Social Security Changes

[TechWriter]

Originally Posted by wnytaxman

I have to go by a poor city high school to get to this client.

In your 2011 Berkshire?

[wnytaxman]

Originally Posted by TechWriter

In your 2011 Berkshire?

??????

[TechWriter]

Originally Posted by wnytaxman

Tech, I think you might be surprised at the number of kids wearing the $300 Nike's and the $500 leather Raider jackets.

Ok, so you (and/or your "client") saw "a number of kids" (5? 10? Hundreds?) in expensive clothes. And all these kids' parents were apparently receiving some form of welfare because . . . they looked poor? you surveyed them?

So, assuming the worst, you're using not-so-emperical evidence to indict 45 million (give or take) folks that fall under the poverty level? Poverty in America likely to get worse, report finds | Business | guardian.co.uk

[Hamshog]

Hey Taxman,

I believe the reason we aren't going to a flat tax is the amount of people that would be looking for work(CPA's, tax preparer's, Attorneys,etc.) when tax time came. Can you say "Good ol' Boys". They all wouldn't be needed if we all just had to fill in a few blanks on a one page form.

Would be a progressive flat tax.. Corporations at 15%, etc.

$0 to $20,000 - 3%

20,001 to $40,000 - 4%

$40,001 to 60,000 -5%

$60,001 to ---------- etc. (You get the picture)



Gross income per W4_______

-6% of Gross income ________

Total Tax Owed ____________



Regards, Hamshog

Originally Posted by wnytaxman

Hmm, would you really benefit from a flat tax? Well, let's see, there would be even more foreclosures than we have today because a lot of people depend on that mortgage interest deduction to help pay for that mortgage. That means that the housing market would drop even more so your own home would now go down in value and there just might be a foreclosure or two in your neighborhood which would lower the value of your home even more. Oh, and your RV would suddenly not be worth as much as it had been because only those who have the cash or don't need the interest deduction can afford to buy your RV and now the value of it has dropped like a rock because of no market.

So now as we move down the schedule A we find that high tax states can no longer provide services that now must be picked up by the Feds, which means you will help to pay for them. We've also lost the contribution deduction which means that more folks who didn't go on welfare and depended on charity to some extent must now utilize government services to survive.

As we get down to end of the Schedule A we find that those who are employees but cover their own business expenses will no longer be allowed to deduct those expenses. So those folks would have to either change professions or get their companies to cover their expense. And the list goes on and on.

LadyFitz, the flat tax is like communism, in theory it's great and in practice it just doesn't work. You have an economy that, for better or worse, is ingrained with our tax code the way it has been structured for the last 100 years. So I think you will find that you really won't benefit from a flat tax.

[TechWriter]

Originally Posted by Bilito

When SS first started it was supposed to be tax free when you finally started drawing your benefit, now over half of my yearly payment is subject to income tax, how fair is that? I am retired and still have to help pay for freeloaders.

Don't look now, but if you're receiving Medicaid, then you too are part of the welfare problem (ie, a "freeloader"). America's Ever Expanding Welfare Empire - Forbes

Pretty clever, eh? First they paint the poor as freeloaders, then they move on to the middle class . . . and all this time you thought it was those freeloading poor people.

[wnytaxman]

Interesting that you would quote an article from the UK.

How about the idea that poverty in the US is getting worse and will continue to get worse due to Nanny state? Why work when someone else will pay for everything? How many different programs have promised to end poverty only to add more to the roles of those in poverty?

I look at things in a very pragmatic fashion. If something has a stated objective and it has achieved the exact opposite of that stated objective then it is time to change it. Some people just seem to think that you can just continue to have people on the public dole forever and the money will always be there. Guess what? Even the "Life of Julia" is a fantasy that ignores the fact that someone has to pay for all the goodies.

[wnytaxman]

Originally Posted by Hamshog

Hey Taxman,

I believe the reason we aren't going to a flat tax is the amount of people that would be looking for work(CPA's, tax preparer's, Attorneys,etc.) when tax time came. Can you say "Good ol' Boys". They all wouldn't be needed if we all just had to fill in a few blanks on a one page form.

Would be a progressive flat tax.. Corporations at 15%, etc.

$0 to $20,000 - 3%

20,001 to $40,000 - 4%

$40,001 to 60,000 -5%

$60,001 to ---------- etc. (You get the picture)



Gross income per W4_______

-6% of Gross income ________

Total Tax Owed ____________



Regards, Hamshog

Hamshog,

Had you gone down farther you would have seen that I took things further that may be helpful for you to understand. My business is one that has payroll as a major expense. Now if you compare my business to one that sells merchandise. The rules have to be different to accomodate different types of businesses. So now you no longer have a flat tax. Your example also fails to account for the fact that 75% of the taxes are paid by 5% of the taxpayers in this country. That means that someone is going to get a huge tax cut and that someone is at the top of the food chain and those in the middle will bear the brunt.

I have been around long enough to see what a mess the politicians can make of sales tax with its multiple exemptions and complexity. Most states sales tax laws are incredibly complex, but it is a flat tax. I'm not worried about being unemployed because politically it is always expedient to use some form of taxation as a tool to either get elected or to perform some percieved social good.

