enjoy my "golden years"

And hence the over expansion of the program beyond its original intent and its pending insolvency.

	25-02-2004 23:39									#10
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by PLATO and these would be?

remove income cap on the amount taxed... currently, the highest amount people are taxed on SS is $87,000 or so... that means... someone making $10,000,000 gets taxed as if they made $87,000.

That is terribly regressive and not fair.

BTW, the common misconception about SS is that the money that is taxed is being saved for our retirement... that is not the case. The current money going into the SS fund is used for benefits to ppl currently collecting SS.

So, by creating a private savings account out of SS, you are taking money OUT of the benefits that retirees currently receive.

Most people are greatly misinformed when it comes to SS, how it is taxed, and how it is paid out. If we got rid of the taxable income cap on SS, it would solve all the problems.

Oh wait, but it's more important that rich people making hundreds of millions have an extra million dollars rather than millions of people having a decent government retirement.

	25-02-2004 23:45									#11
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The income ceiling is interesting ... anything above a certain amount isn't taxed for Social Security. So a person making less than that amount pays the tax on their entire income, while a person making more only pays on a portion of their income.

I imagine it has something to do with the notion that the richer folks wouldn't be as much of a draw on SS in their older years, but I can't help but think that taxing one's entire income would be but one way of helping SS out.

Gatekeeper

	25-02-2004 23:46									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

It seems like basic statistics that SS will run out of money unless it is drastically changed. Its equally obvious that there are only two ways to fix it. Either less money has to come out of the program by reducing or restricting the benefits AND/OR more money has to go in--meaning more taxes of one form or another.

There's no magic pill.


I look at the public service pension my father draws and it was the same type of - -- workers pay for the current pensioners thinking. IN that case, the government and union comprimised ( gov't added some money to the pot)with the result that current workers will receive much less generous pensions than current pensioners get . . The result was a viable plan but one in which the workers had to work for an additional couple of years to get to the same benfit levels as previously available

	25-02-2004 23:46									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Gatekeeper The income ceiling is interesting ... anything above a certain amount isn't taxed for Social Security. So a person making less than that amount pays the tax on their entire income, while a person making more only pays on a portion of their income. I imagine it has something to do with the notion that the richer folks wouldn't be as much of a draw on SS in their older years, but I can't help but think that taxing one's entire income would be but one way of helping SS out. Gatekeeper

with the top 1% holding something like 60% of the wealth... well, that's a lot of revenue the government is missing out on.

	25-02-2004 23:50									#14
	Full PM-box? Change here!

All I can say is

Let's talk fiscal responsibility here, people. Mr. Bush, pay attention!

	25-02-2004 23:51									#15
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd All I can say is Let's talk fiscal responsibility here, people. Mr. Bush, pay attention!

fiscal responsibility???

coming from the guy who thinks taxation is wrong

	25-02-2004 23:52									#16
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Sava with the top 1% holding something like 60% of the wealth... well, that's a lot of revenue the government is missing out on.

Removing the income cap will help some, but you have to realize that this affects only W-2 income. Much of the income of the super rich (as you define them) is not in the form of W-2 income and so would not be taxed for social security in any case.

	25-02-2004 23:53									#17
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by pchang Removing the income cap will help some, but you have to realize that this affects only W-2 income. Much of the income of the super rich (as you define them) is not in the form of W-2 income and so would not be taxed for social security in any case.

we should also remove SS tax from the payroll tax and put it on income tax...

	26-02-2004 00:09									#18
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Gatekeeper I imagine it has something to do with the notion that the richer folks wouldn't be as much of a draw on SS in their older years, but I can't help but think that taxing one's entire income would be but one way of helping SS out. Gatekeeper

Nope. Those who pay the most into SS get the most back in benefits. So the mulitmillionaries get as much back as the people who made $87K. I'm of the opinion that benefits should be graduated based upon need. So, the richer you are, the less you get back.

	26-02-2004 00:14									#19
	Put an end to popups!

I used to enjoy it when during the year it looked like I got a 7% raise when I hit the SS income cap. Medicare has no such cap.

	26-02-2004 00:16									#20
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Nope. Those who pay the most into SS get the most back in benefits. So the mulitmillionaries get as much back as the people who made $87K. I'm of the opinion that benefits should be graduated based upon need. So, the richer you are, the less you get back.

So we should punish people for investing toward retirement and reward someone who squanders all their money? How about graduated based on need defined by lifetime earnings, not your current worth?

	26-02-2004 00:21									#21
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

They should raise the retirement age-simplest solution to a problem created simply becuase people are living longer. If you take that into account, the system remains solvent.

	26-02-2004 00:22									#22
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Stuie, che isn't interested in a fair plan, he's interested in a wealth transfer plan - transfering wealth from those who earned it to those who didn't.

	26-02-2004 00:25									#23
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Stuie So we should punish people for investing toward retirement and reward someone who squanders all their money? How about graduated based on need defined by lifetime earnings, not your current worth?

Social Security is an anti-poverty program. That's its purpose. Those who aren't in poverty do not need it.

And Floyd is slightly correct. I don't buy libertarian morality. It's evil.

	26-02-2004 00:35									#24
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I agree that SS should be scailed back some

not in benefits, but in age

I think that it shuld start when you are 70

HJob Miller

	26-02-2004 00:35									#25
	Increase Your PM Length

SS was never about fairness or savings. It was about makaing sure old people in the US did not live in deplorable conditions. Before SS, there were many old people who lived below the poverty level, and this was considered shameful by the people of the US at that time. Since then, the scope of SS has expanded and its origins have been lost. A return of SS to its original purpose will make it solvent, but will also reduce its scope.

	26-02-2004 00:43									#26
	Suffering from ads?

quote: And Floyd is slightly correct. I don't buy libertarian morality. It's evil.

Yeah, evil, and all you want to do is to strip away everyone's property rights and personal liberty, and place both in the hands of the government (or, excuse me, "the people"). That's isn't evil at all

In any case, che and pchang have both admitted that they aren't primarily interested in an equitable plan, so I think that my point was well made.

	26-02-2004 00:46									#27
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

And it has been made clear by many as well that your extremist liberterianism is as minority a view as they come, so thankfully your ideas will never make it to power.

	26-02-2004 00:58									#28
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: And it has been made clear by many as well that your extremist liberterianism is as minority a view as they come, so thankfully your ideas will never make it to power.

AMEN!

	26-02-2004 01:00									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Social Security is an anti-poverty program. That's its purpose. Those who aren't in poverty do not need it.

Unfortunately, many democrats insist Social Security is an entitlement, available to anyone regardless of need, not a safety net.

Simple solution is a combination of effects
1. Index retirement age to life expectancy when entering the workforce.
2. Remove income cap on contributions.
3. Reduce indexation for inflation by one percent per year (current method of calculating benefits overstates inflation by that much.
(edit: 4. Means test benefits on a sliding scale. Many retirees will get full benefits, but people retired on $100+K per year or so get nothing.)

We need to do this NOW. The longer you wait the harder it is to fix a long-term problem like this.

	26-02-2004 01:02									#30
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd In any case, che and pchang have both admitted that they aren't primarily interested in an equitable plan, so I think that my point was well made.

Different definitions of equitable, buddy boy.