Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

dkf

(37,305 posts)

1. You mean they funded a social security trust fund.

Reply to Coyotl (Original post)

Mon Feb 18, 2013, 03:28 PM

Feb 2013

If not for that trust fund we would be raising the payroll tax or cutting benefits today.

But yes the extra funds into social security made personal saving much more difficult.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This chart shows how Reagan destroyed the economy = reverse Robin Hood [View all] Coyotl Feb 2013 OP

You mean they funded a social security trust fund. dkf Feb 2013 #1

Taxes on the rich went from 70% to less than half of that! Coyotl Feb 2013 #2

What part of that 90% Marginal Rate was for Social Security? Scuba Feb 2013 #3

Then why did personal savings rise dring that time frame? Ikonoklast Feb 2013 #4

Here... dkf Feb 2013 #5

From Joan Walsh... dkf Feb 2013 #6