Skip to main content

View Diary: AK-Sen: Mark Begich (D) Makes The Case For Stengthening Social Security (13 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Falacy: SS has a problem and needs to be fixed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Removing the income cap may make the EITC vulnerable.

    Remember the EITC was passed to compensate for the Regressiveness of FICA and the income cap. SO wanting to remove the income cap and keeping the EITC, well you just painted yourself into a corner.

    And remember, FICA is really an insurance payment.

    SO hands off my SS.... we have something on the order of 25 million people who would take a full time year round if offered, so create some damn jobs....

    Oh wait if we create lots of jobs, that means tons more FICA...

    Oh wait, if we raise the min wage, that means more FICA.

    Oh wait, if we stimulate the economy that means more FICA.

    The only thing wrong with SS is a bad economy. TO paraphrase FDR:

    If we take nothing from capital we owe nothing to capital.

     Right on (112+ / 0-)

        Right, the income cap in 1983 was @90th pecentile (12+ / 0-)

        Whatever formula they've used has put the cap at 84th percentile today.....and doesnt account for income disparity.

        90% today is 186k, 84% is 110,100.

        Just going back to 90% would mean an increase of something like $4,000 to the max benefit.

        FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

        by Roger Fox on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 08:42:47 PM EST

        [ Parent | Reply to This ]

    I dont want to to talk about repealing the Bush tax cuts, I want to talk about repealing the Reagan tax cuts, and the 1986 Tax Reform Act.

    I want to talk about creating 20-25 million jobs, not 4,2 million jobs.

    I want to talk about spending 5% of GDP on infrastruture, not 1.3%.

    Thanks Troub, TnR

    Remeber Kossacks, the SS Trustees issue 4 different financial estimates, low cost, intermediate cost, high cost, and  Stohastic model. The low cost scenario tells us the trust fund is not depleted thru 2090.

    How can that be possible you ask? Well for starters predicting 25 years in the future by using the last 4 years as an economic model is a tad unrealistic. Thats why 2034 is silly, plain silly.

    FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

    by Roger Fox on Mon Dec 10, 2012 at 09:53:01 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site