On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:04:54 -0800, "Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>
>"Michael Coburn" <mikcob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:ggn91161g5h@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> 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.
>
>
>
>I've thought about it alot. It is true that it might kickstart the
economy
>by letting workers keep their FICA taxes. But, FICA is the Social
Security
>Tax, and retired people are still going to be retired, and working people
>are still working toward retirement.
You persist in being ignorant about government accounting. Stopping the
FICA tax completely would, by itself, have no effect on Social Security.
True, fiscal management might require an increase in other revenue for
budget balancing purposes. A dollar is a dollar no matter its source.
Now. At risk of becoming esoteric. Social Security is a contract between
the federal government and the people. It promises to pay SS pensions.
How the government funds this obligation is up to the government. The
recent policy has been to cut taxes and borrow and this might be the
way to pay pensions. Borrow from those who have money (the "rich" among
others) and pay the pensions.
Mason Clark
*Greater America in the Age of Rebellion*
http://frontal-lobe.info/greateramerica.html
-- many excerpts you can see --
|
