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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (21700)	1/18/2005 9:29:22 PM
From: GraceZ	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 116555

He contends that critics throughout the history of the program have been alarmist, yet if the critics haven't had a little truth to their assertions why is that the premium workers are compelled to pay is 12.4 times what it was when the program started? Imagine a private retirement insurance policy which raised the premium rate that many times after you signed up for it? Since the level was increased numerous times through it's history, doesn't this imply that the program looked like it would go bust more than once? This time may be different only because they've reached the natural limit beyond which it would be incredibly difficult to raise the premium extracted. How many more percentage points of worker's incomes can it soak up before people say enough is enough? If people have difficulty saving for retirement, I'd say paying a 12.4% tax on top of federal and state income, sales and property taxes all while inflation erodes the value of your savings might have a little to do with it.