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 : Dividend investing for retirement -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JimisJim who wrote (23912)	11/16/2015 4:51:40 PM
From: Steve Felix	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34328

"I can understand wanting to close that sort of loophole" Well, Jim, I just got hit with one of those too. Admittedly, the whole thing is ridiculous, but I don't write the rules. Our new assessment values our land at $60,000 as compared to $11,200 previously. From a value of $704 an acre to $3773 an acre. Hard to complain, as I would borrow to the hilt if I could buy land for that, but sort of changing the rules after the game has started. There are different "uses", so I am not sure how actual farmers are getting hit, but if the value of their acreage goes up 5X, I'm sure there will be some farms for sale. "The Clean and Green program has the potential to provide landowners with substantial tax savings because under Clean and Green's preferential assessment structure, enrolled land is taxed according to its use value rather than its actual fair market value."

To: JimisJim who wrote (23912)	11/16/2015 8:22:18 PM
From: sm1th	Respond to of 34328

Jim, I am the same age, but hadn't considered the file and suspend option. Like you, self-employed consultant in an industry where I spent much of my traditional working life. I realized it is a ponzi scheme in the early 80's and have always planned to retire without it if necessary. Now that I am close, I am confident that I will get something, but significantly less than the official current projections. eliminate that cap and SS would probably stay solvent for many decades. SS benefits are (very weakly) correlated with contributions, my wife paid less in, and will get less out. There is a cap on both contributions and benefits. Removing one without the other is just another soak the rich scheme, and would have less benefit than most people think. Remember, only wages are subject to SS, the real rich get most of their income from investments.