[Will88]

If people were looking, they would have noticed the deduction was 12%.

The notion that an employee's pay would have automatically been 6% higher absent the employer's SS contribution is quite a stretch.

More likely the amount of the employer contribution would have simply increased the employer's pre-tax income.

[Grammy]

"The notion that an employee's pay would have automatically been 6% higher absent the employer's SS contribution is quite a stretch."

Actually, people like me and Mr G, who are self employed, have been picking up the whole amount, so my income would have been 12% higher. And the amount is actually 15.6% now, for SS and medicare. 15.6% times 40 years would be quite a nice nest egg, thankyouverymuch.

[Atlas Sneezed]

The notion that an employee’s pay would have automatically been 6% higher absent the employer’s SS contribution is quite a stretch.

---

Unless you understand common sense economics and believe that employers set wages in a free market.

Thanks for the leftist talking point.

[Bob]

The notion that an employee's pay would have automatically been 6% higher absent the employer's SS contribution is quite a stretch.

I don't think anybody has said that employees would have automatically gotten the other 6% as a salary increase. That money, though, could have been used to grow the business, benefiting both the company and its employees.