viktor said:

If you're charitable to people, they commit less gun violence.

---

Loyola10 said:

viktor said:

NO ONE wants to prevent anyone from making a lot of money.  The idea is that if you ever get filthy rich (and I hope you do), you need to pay a little more taxes.  You'll still get to be filthy rich.

---

Oh well thats totally different. As long as market capitalism is still in place I'd be fine with paying a reasonable tax rate. Going all soviet russia though I think would be a bad idea and I see alot of leftists going down that road which makes me leery.

---

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

Loyola10 said:

viktor said:

NO ONE wants to prevent anyone from making a lot of money.  The idea is that if you ever get filthy rich (and I hope you do), you need to pay a little more taxes.  You'll still get to be filthy rich.

---

Oh well thats totally different. As long as market capitalism is still in place I'd be fine with paying a reasonable tax rate. Going all soviet russia though I think would be a bad idea and I see alot of leftists going down that road which makes me leery.

---

No one that I'm aware of on the political forum wants communism, yet most of the conservatives here like to make believe that we do.

---

viktor said:

If you're charitable to people, they commit less gun violence.

---

hostileuniverse said:

You're assuming Americans don't already do this, we are charitable, just some of us don't want it to be through govt.

---

Quote:

Trump’s tax plan would substantially lower individual income taxes and the corporate income tax and eliminate a number of complex features in the current tax code.
Mr. Trump’s plan would cut taxes by $11.98 trillion over the next decade on a static basis. However, the plan would end up reducing tax revenues by $10.14 trillion over the next decade when accounting for economic growth from increases in the supply of labor and capital.
The plan would also result in increased outlays due to higher interest on the debt, creating a ten-year deficit somewhat larger than the estimates above.
According to the Tax Foundation’s Taxes and Growth Model, the plan would significantly reduce marginal tax rates and the cost of capital, which would lead to an 11 percent higher GDP over the long term provided that the tax cut could be appropriately financed.
The plan would also lead to a 29 percent larger capital stock, 6.5 percent higher wages, and 5.3 million more full-time equivalent jobs.
The plan would cut taxes and lead to higher after-tax incomes for taxpayers at all levels of income.

---

ballsalsa said:

hostileuniverse said:

You're assuming Americans don't already do this, we are charitable, just some of us don't want it to be through govt.

---

Do you know why Social Security was enacted?  It was because charity isn't reliable, and the country had huge problem with crippling poverty among the elderly.  Unlike relying on charity, by funding SSI through a payroll tax, the govt forced everyone to have some skin in the game and to take some responsibility for their old age.  Unlike charity, SSI was and still is wildly and reliably successful at its primary purpose, which is to keep the elderly from being homeless and starving.

---

hostileuniverse said:

ballsalsa said:

hostileuniverse said:

You're assuming Americans don't already do this, we are charitable, just some of us don't want it to be through govt.

---

Do you know why Social Security was enacted?  It was because charity isn't reliable, and the country had huge problem with crippling poverty among the elderly.  Unlike relying on charity, by funding SSI through a payroll tax, the govt forced everyone to have some skin in the game and to take some responsibility for their old age.  Unlike charity, SSI was and still is wildly and reliably successful at its primary purpose, which is to keep the elderly from being homeless and starving.

---

Social security is a Ponzi scheme, the same thing that sent Bernie Madoff to prison...

---

hostileuniverse said:

Sure, if social security taxes were allowed to be invested, instead of put into the general fund of greedy politicians, the elderly would come out much better off.

You can yap all day about the failures of "charity" but what you'll never admit to is the failure of govt in this instance. The money that was supposed to be used for social security, was raided and spent. It was a betrayal of the American people. The money being given out today is being borrowed from the taxpayers who haven't even been born yet.

---

ballsalsa said:

hostileuniverse said:

Sure, if social security taxes were allowed to be invested, instead of put into the general fund of greedy politicians, the elderly would come out much better off.

You can yap all day about the failures of "charity" but what you'll never admit to is the failure of govt in this instance. The money that was supposed to be used for social security, was raided and spent. It was a betrayal of the American people. The money being given out today is being borrowed from the taxpayers who haven't even been born yet.

---

Jesus christ, how many times do we have to go over this?  SSI has a trust fund that is REQUIRED to invest in US Treasury products.  The money isn't just put into a "general fund".  The money being paid out today is being paid from that trust fund, not by borrowing anything from anyone.

---

How much is in that "trust fund"? 

ballsalsa said:

at the end of FY2014, the OASI trust fund balance was ~2.7 trillion dollars

https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4a1.html

---

You're hilarious. 

Are you interested in purchasing any bridges?

ballsalsa said:

i assume that you are implying that the government accounting is fraudulent.
do you have some other numbers to dispute them with?

---

Quote:

On the recommendation of Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau, the Social Security Amendments of 1939 created an Old Age and Survivors’ Insurance Trust Fund at the Treasury. This was done for the express purpose of ending the controversy. Testifying before the Senate Finance Committee during the hearings on the amendments, Social Security Board Chairman Arthur Altmeyer stated that the purpose of the trust fund was “to allay the unwarranted fears of some people who thought Uncle Sam was embezzling the money.”

Social Security revenues go into the Treasury’s general fund and are automatically credited to the Trust Fund in the form of Treasury bonds. The Treasury pays Social Security benefits and administrative outlays out of general revenue and debits the Trust Fund an equivalent value of bonds. Any leftover Social Security revenue finances general government operations, with an equivalent value of bonds remaining in the Trust Fund as Social Security’s “surplus;” to cover any revenue shortfalls.19 This is how a Treasury account, not a trust fund, works. And calling a Treasury account a “trust fund” to influence public opinion does not make it one.

---

Quote:

The United States Social Security Administration collects payroll taxes and uses the money collected to pay Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance benefits via trust funds.

When the program runs a surplus, there will be excess funding available for the Social Security Administration that year. The excess funds are diverted to one of the trust funds.

The money in the trust fund is used by the treasury in the form of treasury bonds. The treasury bonds provide interest on the money in the trust funds, and if the program sees a deficit, the excess funds from previous years plus any interest earned is used to pay beneficiaries. The trust funds do not represent a legal obligation to Social Security program recipients, and Congress could cut or raise taxes on such benefits if it chooses.

The trust fund that supports Social Security's disability program is projected to run out of money late next year, triggering automatic benefit cuts, unless Congress acts.

---