Social Secuity and Medicare not in Crisis
Virtually all income of the bottom 50 percent is “earned” and fully taxed for Social Security and Medicare. Many people are unaware that wealthy taxpayers are entitled to exempt much, if not most, of their wages, as well as investment income. Ending those exemptions would allow a major reduction in Social Security and Medicare tax rates.
Roland
8:28 am on Monday, June 11, 2012
wE NEED TO FIND THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THESE PROGRAMS AND DON'T BELONG THERE NOT TAKE MORE MONEY FROM OTHERS AND GIVE IT TO MORE PEOPLE WHO DON'T BELONG THERE AND THEN THERE WILL BE ENOUGH MONEY FOR THOSE WHO ARE REALLY IN NEED .
david mokal
9:57 am on Monday, June 11, 2012
Well it sure scares me thats my only income.I have known so many that only collected one year and passed away. Some never even got a dime. That was in the 50's 60's 70's and half the eighties. Great Topic Howard. Well at least I got my Refridgerator Box to live in just in case.
Ronnie
3:36 pm on Monday, June 11, 2012
How about social security for those who deserve it. Not for addicts or false claims. People like David earned this and paid into it all their lives.
coldwaterdiver
4:05 pm on Monday, June 11, 2012
"Virtually all income of the bottom 50 percent is earned" You mean people in the top 50% dont earn their money? Is an unemployment check "earned"? Do you have any facts to back up that opening statement? That said, those exemtions kick in after earning 106K per year. What is fair, that person would have paid 6000 into the system, where as someone earning $45000 contributes only $2700, is it fair that they are only paying 1/2 as much but will be intitled to the same SS check upon retirement? (just playing devils advocate here) Social security was never intended to be someones only income, it was supposed to be an emergency safety net.
I would like to see them tax municipal bonds though, but thats a sacred cow that would never be touched, John Kerry would never let that happen.
Phe
7:26 am on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
You do realize that 6,000 is 5.5% of the total earned income of 106,000 whereas 2,700 is actually 6% of the total earned income of 45,000. Given that, people with an income over 100K actually pay half a percent less by your numbers than those who make less than half of the "top" income earners. Yeah, that's a disparity - especially when you consider that top income earners are less likely to miss that income than those who live paycheck to paycheck.
I'm not sure how you can compare dollars in versus percentage of income in this. I mean, is it fair that someone who *makes* less than half pays half as much in total dollars but half a percentage more in total overall income? Um, probably not.
david mokal
9:00 pm on Monday, June 11, 2012
Social Securety was designed for the working person to retire on. There were no such things as 401 k's. Most shops had Profeit sharing. Most people never collected cause no one lived that long. 60-65 you were gonzo. But true now the addicts are getting it with the food stamps and other gratuities. Rides to Meth Clinics. It was not designed for that. Social Securety is money earned its not welfare. People are living longer and the BabyBoomers but the money should be there. I worked since I was 10 years old and paid in 10 foe.
coldwaterdiver
2:01 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
no it wasnt, it was first introduced for war widows. The idea was that you saved money to retire on, or you didnt retire. When you were working at the age of 10 can I safely guess it was under the table and you didnt have SS and medicare taken out? Yes in 1950, the average lifespan was 64 for a man, but thats an average, plenty of people lived into their 70's and many died before the age of 10, thats why its an average.
Now I know of people who retired at the age of 62 just so they could "max out" their dollar total from social security. Add that to the people who for different reasons are collecting in their 20's and 30's, if you expect SS to cover all your costs when you retire and havent saved anything over your 50+ years of working (starting at age 10 of coarse) then I hope you enjoy a simple lifestyle.
Phe
7:30 am on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
coldwater - Again, you're off the mark. Per the amendment itself, "On August 14, 1935, the Social Security Act established a system of *old-age benefits for workers*, benefits for victims of industrial accidents, unemployment insurance, aid for dependent mothers and children, the blind, and the physically handicapped."
(note the asterisked item - my addition).
