HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » To those demanding an abs...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Nov 13, 2012, 11:49 PM

To those demanding an absolute ban on consideration of any changes to SS and Medicare...

...this year I will be receiving a promotion and a salary increase of about $25,000. Setting aside the income tax situation (I'm under the $250,000 cap, so presumably my taxes won't rise), am I to understand that you feel I shouldn't pay a penny more in FICA payments then I do now?

17 replies, 1060 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 17 replies Author Time Post
Reply To those demanding an absolute ban on consideration of any changes to SS and Medicare... (Original post)
brooklynite Nov 2012 OP
limpyhobbler Nov 2012 #1
elleng Nov 2012 #3
limpyhobbler Nov 2012 #14
elleng Nov 2012 #2
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #5
ProudProgressiveNow Nov 2012 #9
HiPointDem Nov 2012 #10
HereSince1628 Nov 2012 #15
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #4
brush Nov 2012 #13
MotherPetrie Nov 2012 #6
MannyGoldstein Nov 2012 #7
forestpath Nov 2012 #12
HiPointDem Nov 2012 #8
forestpath Nov 2012 #11
WorseBeforeBetter Nov 2012 #16
closeupready Nov 2012 #17

Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Nov 13, 2012, 11:54 PM

1. Most of us support raising the cap. We reject benefit cuts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to limpyhobbler (Reply #1)

Tue Nov 13, 2012, 11:57 PM

3. So some 'changes' are OK; I agree,

and I'll affirm that nothing should be off the table.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 03:34 PM

14. I disagree. Benefit cuts should be off the table.

I agree with the person who said this OP is pointless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Nov 13, 2012, 11:55 PM

2. Good point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #2)

Tue Nov 13, 2012, 11:58 PM

5. It's not a good point. SS has nothing to do with the Deficit, yet they have attempted

to force that lie on the public in order to privatize SS funds. The issue raised by the OP has zero to do with why people are opposed to the Grand Bargain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #5)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 12:17 AM

9. +1000 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #5)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 12:20 AM

10. +1. the op is pointless.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #5)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 04:08 PM

15. Exactly, there is no reason other than 'conservative' values to cut SS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Tue Nov 13, 2012, 11:57 PM

4. Tying SS to the Deficit, pretending it had anything to do with the Deficit is

the problem. SS had nothing to do with the deficit and should not be mentioned at all in any discussion of reducing the Deficit.

That lie needs to be debunked as it is an excuse to try to privatize the SS fund.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #4)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 01:13 AM

13. Exactly

SS is a paid benefit that is funded (and will send full benefits to seniors) until 2037 and does not add to the deficit in any way because, as I said, its paid for with money withheld from paychecks. The income cap can be adjusted up as was done in the 80s, maybe early 90s, that will fund it for 75 more years. I'm not sure what the poster of the OP is trying to do but it sounds that if the cap was raised he would not miss the few additional dollars withheld from his check. It's a great program that has worked well since President Roosevelt instituted it and the repugs need to keep their hands off the huge pile of money if represents, and that them and their Wall Street masters are salivating over. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. If it needs shoring up, adjust the cap up a tad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 12:10 AM

6. Here's what I ask myself...

 

If BUSH were president, would I support it or be against it?

And whatever answer I come up with, is the answer I apply to the current administration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 12:14 AM

7. Assuming that you're already over the cap, you should not pay more.

Once we start fiddling with Social Security in any way, shape or form, there will be other dramatic changes such as the 22% cut in benefits that the President's commission recommended, and seniors will be clusterfucked.

I certainly support raising taxes on those who are doing pretty well (I'm over the cap too), but in this climate of bipartisan salivation over the $2.6 trillion in the Trust Fund, touching Social Security in any way will turn into a disaster.

Social Security itself is in very fine shape. The projections that it will only pay 80% of promised benefits starting 25 years from now are based on cooked numbers, they assumes that the economy will stay as bad as it is today forever. If the economy recovers even partially, then it will pay 100% for at least as far into the future as has been modeled (75 years).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #7)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 12:54 AM

12. +1

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 12:15 AM

8. what? everyone pays the same rate up to $110k. so not sure what you're talking about.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 12:52 AM

11. Huh? It is not hurting BENEFITS that is the issue.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 04:13 PM

16. Most are clear when posting... it's CUTS we oppose.

"Changes" I'm open to, like RAISING THE CAP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 04:15 PM

17. People here oppose weakening SS; we support strengthening it,

however, meaning we support lifting the income cap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread