| Vetteman94 said: SO now the arguement is the interest isnt very good? Thats funny. As for my family, my fathers pension is currently looking well for when he retires. Couple that with what he will receive from SS and he will be doing quite alright for himself. I wish I could say the same, dont have one, since my company got rid of it to maximize profits and "stay competitive". Well, that is one of many arguments. Your initial argument is that it was self-sustaining, but then argue taxes need to be raised on it: Why? If its self-sustaining, increasing taxes on it makes absolutely no sense. But I digress, do you disagree that interest on Social Security is actually good? Furthermore, you say you will have to rely on SS for retirement - are you comfortable with such a system? About SS, raising taxes is not needed, you obviously didnt understand that part or you are deliberately twisting the words to make it looks worse. The maximum taxable income for SS is 90K, meaning a person who makes 90K a year, a person who makes 250K a year and people who make 2M a year all pay the same amount to SS. Raising the maximum taxable amount to say 150K, the person who makes 90K a year wouldnt pay more, neither would anyone who makes less, only the people who make more. But the difference is small on the paycheck itself. Could you explain why we need to raise more Social Security taxes, again? You already said it is solvent. Is 12.4% up to 90k not enough? Why is it not enough? Obamacare needs fixing because of all the other crap that was forced on it in order for it to be passed, its barely recognizable from its original form. It funny that the 2nd best health care system state by state is Mass which has a state run Health care system almost identical to Obamacare. And a Republican, Mitt Romney, is the man responsible. Wonder where the uproar for that is. How is Massachusettes state health care good? It is massively overbudget - $4.2 billion USD over four years. If such a system is identical, isn't it safe to assume Obamacare is going to be significantly overbudget - which agrees with the CBO after the bill was passed? So basically your arguement is that those people didnt deserve the wages they were making because the corporations said so? The same corporations that pay their execs $20+M, and instead of looking in the mirror they blame it on the workers. As for where I work, I work for Caterpillar INC, so I see first hand how they treat unions as we deal with quite a few. Plus my father and brother are both in unions themselves. And Im sure I will get a comment that Im baised because of this, so whatever. Your last statement is a joke though, corporations flee to non-union states so they can maximise profit by getting the cheapest workers possible. Its the same reason the outsource jobs to other countries, its cheaper plain and simple. Its cheaper to open a facility in some countries and hire over 100 engineers, with degrees not worth the paper they were printed on, than to just add 50 here. My argument is that people get the wages that the market dictates for their job, regardless of what it is. If workers are readily available for a given skill set, wages decrease. If workers are not readily available, wages increase. Its why doctors make more than fast food employees. Catepiller has 104,900 employees. If the average wage is $50,000 USD between income and benefits, and the CEO makes $20 million USD, which one has a much bigger financial burden on the company? The guy that makes $20m or the employees that collectively ake $5.4 billion dollars? Which one do you think has a bigger impact on the bottom line of the company? Well i guess then our education system should be getting better and better than since it has less money now that federal funding has been cut for it, since thats one of the reasons my taxes went up. And one of the reasons the tax cuts dont help people like me. Education spending per capita is at an all-time high, and has been increasing for decades - far above the rate of inflation. Your argument about federal funding flies in the face of actual data on the subject:
|
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