Here's the link for your edification: http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=68
Phe
7:42 am on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Whoops. Two corrections:
Per the government's fact page on the amendment, not the amendment itself...
and
I did not add the asterisked item. I merely added the asterisked to highlight the text.
Clearly, I am in need of more coffee. You know, an edit feature would be awesome...
david mokal
9:13 pm on Monday, June 11, 2012
How could social securety be a safety net? There were no other retirements offered. My first house cost me $24,000in 1971...the interest was 8 1/2 % The average pay for a mstal worker was $5.00 to $6.00 dollars an hour. You actually servived on overtime and most industries were dolling it out all you wanted to work. Then came the imports..Toyota's..steel from Japan and Canada for starters. Then the Telivisions in the mid eighties. There went the TV repair man. Cheaper to toss than fix. The docks were loaded with containers of Toyota's. Then clothing gets imported. Jobs were going south and overseas. So when companies closed there were no retirements just social securety.
howard mcgowan
9:49 pm on Monday, June 11, 2012
Keep strong for the survivors of the" Rat Race" and those who contributed to make this the greatest country in the World our WWII generation
david mokal
7:30 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Cold water I wasnt born with everything handed to me I recieve no Handouts..Yes I do enjoy the simple life. I didnt do drugs I saved and bought my house when I was 19 suppoterted 4 kids so if you like the high life good for you not for me.I owe no one nothing and own everything I have outright. So Coldwater dont critisise ya dont know what your talking about. You have a computer in front of you and just look it up SOCIAL SECURITY Also I dont need a nick name to hide behind and say stpid things like you said.
Phe
7:35 am on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
david - coldwater doesn't fact check himself before he posts. Don't let him/her get to you. So far in the varying comments across different articles, he's stated that an influx of people who rent into the renter's market is actually great for renters (quite the opposite), that Soc. Security was created to help war widows (it was created in 1935, well after WWI but before WWII and according to the amendment itself, it was created for multiple reasons, war widows not among them - see above), that lower income earners who pay half a percentage MORE of their overall earned income are actually contributing less than top income earners who pay half a percentage LESS of their overall earned income...
david mokal
10:29 pm on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Absolutly Howard and I Thank You Sincerely for your service.
howard mcgowan
9:26 am on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Remember, not only did you contribute to Social Security but your
employer did too. It totaled 15% of your income before taxes. If you
averaged only $30K over your working life, that's close to $220,500.
If you calculate the future value of $4,500 per year (yours & your
employer's contribution) at a simple 5% (less than what the government
pays on the money that it borrows), after 49 years of working you'd
have $892,919.98.
If you took out only 3% per year, you'd receive $26,787.60 per year
and it would last better than 30 years (until you're 95 if you retire
at age 65) and that's with no interest paid on that final amount on
deposit! If you bought an annuity and it paid 4% per year, you'd
have a lifetime income of $2,976.40 per month.
Entitlement my butt, I paid cash for my social security insurance!!!!
DannyBoy
6:36 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
I'm going off-topic here, but I have to get this off my chest. I think people on government welfare have it REALLY GOOD in this country. I know of some on section 8 who have iPads. An iPad!!! Who are they kidding?!?!??! What happened to the concept of hard work and earning your pay? Free-loading and a sense of entitlement are ruining our society and economy, and we all need to put an end to this nonsense!!!
howard mcgowan
7:58 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Congressional benefits ---- free healthcare, outrageous retirement packages, 67 paid holidays, three weeks paid vacation, unlimited paid sick days, now that's welfare, and they have the nerve to call my social security retirement entitlements?
We're "broke" and can't help our own Seniors, Veterans, Orphans, Homeless.
In the last months we have provided aid to Haiti , Chile , and Turkey . And now Pakistan .......hideout of bin Laden. Literally, BILLIONS of DOLLARS!!!
howard mcgowan
1:44 pm on Sunday, June 24, 2012
Come leartn how Social Security,Medicaire,Medicaid are faring in the election season and what you can do to protect it
Malden Senior Action Wednesday 27th at 1:30 Pm Malden Senior Center Malden
Every One Invited Bring a friend