General Discussion

Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)

30. Not at all.

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 11:30 AM

Jan 2013

You don't have to retain proportionality, just the general principle that a lifetime of higher earnings gets you somewhat more in returns. It's more of a psychological thing than anything else when it comes to the rich. Many of them just want to know that they're getting a little more than the people who paid in less. It has more to do with snobbery than with need or actual return on investment. They need to know they're receiving at the top rate, even if that rate isn't a whole lot higher than the average rate. Trust me on this.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

67 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Please, somebody, tell me why we CAN'T raise the SS cap? [View all] CTyankee Jan 2013 OP

Rich man say no. dawg Jan 2013 #1

no debate? Ever? CTyankee Jan 2013 #2

Rich man supporters have majority in US House of Representatives Paulie Jan 2013 #6

It's not up to me. dawg Jan 2013 #8

Obama took the Grover-Norquist-lite pledge hfojvt Jan 2013 #51

yup. if reagan could strengthen social security by DOUBLING fica taxes, unblock Jan 2013 #3

this seems so easy peasy. I say call their bluff... CTyankee Jan 2013 #7

Occam's razor: The wealthy don't want that. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #4

It may not be the right time. But he should take some lessons from his great victory. CTyankee Jan 2013 #10

He "should take some lessons"? Can't we assume that he is a smart man? One who is fully informed? AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #31

I used Occam's razor to shave Schrodinger's cat. dawg Jan 2013 #23

Bazinga! Nearly spewed tea all over my laptop. nt historylovr Jan 2013 #29

Open the box and tell us! randome Jan 2013 #35

I think you'd need a republican for that. LisaLynne Jan 2013 #5

I have never understood why not. I don't think repubs want to preserve SS but rather snappyturtle Jan 2013 #9

Yeah, but they can't say that out loud. Remember what happened when Bush started CTyankee Jan 2013 #12

I agree. nt snappyturtle Jan 2013 #16

We can't do it becaue it would piss off the rich. Jackpine Radical Jan 2013 #11

If we pay the rich more, does that defeat the purpose of having the cap raised in the CTyankee Jan 2013 #14

Not at all. Jackpine Radical Jan 2013 #30

or at least use a Cola revision to the upper limit... srican69 Jan 2013 #15

The upper limit has been raised from time to time. Jackpine Radical Jan 2013 #50

So it's not like it is unheard of. And now that we have established the concept of CTyankee Jan 2013 #58

Because it would strengthen SS, and TPTB do not want that. Scuba Jan 2013 #13

This is The Answer. We need a bluer House. closeupready Jan 2013 #26

Because nothing progressive is going to pass the House. Odin2005 Jan 2013 #17

Agreed. Only those who will disregard years of experience will believe to the contrary. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #33

We can. But then the maximum payout will automatically be increased, too. Nye Bevan Jan 2013 #18

I think that this is a very clarifying point. Raine1967 Jan 2013 #55

I wonder that too newfie11 Jan 2013 #19

Pres. Obama has said it & he's for it. He said it solves any solvency issues with Social Security. Pirate Smile Jan 2013 #20

I think that since the tax rate did not change Riley18 Jan 2013 #21

That is a tax increase on the richie rich, so no....NO discussion of that...EVER! SammyWinstonJack Jan 2013 #22

why are you asking us leftyohiolib Jan 2013 #24

because I believe in "the wisdom of crowds." I always want to seek out other CTyankee Jan 2013 #42

can you explain what raising the cap means? is it paying social security taxes on higher incomes? robinlynne Jan 2013 #25

yes n/t godai Jan 2013 #27

Here's a good analogy Oilwellian Jan 2013 #32

But I think when Blankfein retires and starts drawing SS, .... oldhippie Jan 2013 #34

No, it's still an insurance program. What if the guy who makes $4 million dollars loses his money? randome Jan 2013 #36

If the guy that makes $4M loses his money, he get the same benefit ..... oldhippie Jan 2013 #39

Same reason he pays more taxes. Or SHOULD be paying more taxes. randome Jan 2013 #47

Why not raise the benefit level as well? Oilwellian Jan 2013 #46

Most people end up getting more in benefits than they put in. randome Jan 2013 #49

got it! Raise the caps! robinlynne Jan 2013 #38

Dem Senator Introduces Bill To Lift Social Security’s Tax Cap, Extend Its Solvency For Decades ProSense Jan 2013 #28

I hope he re-submits it in the next Congress starting soon. CTyankee Jan 2013 #61

Capitalism Cal Carpenter Jan 2013 #37

Our mega rich over lords can but won't n/t L0oniX Jan 2013 #40

I've Posted This Thread Each Time A Discussion Comes Up Here On DU About "Raising The Cap".... global1 Jan 2013 #41

GREAT advertising idea! CTyankee Jan 2013 #43

If You Like The Idea Find A Similar Pic Or Take Your Own Picture Of Raising Your Cap...... global1 Jan 2013 #44

Great idea Oilwellian Jan 2013 #48

There You Go - That's The Spirit - Great Pic..... global1 Jan 2013 #52

raise it? double it MissMillie Jan 2013 #45

Because it's class warfare against the Job Creators MannyGoldstein Jan 2013 #53

Supposedly because it's a big "tax" increase for upper middle class. Hoyt Jan 2013 #54

You raise the cap, you have to raise the payout to them as well. OnlinePoker Jan 2013 #56

I wish more DUers understood this point. Nye Bevan Jan 2013 #60

Is the raised cap limit/payout ratio the same or do we get more into the SS coffers CTyankee Jan 2013 #62

It's already means-tested so it's not far from someone characterizing it as 'welfare'. randome Jan 2013 #63

Raise The Cap..... global1 Jan 2013 #57

It will be raised but it won't be raised by itself. grantcart Jan 2013 #59

Repukes hate SS. nt Sarah Ibarruri Jan 2013 #64

Yep. But they cannot 'win' without it (and they KNOW it). nt Amonester Jan 2013 #65

That's not what they think. They're brainless creatures. All they care about is... Sarah Ibarruri Jan 2013 #66

I think you're right. randome Jan 2013 #67