Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
If we can bring their soccer talent with it, lets do it.Unless we turn into France
If we can bring their soccer talent with it, lets do it.Unless we turn into France
No
I think we're collectively at the point where we don't need to worry about this sort of thing. If/when they tweak social security, there's a very high chance that we'll all be grandfathered in.
They’ll fix that. Last thing they want is old people on the streets. Talk about a disaster if they start cutting social security. Huge voting demographic. Not to mention social security isn’t a give away. Those people have been putting money into the fund for their entire lives.
www.bloomberg.com
www.nbcnewyork.com
Fair, as we all have different priorities.
No, if need be, the government will print the other 20% to give to us.
Where milk is not 5-6 bucks a gallon.
Dude, only the first $147k of your income. With FBG money, that's nothing.
Seriously, if this isn't proof that the government is horrible at running things then I don't know what is.
The government and the general idea is fine. Just need to tweak the operating parameters a little bit.
In other words, let's just increase the tax on those who already pay 90% of all federal income taxes some more. That seems fair!
Delivery costs me $40-$70 now (depending on what I order) except for pizza. Its insane. Pizza still the best deal. Pies generally $25 and can comfortably feed our family.
A lot of those people that don't pay federal income taxes are retired. They already paid their income taxes and now are living off of SS.
There's no way to address social security without making somebody worse off. Either future retirees will have to pay more in payroll taxes, or they'll have to retire later, or they'll receive fewer benefits, or taxpayers will have to make up the difference from general appropriations, or whatever. Raising the limit on the payroll tax seems like a reasonable alternative, among many others.
Privatizing social security from now on would be a great first step
I'm sure we could find billions, if not trillions of dollars in federal government spending that would not make anyone any worse off (except maybe the lobbyists or farcical "project" owners) and funnel that to SS.
Can you describe how that works? Us two examples, one 50 year old and one 20 year old.
I'm all in favor of doing this, but the transition-related problems that people were talking about back in 2005 would still be there. You're not going to tell current retirees and near-retirees "Sorry, but you guys are on your own from now on." Those folks are going to be grandfathered into the existing system. And then we have to figure out how to cut checks to those people for the next few decades without relying on payroll taxes from younger workers. We should probably rip that band aid off at some point, but it's going to be painful for whoever gets caught in the transition.
This.
The one player game is pretty straightforward - they have that one actuarily equal no matter the age you claim. If you're married and your wife has earnings, though, the two player game is more complicated and there is opportunity to make or lose thousands of dollars over your lives with a poor choice. If you're in that category you definitely want to run the numbers (or have someone do that) to know where you stand. It pays off bigly.
Actuarily pulling the other bandaid - the income limitation on the payroll tax. This covers a lot of the shortfall. They could also monkey with the bend points to squeeze the upper income folks. That's obscure enough to pass muster and could be pretty effective.
If you do it from now on it would be the same for everybody. However the 50 year old would have the old social security pension as well as whatever they put away and earn going forward.
And McDonalds is trying to go upscale with their burgers, no doubt at a higher price. It’s hard not to spend $10 now. It defeats the whole premise, people want McDonalds because it’s cheap.
I couldn’t believe it. I work overnights, starving when I got out recently. Busy night. Hadn’t had McDonalds in years. Pulled in and got a bacon croissant sandwich, orange juice and a hash brown. $12……..twelve friggin dollars for that.
As it should be.
Can you describe how it would work for everybody?
When I was younger I was all for making SS an elective program and/or letting people make their own investment decisions etc. As I’ve gotten older my thinking has changed. Quite frankly, I don’t think the majority of people are qualified to make those kind of decisions on their own. Like you said SS is supposed to me a minimum backstop for the elderly. If you worked your entire life, you’re not going to live well but you’re also not going to be begging on the street. What do we do with the people who opted out but didn’t put anything away, made poor investment decisions…ie kept chasing the meme stocks etc, or even if we have an extended downturn in the market lasting a decade or more. SS is a good system as long as the government stops using it as a slush fund.
That's fair, though I did use the word 'seem'.
I like to bash the gov't as much as the next guy, but the bolded above really isn't the problem is it?
McMuffin Hack: ask for the muffin "very well done".
After skipping dinner and staying too late at a friend‘s house, my wife and I went to Taco Bell, possibly our first fast food meal in 15 years together. It definitely wasn’t 49 cent bean burritos, but $1.69 is still pretty cheap imo.
A lot of it, yes.
You know this is the U.S. of A., right? Gluttony is a way of life.
My best friend’s sister’s boyfriend’s brother’s girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who’s going with a girl who saw Ferris pass-out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it’s pretty serious.
