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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Lacelle who wrote (13940)	6/29/1998 1:05:00 PM
From: Lightning	Respond to of 116795

John: While it is true that the social security tax is regressive, so are the payouts, i.e. low earners have a larger proportion of their wage base returned to them than their high-earner counterparts. My guess is that the "rate of return" to those who contribute 40 quarters at the minimum wage is higher than to those individuals who contribute for 160 quarters at the highest taxable level of wage income. And one-earner families do better than two-earner families (holding family income constant).

To: John Lacelle who wrote (13940)	6/29/1998 3:20:00 PM
From: Pete Schueler	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116795

John, I must agree with Lightning, the there is a strong income leveling effect at payout time. For instance, in the 1995 SS guide that I have it has a table of payouts that shows avg. monthly earnings (payin base) vs monthly benefits at 65. Someone earning $800/mo gets $503/mo SS benefits or 63% of their wage base. Someone earning the max SS wage rate, $3493/mo will get $1207/mo SS benefits or about 35% of their wage base. Not to worry, they will get the the rich guys. Regards, Pete