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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (329085)	3/15/2007 7:36:33 PM
From: 10K a day	Respond to of 1575429

>You go on and on about how great military spending is,< lol

To: Road Walker who wrote (329085)	3/15/2007 8:00:02 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575429

I let it go before, but do you really think that if employer SS taxes were reduced to zero that everyone would get a 7.5% raise? It wouldn't happen immediately or universally, but wages would go up, without an increase in costs. Its likely that most of the other 7.65% would go to wages, either from higher wages, or from more employment. Taxing the payout of wages is a disincentive to hiring labor or giving workers wages. You want more employment and higher wages, so why tax/punish companies for providing them? tcsdaily.com gregmankiw.blogspot.com Those links are about the corporate income tax but the ideas involved also apply to any tax on companies. (Except the compliance cost issue, which is high for corporate income tax, but not so high for payroll taxes). To the extent that it doesn't go to wages, it would help decrease prices or control their increase, and thus help real wages, or it would result in higher earnings, and higher expected return, on investment, and thus encourage investment, at least investment that results in more hiring (it wouldn't have the same type of effect on investment in replacing workers with machines). SS just works. Not well. Low overhead Sure but if your not actually getting a return on investment, the low overhead can only do so much. Return on investment is zero from the perspective of the federal government, they shuffle the money between funds, one of which pays interest to the other, but the interest gained exactly equals the interest cost. Return on investment might also be zero, or even negative from the perspective of the individual participating in SS. You go on and on about how great military spending is Really? Please provide a link to where I do so. Give me a 15% increase in SS funding and it's a non-issue. A 15% one time increase doesn't make it a non issue. Also 15% of Social Security is huge.