Go Back   iRV2 Forums > iRV2.com COMMUNITY FORUMS > Just Conversation
Click Here to Login
Join iRV2 Today

Mission Statement: Supporting thoughtful exchange of knowledge, values and experience among RV enthusiasts.
Reply
  This discussion is proudly sponsored by:
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about their products on iRV2
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-18-2012, 04:31 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Papawto5's Avatar


 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,270
Social Security changes need to be changed the way that many pension plans are being changed (incoming workers are informed by the company that the company's pension plan does not pretain to the newly hired).

Those joining the world of work need to be told by the government what the new rules are and then those workers can follow those new rules in a fashion that will benefit THAT worker in the best way. It would be totally unfair to SURPRISE a 50 year old worker (who has followed the age old rules for 30 years) with the news that the playing field has changed dramatically and unfortunately those 40 to 64 years of age are bearing the brunt of these radical changes. Just MHO.

One of the more interesting ads on TV is the one where folks are asked "What's your number?" This number, say $2,150,000, is the amount the person needs to face retirement in comfort. With the insinuation that each of us should be doing some saving for the future. Think of the fear this strikes in the heart of folks who haven't set aside more that one month's house rent. They're facing retirement with a possible guarantee of $1,009.00 in Social Security each month.

EVERY school in America should be required to offer 3 classes 1) the reality of living in America like you want to live (the disappearing safety net) , 2) the ways to find a helping hand - - - - hint: look at the end of your arm, 3) my role in my success or failure. I would recommend these classes by the 8th grade so we have at least 50% of the intended audience in school.
__________________

__________________
Papawto5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 RV Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

iRV2.com RV Community - Are you about to start a new improvement on your RV or need some help with some maintenance? Do you need advice on what products to buy? Or maybe you can give others some advice? No matter where you fit in you'll find that iRV2 is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with other RV owners, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create an RV blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 05-18-2012, 05:00 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
wildtoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul R. Haller View Post
Mitt paid less then 15% income tax last year on 38 million income. I paid almost 30% on 80,000$ and you ask why there is a problem?!? Everyone needs to be held to the same tax standard. Now, I'm not picking on Mitt or the repuplican party but as long as these injustices are true in todays tax laws the poor will pay way more then the rich for everything amd make the backbreaking sacrifices.
-Paul R. Haller-
I paid a lower percentage rate to the fed than Mitt on an income (defined as divideneds and capital gains) greater than $80k. I think we and especially the media tend to put too much emphasis on the effective tax RATE and too little on the AMOUNT one pays. 15% of $38+ million (and I propose a better than fair share) to the fed is by anyone's measure a large number, and the amount given to charity was also huge. Could/should he pay more? Perhaps but writing a $6 million check to uncle sam is not bad.

Tom
__________________

__________________
Tom Wilds
Blythewood SC
2016 Newmar Bay Star Sport 3004
2013 Chevy Sonic Hatchback (Automatic)
wildtoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 05:07 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
greystroke's Avatar


 
Monaco Owners Club
Freightliner Owners Club
Holiday Rambler Owners Club
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Spring Hill, Florida
Posts: 1,150
Politicians won't do anything to fix SS and hold down SSI fraud because they can't take something away without losing votes. Therefore every year the problem keeps getting pushed to the next generation. The problems first started when the Gov dipped into the til to pay for wars and expansion of Government. Now it may be too late to save it. The solution is just too complicated and probably impossible. Our countrty simply does not generate enough revenue to pay for everything including the interest to China. Cuts in spending will not be enough. We are headed down the same hill as Greece. It will take great pain to reverse this and probably riots.

In Tampa alone the IRS is sending BiLLIONS in refunds to criminal organizations that file taxes with stolen SS numbers. Then when a taxpayer files his return the IRS won't accept it because they give a refund to somebody else that used his number.

So our country that we love dearly has major financial problems and it is not limited to Social Security. God help us.
__________________
98 Endeavor DP, ISB275
RX300, Falcon II hitch, BB Vantage Select
VMSpc, 2002 Grey Ford Powerstroke
TST 507 w/ 10 Sensors
greystroke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 05:11 PM   #18
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul R. Haller View Post
No sacrifices need be made, we just need to tax everyone at the same rate for social security. Right now there is a cap on social security tax payments at 120,000$. Anything made above 120,000$ is not taxed at all. Who does that favor? The richest folks. I don't mind Mitt making 38 million dollars last year. Good for him! What I do mind is that he doesn't pay any social security tax after the first 120,000$ of income. We also need to pass bills that require the same sacrifices from our elected officials no matter what party they belong to, as they demand of us. Since they get retirement and health care for life paid by all tax payers, cutting social security affects them not at all.

