Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (66417)	12/13/1999 12:46:00 PM
From: Michael M	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

X, obviously, we disagree. Not trying to shut you off if you want to discuss more, but I will close with a couple of thoughts -- The old couple, like many young couples today, probably maxed out when buying their home years ago. Why should the govt. systematically increase the cost of remaining in the home. The fact that the old couple may be well off today because they saved or invested wisely or worked extra hard should be none of their neighbor's business and certainly none of the govt's business. If the old couple had given their surplus capital to the govt for the greater good, do you think the govt. would have used it more productively? Do you think there would be a penny of the money remaining today? As home buyers, it is very possible, if not likely, that the old homeowner was paying the max rate to SS many years ago and that it did take a chunk out of a much smaller income. Keep in mind that SS rates have gone through the roof, in part, because your govt. is fundamentally chickenshit when it comes to letting you know what your true overall tax rate is. The feds have been robbing SS for years. Also, there was a time when hunks of SS weren't used to literally "reward" people with drug and alcohol problems. By the way, don't forget that the young couple is getting a couple of subsidies that the geezers aren't -- a huge deduction for taxes and interest paid AND a write-off for each of their children (the very people that the young parents want the money spent on) Finally, the geezers also paid less for their Microsoft shares years ago. Is that fair? I see Lizzie has weighed in down the road. I may have a final-final comment or two. Mike