Sorry I didn't get a chance to know you. Our parting is not unexpected as we've seen it coming for quite a few months now but your comfort will be sorely missed. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/04/20050428-9.html Last night, President Bush talked about cutting Social Security benefits for “people who are better off.” Who are these people? Bush adopted a proposal created by a guy named Richard Posen called “progressive price indexing.” That proposal would cut benefits for everyone except “the bottom 30 percent of earners, or those who make less than about $20,000 currently.” So now people who “are better off” are defined as anyone earning over $20,000 a year. This is a dramatic change from the rhetoric Bush used to promote his tax cuts. A 3/8/01 White House fact sheet entitled “President’s Tax Relief Plan Gives Greatest Relief to Lowest Income Taxpayers,” touts that the “share of income taxes paid is reduced for all income groups below $100,000 in income.” So to sell his tax cuts, Bush implied that anything under $100,000 was “low income.” Now, to sell his Social Security package, anything over $20,000 is “better off.”
There's a difference between paying taxes on your earned income and receiving money from the government while you are not working. You're a moron if you can't see that. Sounds good to me! [/font]
Ha, what a joke. I was merely wanting to lament the loss of social security, not get into a debate, but this one is too easy to pass on. The Washington Post did an article debunking this joke two weeks ago. Workers who opt for personal accounts would ultimately get to keep only the investment returns that exceed the rate of return that the money would have accrued in the traditional system. I can get a better return on my investment by playing scratch offs for the next 60 years.
Over $20,000 is hardly "better off". I think this amount should be raised - closer to $25,000, but I'm sure it's also depends on how many dependents you have & the more dependents you have the more money you could make & still receive benefits. Luckily for me, I've only been paying Social Security a few years...
So what? $20,000/year is not all that far from the definition of "better off" that Teddy Kennedy and Chris Dodd and co. have been using for the last 25 years when they whine and bitch about Republican tax cuts benefitting "the rich". Can't have it both ways, ya know. Oh wait, I forgot...you're a liberal...you don't know that.
Typical Democrat ranting. All they can do is bitch and moan but no one has any suggestions. Bush's proposals are just that. Proposals. Nothing is etched in stone. He's trying like hell to get the Dems to come up with their own plans but they are too busy trying to knock Bush down and they can't see that their own a$$es are on the ground.
As a wise man once said: Originally Posted by Mystikalilusion That's exactly my point, the Republicans will do the same thing next time when the Democrats are back in power. And so will the Democrats moan and groan about it as the party in power is currently doing. As is the circle of politics. . . No suggestions? How about don't do that ignorant package of tax cuts a few years back. Tada, problem solved, end of story.
:shock: :shock: maybe you should consider liquidating your 401K then and playing scratch offs with the money. good luck with that. I think someone scratched you off and you didn't match. :dis:
