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 : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (240891)	3/14/2010 9:45:28 PM
From: The Reaper	Respond to of 306849

Taxing unearned income is already in the Pelosi bilking machine.

To: bentway who wrote (240891)	3/15/2010 10:25:31 AM
From: GraceZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

A simple fix is to just remove the cap, and/or apply it to "unearned" income. It isn't as simple as it might seem. Benefit levels are based on a formula, the formula uses the distribution of wages over the entire population to determine minimum as well as maximum benefits. The formula is also highly dependant on what you paid in over your lifetime. Increasing premiums paid by the wealthiest segment (those people who get the largest share of unearned income) would also increase the benefits owed to them unless the link between what you pay in and what is paid out is broken. This would also change the fundamental nature of the program, which was designed to insure against the loss in your ability to earn wages, to work for a living. Unearned income is never effected by age or disability, so it was not something that needed to be protected with insurance.