I've spent at least 40 hours on this and I'm about through I figure, I'm not sure that it is time well-spent because someone else would've shot it down along the way before passage, but I was tired of watching the DC Chapter and the people in Crawford get to do all of the actual activism and wanted to do something besides post on FR about this.
I will followup with Linder and I am trying to get a meeting with him.
And yep, I'd agree that solely debating this on FR is of limited value ... it generally takes a only few replies before the name calling begins. Shortly after that come the "cut and pasters" and virtually nobody has the time, skills or inclination to check the algorithms, or verify the research.
Good luck with the next step; and I am interested in what Linder, Boortz and others might have to say ... once public figures "go public" re-direction is not easy.
You WILL let us know if you hear from Boortz and Linder, won't you?
HI Rob,
I don't know if I can wade through the whole thread of bickering, but from reading you original post one of the things that it appears you missed is that while the worker recieves a check without his Social Security witholding taken out (an increase) you note that this doesn't become a savings to the employer. While that part is true, there is a like amount: the employers' contribution, that is every bit as large, and if the employer isn't paying that, then the employer does reap a savings.
I don't really have an axe to grind as I haven't formed a studied opinion on this as I see the tax code so embedded politically, this thing will never get out of committee even if it is introduced.