Mitt paid less then 15% income tax last year on 38 million income. I paid almost 30% on 80,000$ and you ask why there is a problem?!? Everyone needs to be held to the same tax standard. Now, I'm not picking on Mitt or the repuplican party but as long as these injustices are true in todays tax laws the poor will pay way more then the rich for everything amd make the backbreaking sacrifices.
-Paul R. Haller-

See thats what the goverment wants you to think...his income comes from investments. That's why it's taxed at 15%...if your income was from investments yours would be taxed at 15%. And the income is taxed twice...once when the company makes the profit that you invest in at 15% and then when the investor gets his money(Mitt) it's taxed again at 15%. And if the company that you invested in doesn't make a profit or looses money you lose your money you invested. Just like the taxpayers losing money that was invested in Solyndra. That's why it's taxed at 15% because you are taking the chance with your money. I really hate it when I hear that arguement about them being taxed less.
__________________
jimbo16720 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 05:11 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
JayGee's Avatar
 
Fleetwood Owners Club
Ford Super Duty Owner
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul R. Haller View Post
No sacrifices need be made, we just need to tax everyone at the same rate for social security. Right now there is a cap on social security tax payments at 120,000$. Anything made above 120,000$ is not taxed at all. Who does that favor? The richest folks. I don't mind Mitt making 38 million dollars last year. Good for him! What I do mind is that he doesn't pay any social security tax after the first 120,000$ of income. We also need to pass bills that require the same sacrifices from our elected officials no matter what party they belong to, as they demand of us. Since they get retirement and health care for life paid by all tax payers, cutting social security affects them not at all.

Mitt paid less then 15% income tax last year on 38 million income. I paid almost 30% on 80,000$ and you ask why there is a problem?!? Everyone needs to be held to the same tax standard. Now, I'm not picking on Mitt or the repuplican party but as long as these injustices are true in todays tax laws the poor will pay way more then the rich for everything amd make the backbreaking sacrifices.
-Paul R. Haller-
Ditto.

Tax all income at the same rate regardlesss of where they say it comes from.
__________________
JayGee
Foothills of the Smokies
2005 Bounder 35E
JayGee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 05:30 PM   #20
Member
 
RVNYORKIE's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 76
I to am very concerned about the future of SS, both me and my DW are on it. However, SS, like many government agencies, is suffering because of fraud, abuse and mismanagement. I read an article recently that indicated the SS system is paying $millions each year to dead people. I have seen recent articles about Medicare and Medicaid experiencing astounding fraud. Just a few examples. We need to get tough on offenders.
__________________
RVNYORKIE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 05:43 PM   #21
Moderator Emeritus
 
RickO's Avatar


 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Litchfield Park, Arizona
Posts: 10,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildtoad View Post
I think we and especially the media tend to put too much emphasis on the effective tax RATE and too little on the AMOUNT one pays. 15% of $38+ million (and I propose a better than fair share) to the fed is by anyone's measure a large number, and the amount given to charity was also huge. Could/should he pay more? Perhaps but writing a $6 million check to uncle sam is not bad.

Tom
I couldn't agree more. This whole "Buffett" rule idea makes me crazy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildtoad View Post
I do think we need to take SS back to it's roots which was to help the elderly from living in utter poverty. After all when first instituted the plan was for most people to die before they collected one dime. Now many are receiving SS for 10,20,30+ years collecting far more than the system can support. It was not meant as a way for the middle/upper class to pay for their golf course membership, pay for vacations, or be the first line item in a retirement plan. My wife was a hospice nurse and saw first hand that many people desperately need SS. She and I have seen many that could afford to take a reduced payment.
This certainly capitalizes the "social" is SOCIAL Security. It sounds a lot like ' ... to each according to their needs and from each according to their ability".

I would be supportive of sweeping changes to fix the system but feel it's unfair to reduce benefits on people of a certain age... they have been planning retirement based on the rule book they were given by our government. I sleep very well at night in spite of the fact that my monthly SS checks help pay for my country club membership.

Although it doesn't directly address the OP, I think the best idea offered yet in this thread is to ensure that our children are educated in real life financial planning skills. It amazes me how much this very important topic seems to be ignored by both our schools AND parents.

I agree that our elected officials traditionally won't take any action but will continue to kick the can down the road... but hopefully there's a groundswell of support for getting a new breed of cat in these offices. I'm surprised there isn't more in the media about what Greece is currently going through and how it relates to decisions we have made and continue to make right here at home.

Rick
__________________
Rick, Nancy, Peanut & Lola our Westie Dogs & Bailey the Sheltie.

