Skip to comments.AP-GfK poll: Raise taxes to save Social Security
Posted on 08/26/2012 12:42:45 PM PDT by TurboZamboni
In previous polls, most of the options for addressing Social Security scored poorly among the public, which helps explain why Congress hasn't embraced them. But the AP-GfK poll forced people to make a choice: Raise taxes or cut benefits? Raise the retirement age or cut monthly payments?
Democrats, Republicans and independents all favored raising the retirement age over cutting monthly payments. But there was a big divide on raising taxes. Sixty-five percent of Democrats and 53 percent of independents supported higher taxes, compared with just 38 percent of Republicans.
(Excerpt) Read more at twincities.com ...
IOW, current retirees have no problem screwing their kids.
So the money they steal from you for “your” retirement, because they do not trust you to save for yourself, that they spend on social programs leaving an IOU in your account and that goes to able bodied 18 year olds with attention deficit disorder, Puerto Ricans who are “depressed”, and illegal aliens...is short on money.
Solution, steal more money from you.
My SS taxes are almost as high as my Federal income tax. I suspect this is true for most families with income under $100k - there are no deductions or exemptions to Social Security....its just a flat rate, and its pretty high. Count the employer contribution, and SS taxes are much higher than my income taxes.
My SS taxes already eclipse my state taxes (literally double), and that doesn’t even count the employer contribution.
The money supply is fairly finite (notwithstanding some fed pumping). To raise the SS tax would just remove a large amount of money from private hands, which never goes well.
The “full” SS retirement age should be raised to 70 from its current 67 in one month a year increments IMHO. In 2013, 67 and one month, in 2014, 67 and two months, until they hit age 70. Since I was born in 1953, my full retirement age is 66 years old.
I was diagnosed with Leukemia seven years ago so I decided that I will draw the SS reduced Benefit at age 62. Better to get a little of my money back before I buy the Farm, then take a chance and get NADA. My “estimated” shelf life ends in my mid 60’s unless Big Pharma invents some new drugs. I'll hope for the best, but I'll always expect the worst. Kind of like the November Election...
Current and past recipients get/got more than they paid in
Current workers pay far more than prior generations and will get less than they put in
So the answer is.....?
How did you arrive at onclusion “current/past recipients get more than they paid in”? I always thought the opposite. You may be right but I never that was the case.
Or: Let’s kick the can down the road another 20 years and just blame the evil “Boomers”. We told them so. I don’t want a dime back. On the other hand $400,000 in contributions over my working livetime would have been a lot better than DEATH!!!!!
So glad I contributed to the “greatest generation” and the ‘stessed out’ disabled.
I agree, except raise the full retirement age to 78. Remember, when SS was passed, average life expectancy was around 60.
(I won't be collecting SS for several years yet, so this would affect me also.)
“IOW, current retirees have no problem screwing their kids.”
Well the are Baby Boomers, many of them.
Anyway, I prefer raising taxes as opposed to piling on even more debt...taking us that much closer to doomsday.
But the best solution, of course, is to make Social Security MEANS-TESTED. Tell people the truth - it was NEVER a savings plan, it was just a tax that you paid - it all went into the general fund and it was all spent as it came in. So IT’S GONE.
That leaves us having to figure out what to do about old people, and that’s where means-testing comes in - if an old person doesn’t need it, they don’t get it. That simple.
1) Remove the SS payments from the general fund, put them in their own 'trust fund' like the National Highway Trust Fund. Congresscritters can't touch the NHTF unless it deals directly with road and highways.
2) Take a small percentage (.1% - .5%) of the royalties from new oil production on federal lands and put that directly into the SS Fund (Step 1 in place FIRST).
Just my thoughts.
Wait. I thought George Bush Senior saved social security back in 1990???? Why does it need to be saved again? Maybe it never really was saved and we were lied to.
I’m sure they didn’t offer the “investigate EACH recipient to make such they are eligible, and prosecute those who aren’t” option when they took the poll.
It would have recieved over 75%, giving the polltakers an anurism.
I’ll wager MY OWN SS that such a step would ‘save SS” for many many decades without any increase in taxes.
If I was in office, the first bill I would present is a revision to the requirements on paystubs that show exact percentages being paid into each program, including employer portions of SS, Medicare, healthcare and all other payroll taxes/fees so employee recognize the total amount of outlay their employer has to hire and maintain their employment.
Additionally, I would revise the tax forms so the signatures are actually on a separate page, with a full breakdown, tax rates, and breakdown of everything being paid, both in total paid, and percentage of earnings. The filer would need to initial each line to ensure they reviewed it.
well known in fact the first recipient paid 20$ and got 20k back
remember it was 1% at first.
It’s an AP poll, they probably polled 50% D 40% d claiming to be Is and 10% R
Until you reform the tax code all any Government will do is "fix" the system for as long as they are in office. "Kick the can down the road" is all the gutless political/media class is willing to do
Yeah go ahead and raise taxes to pay for Social Security to give them more to steal from