SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: David Johnson who wrote (551)8/5/1998 10:52:00 AM
From: cody andre  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 13994
 
David,

Re: Social Security. If we extrapolate your idea, why should we pay
15.6% FICA and get an annual return of only 1.8% on our money?
Why should someone work 55-60 hours/ week instead of staying home and making babies, or inhaling, or whatever ...?



To: David Johnson who wrote (551)8/5/1998 11:01:00 AM
From: Rick Slemmer  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 13994
 
David:

Social security in old age should be a safety net, not a reward for having paid taxes in the past.

Then what is the average American's incentive to stay in the system? The only reason people allow FICA paycheck deductions is the government's assurance that they will be entitled to the money upon retirement. If that turns out to be untrue, the system will surely come under attack from the producers.

RS



To: David Johnson who wrote (551)8/5/1998 12:18:00 PM
From: Les H  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 13994
 
Social Security tax as recently as the 70's was only 3% on the first
$ 3000. The second figure was considerably below the median income
at the time. Now, the income ceiling is considerably above the
median income and the tax is over 15%.

Social Security tax not only saps money people would save for
retirement, but for contingencies such as education, medical care,
and unemployment.