2007 Itasca Ellipse 40FD
RickO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 05:52 PM   #22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo16720 View Post
See thats what the goverment wants you to think...his income comes from investments. That's why it's taxed at 15%...if your income was from investments yours would be taxed at 15%. And the income is taxed twice...once when the company makes the profit that you invest in at 15% and then when the investor gets his money(Mitt) it's taxed again at 15%. And if the company that you invested in doesn't make a profit or looses money you lose your money you invested. Just like the taxpayers losing money that was invested in Solyndra. That's why it's taxed at 15% because you are taking the chance with your money. I really hate it when I hear that arguement about them being taxed less.
The majority of large US corporations and Ultra wealthy pay no where near the "standard tax rate". With offshore holdings, and the moving of "corporate HQ" to overseas locations corporations dodge income taxes constantly.
There is a lot of talk about raising the eligibility age, due to increased life expectancy, but life expectancy for who, the guy who works in an air conditioned office, or the life expectancy for manual laborers, whose life expectancy has not changed all that much.
__________________
cdat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 05:56 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Lindsay Richards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Tavares, FL
Posts: 1,644
Not only are the deductions capped at $112,000, but the benefits are also capped. The benefits for somebody who has paid the max and somebody who made triple the max are the same. The net affect would be a wash. This is just another part of the class warfare deal going on now. This redistribution of wealth makes no sense and has never worked in a country before. 49% of people pay no federal income tax at all and they are the ones yelling the loudest that the people pulling the cart are not doing enough. I get so tired of being told I don't pay my fair share when half don't pay anything. If the money was spent wisely, then I might feel a little different. Had I put my and my employers SS contributions into investments, I would be receiving much more income now. The same is true for Medicare. The whole plan is the workers pay for the people who don't work.
__________________
http://www.linandnancy.com
Lindsay Richards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 05:57 PM   #24
Moderator Emeritus
 
RickO's Avatar


 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Litchfield Park, Arizona
Posts: 10,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdat View Post
There is a lot of talk about raising the eligibility age, due to increased life expectancy, but life expectancy for who, the guy who works in an air conditioned office, or the life expectancy for manual laborers, whose life expectancy has not changed all that much.
I wasn't aware that the life expectancy for blue collar workers hadn't changed much since the inception of SS. Is that really true?

Rick
__________________
Rick, Nancy, Peanut & Lola our Westie Dogs & Bailey the Sheltie.

2007 Itasca Ellipse 40FD
RickO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 06:07 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Lindsay Richards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Tavares, FL
Posts: 1,644
Quote:
Is that really true?
No, the increases in life expectancy have occured through advances in drug and medical technology. They are availalbe to everybody reguardless of occupation. When SS started the life expectancy was a 63 years.
__________________
http://www.linandnancy.com
Lindsay Richards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 06:15 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Dav5942's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lake Oklawaha RV Resort(\
Posts: 1,374
OK for means testing but give me back what ipaid in!
__________________
Outlaw LS '16 JK Ruby '13 TJ '04 Ruby XJ '98-all built for Moab, HD Trike '15, AC Wildcat Trail in garage
http://picasaweb.google.com/dav5942/...T2AlaskaBeyond
Dav5942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 06:24 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
dlovitt's Avatar


 
Texas Boomers Club
Entegra Owners Club
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by RustyJC View Post
In case you haven't noticed, the current retirees (and no, that doesn't include me) are already bearing an unfair burden. In order to recapitalize the banks, the Federal Reserve has effectively set the interbank interest rate at almost 0% and has announced its intention to hold this rate through 2013. This means that those who have played by the rules, been prudent and saved for their retirement with the anticipation that interest income would fund a respectable portion of their needs are already being worked over - interest income hardly exists!!

Now we're proposing turning around and sawing off another leg of their retirement stool - Social Security income. Sorry, but I don't buy penalizing those who have worked hard and tried to do the right things for all of their working years to subsidize those standing around with their hands out. It isn't fair to them to change the rules in the 4th quarter of the game when they have no realistic means of compensating for the change as a current worker does.

JM2CW....Flame suit on.

Rusty
AMEN!! We saved instead of taking exotic vacations every year like some of our friends did. Now they don't have anything and expect us to support them by letting the government borrow money at effectively (after inflation) zero interest rate to support their poor choices.
__________________
2018 Newmar Dutch Star 4369, Spartan K2 Chassis,
Cummins ISL 450HP, Allison 3000

2015 F-150 King Ranch LB 3.5 L twin turbo Ecoboost Toad, Texas Boomers RV Club
FMCA F292298, NRA Benefactor Life Member
dlovitt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 06:35 PM   #28
Moderator Emeritus
 
RickO's Avatar


 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Litchfield Park, Arizona
Posts: 10,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindsay Richards View Post
No, the increases in life expectancy have occured through advances in drug and medical technology. They are availalbe to everybody reguardless of occupation. When SS started the life expectancy was a 63 years.
I guess we can't believe everything we read on the internet.

Rick
__________________

__________________
Rick, Nancy, Peanut & Lola our Westie Dogs & Bailey the Sheltie.

2007 Itasca Ellipse 40FD
RickO is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.