SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: TigerPaw who wrote (212802)12/7/2004 6:59:07 AM
From: Amy J  Read Replies (2) of 1573980
 
Hi TigerPaw, fica tax applies at any income level. Poor or rich, everyone.

Fica is a special type of tax that penetrates everyone, so it's different from your other taxes.

[ Most people aren't advocating this, but to be factual, a reduction in the payroll tax would decrease poor people's tax. I don't think anyone concurs with decreasing the payroll tax due to the deficit, though Ten floated the idea. I think once the transition cost is paid for through the repeal of a fica tax cap, then it would be okay to consider Ten's idea of reducing fica tax, but not until all debt is paid off. ]

I think the thread (both Dems & Reps) are in general agreement on the privatization proposal submitted by Sen. Lindsey Graham Message 20832045 , which is actually quite surprising because this is the only issue we all seemed to find reasonably good agreement on. Graham's proposal is very similar to Bush's, but Graham is more fiscally responsible.

My only stickler is with Bush's proposal where he caps the savings to 1k (not Graham's proposal where the cap on savings is 4% of 90k I believe). Bush needs to change the savings cap from 1k to 3.6k then I'm completely bought in, otherwise it stinks for my generation. (The 1k is the maximum amount you can save and is your annual input into the privatization, and it's suppose to replace my generation's 11k/year payout because we don't believe for a second in social security, which means our privatized 1k has to grow 10X - a ridiculous assumption. But 3.6k of your own input/year would work and could reach 11k/year payout through growth.)

Graham's proposal is better than Bush's because Graham removes the cap on fica tax so that it pays for the transition costs. Graham is more fiscally responsible.

I have to say, quite surprisingly everyone here on both sides seem to like Graham's proposal (which is pretty close to Bush's but with more fiscal responsibility).

I think the thread should confirm Graham's proposal has a cap savings at $3.6k, rather than $1k, otherwise Gen X, Y, etc will get totally screwed since 1k/yr input cannot replace 11k/year payout. But 3.6k of your own savings can.

Regards,
Amy J
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext