On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 13:25:36 -0800, Jeff Strickland wrote:
> "Michael Coburn" <mikcob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:ggn2ci61e7@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 12:14:43 -0800, Jeff Strickland wrote:
>>
>>> "Mason C" <masoncXXX@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:bksti49nnis6irsd2jl4befrdgsb7clec9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:23:43 -0800, "Jeff Strickland"
>>>> <crwlr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Mason C" <masoncXXX@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>news:2gfki4pprbu5uvhq5685sqj8cjs7a3562s@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>> On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 17:20:14 -0800, "Jeff Strickland"
>>>>>> <crwlr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>FICA is a tax on wages.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh. We didn't know that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jeff, I have a question: how old are you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>55. Why?
>>>>
>>>> I'm sorry to say so but your assumptions about the world seem
>>>> juvenile.
>>>>
>>>> ( I don't like to post such things but I'm getting fed up with the
>>>> infantile behavior on the Usenet. I've been kill-filing like crazy
>>>> and it isn't helping. I'll probably abandon ****p.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Just because I find your view wrong means I'm juvenile?
>>>
>>> I understand that dropping the collection of FICA tax will put more
>>> cash into the hands of the little people -- me included -- but my
>>> point is that FICA is akin to forcing Americans to save money for
>>> their retirement. If we give them a bye on saving, then they get less
>>> in retirement, and SS is already a pretty crappy retirement account,
>>> so stopping the collection of FICA taxes will do more harm than good.
>>
>> Imagine for one fleeting moment that the money to pay current benefits
>> was not being collected from FICA taxes but instead just created and
>> sent out. Your pre-programmed reaction is Martha, hide the children
>> because the inflation monster is going to eat them. Money will be
>> worthless because we will have hyperinflation.
>>
>> So now ask yourself what happens if we do half of it? Then 25% of it,
>> or 10% of it. How much inflation do we get?
>>
>> This _MAY_ help you to understand that the rich people are called rich
>> because they have all the money. The objective is to make all that
>> money worth _LESS_ such that honest production is worth _MORE_. The
>> objective is to make real investing the only way that the rich people
>> can stay rich. The Stock market will no implode because of inflation.
>> The value of T-Bills will.
>>
>> Pleas take the time to understand that moderate to high inflation hurts
>> people who _HAVE_ money. It works to the advantage of people who work
>> for wages and who OWE money.
>
>
>
> But, it is impossible to make the value of money worth less for one
> group while making the same money worth more for another group. Money
> does not know whos pocket or bank account it sits in. Inflation is bad
> for everybody. That's e-v-e-r-y-b-o-d-y.
>
> It helps to define the inflation you are speaking of as wage inflation
> or price inflation. If you are making $22.50 today and go out and buy a
> new TV on your credit card, then get a raise to $27.50, then wage
> inflation is good for you. But if you are paid $22.50 and the $1750 TV
> you had your eye on jumps in price to $1950, then price inflation is bad
> for you.
>
> But, I'm not sure where the discussion became about inflation, we were
> talking abouot kickstarting the economy by the curtailment of FICA
> taxes.
I must, a this point, throw in the towel. You need to spend a lot more
time thinking about this.
|
