Democrats will not address Social Security disparities, they have proved this time and again. They prefer to demonize Republicans and use fear tactics as a means to scare the elderly. The honest truth is that the fund is going broke and the latest analysis shows that the fund will be operating at a deficit by 2017 with the fund being completely exhausted by 2040 without immediate adjustments in revenue. The SSI trustees estimate that in order to save SSI and preserve solvency for the next 75 years would require an immediate increase of 16% in payroll taxes, or a 31% reduction in current benefits. People ignore these numbers at their own peril. Best advice is do not count on Social Security as your primary means of retirement. Personally I am over halfway to retirement age and do plan to be able to enjoy a good quality of life when the time comes. For this reason I am investing heavily in my 401K and IRA.
2006-11-29 02:00:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bryan 7
·
2⤊
3⤋
No, I wouldn't gladly pay 60%... Luckily, the data says I won't have to pay anywhere near that amount to keep them both solvent. check out the solutions at the link below to see some proposals. Some of these I think are great ideas that alone or in combination with each other would solve the problem nicely. Others (such as privatization) might sound like a great idea at first, but end up benefiting the private companies who are entrusted with the public good more than the public itself.
2006-11-29 01:55:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by patrick o 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Blowing Myth #1... We ALREADY pay 60%+ in federal taxes. When all the taxes on goods and services imposed by the fed on business trickles down to the consumer, it is more like 80% (Dianne Feinstein's own words)
Blowing Myth #2... If all the contribution paid into SS (on an individual basis) were in turn paid into safe money market funds and CD's the U.S. Government could double monthly benefits and operate very comfortably on the surplus after THAT, but they spent it on hammers and toilet seats instead...
2006-11-29 02:26:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by Gunny T 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Both parties are still raiding the "surplus" funds meant to go into Social Security to make the national debt look lower. All politicians think of is getting re-elected as soon as they GET elected.
Soon the Dems will be getting bribed as they have the power now.
2006-11-29 02:32:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
You pay a separate tax for social security and medicare.
Do you work? If you do go look at a pay stub.
2006-11-29 01:45:20
·
answer #5
·
answered by Perplexed 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
real, 40 seven% of individuals do no longer pay taxes which contains the very wealthy and the very poor. no longer quite everyone will pay into social risk-free practices yet once you do no longer you only isn't entitled to get carry of any social risk-free practices or unemployment reward. Bush gave 2 enormous tax cuts to the wealthy; he slashed the capital valuable factors tax and the inheritance tax. Bush replaced into the king of cronyism. the wealthy do no longer be counted on social risk-free practices or medicare because of the fact once you have money to speculate on your destiny and you have money to purchase a wellbeing care plan on your loved ones at a chit in case you very own a employer. as a result, those wealthy persons have no activity in continuing the medicare or social risk-free practices money because of the fact they do no longer desire them yet they particular could relatively opt to have administration of it "to speculate" it for the american human beings. that's what privatize skill enable Bernie Madoff cones to speculate your retirement money. It did no longer artwork out very nicely whilst New Jersey privatized the government pensions did it. can we relatively desire to furnish our money to Wall street investors? particular Madoff is in penitentiary and that Enron guy is lifeless now yet did no longer we only bail them out 2 years in the past? Paul Ryan maintains to push that thought down our throats and that i ask your self how plenty Wall street is paying him. to smash his political occupation? i could fairly have confidence my sock account and positioned my money in my sock.
2016-10-13 08:34:10
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Wont have to if Republicans pay their fair share.
2006-11-29 01:46:45
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
You really don't know how government works, do you?
2006-11-29 01:58:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by capu 5
·
1⤊
0⤋