[Bilito]

Originally Posted by wnytaxman

When you are talking about not allowing anyone who hasn't paid into Social Security to draw it, just remember who you are excluding. That would exclude all the handicapped, widows, orphans, and so on. I don't think there are many here who would want to exclude those who could not take care of themselves.

As to the income limit when your SS becomes taxable, that limit hasn't changed in quite a few years. If your overall income changed that would make more of your SS taxable.

Our overall income stayed the same last year but the ammount of SS I had to pay taxes on increased by 75.00 over the year before, itreturns is done so gradually that you hardly notice it unless you compare tax returns
(You gotta love the tax sytem for figuring things, lets see, add rows 1 thru 5 divide that by some number and multiply that by another number and subtract that from line 99 and that is what you pay)
There are other GOV programs to take care of handicapped, I have a grown son with CP and he is well taken care of
Orphans, where do we have orphanages nowadays and we have programs for parentless children and get after those dead beat dads that have 8 kids by 5 diff women and stop paying for any additional kids after they get on the public dole, they will stop having kids then.
Widows. most elderly widows today collect their husbands SS, My mother in law is one that I know of and she is in a nursing home, his SS pays for most of that and her children pay the rest

[alba07]

Originally Posted by TechWriter

Ok, so you (and/or your "client") saw "a number of kids" (5? 10? Hundreds?) in expensive clothes. And all these kids' parents were apparently receiving some form of welfare because . . . they looked poor? you surveyed them?

So, assuming the worst, you're using not-so-emperical evidence to indict 45 million (give or take) folks that fall under the poverty level? Poverty in America likely to get worse, report finds | Business | guardian.co.uk

TechWriter, don't bother responding to taxman. He started this thread and has been extraordinarily active with incendiary statements throughout the thread in order to keep it going. He has a fixed view of the world and nothing you or anyone says will change his agenda.

[wnytaxman]

Originally Posted by TechWriter

Don't look now, but if you're receiving Medicaid, then you too are part of the welfare problem (ie, a "freeloader"). America's Ever Expanding Welfare Empire - Forbes

Pretty clever, eh? First they paint the poor as freeloaders, then they move on to the middle class . . . and all this time you thought it was those freeloading poor people.

Just to fill you in on a little fact, if you work for any company that has less than 50 employees you HAVE to take Medicare even if your regular health insurance provides better coverage. Also if you are 65 or over you can no longer utilize Health Savings Accounts which are a very unique program which makes people accountable for the own health costs. If you would like to be critical of someone on Medicare you need to realize that Medicare is not a voluntary program for most people. It is a mandated program.

[wnytaxman]

Originally Posted by alba07

TechWriter, don't bother responding to taxman. He started this thread and has been extraordinarily active with incendiary statements throughout the thread in order to keep it going. He has a fixed view of the world and nothing you or anyone says will change his agenda.

I'm not sure where I've been incendiary, but if I have stepped on someone's toes, it was not intentional.

I started the thread with the idea that most of us on here are either on SS or close to drawing. Also most on here are probably a little bit better off financially than a great number of Americans. Yes, I do have my ideas of what could be done to improve SS, but I would also like to know what others think. If I didn't care what other folks think, I wouldn't have asked the question.

[Lindsay Richards]

Somehow it has become incendiary to think able bodied folks should work and add to society. This class warfare and soak the achievers mentality has really taken hold. Is this the spirit that made America the most successful country it is. The notion that there are not a whole lot of people gaming the system is just totally wrong. Anybody hiring employees knows this. We think we are entitled to retie at 53 years old and others should take care of us. Social Security was never set up to be a total retirement program. Savings and family should still be the main means of retirement.

[TechWriter]

Originally Posted by Lindsay Richards

Somehow it has become incendiary to think able bodied folks should work and add to society.

Where'd this come from? Koch brothers talking point?

Originally Posted by Lindsay Richards

This class warfare and soak the achievers mentality has really taken hold.

You mean asking the rich (excuse me, "job makers") to ante up?

Just so I have this straight . . . attacking the poor is patriotic, but attacking the rich is "class warfare"?

Originally Posted by Lindsay Richards

We think we are entitled to retie at 53 years old and others should take care of us. Social Security was never set up to be a total retirement program. Savings and family should still be the main means of retirement.

Retire at 53? I haven't heard anyone pushing that lately . . . even the Greeks.

Actually, company pensions were supposed to be one of the retirement "legs", but after 401ks, pensions for the most part went by by.

[Hamshog]

Originally Posted by wnytaxman

Hamshog,

Had you gone down farther you would have seen that I took things further that may be helpful for you to understand. My business is one that has payroll as a major expense. Now if you compare my business to one that sells merchandise. The rules have to be different to accomodate different types of businesses. So now you no longer have a flat tax. Your example also fails to account for the fact that 75% of the taxes are paid by 5% of the taxpayers in this country. That means that someone is going to get a huge tax cut and that someone is at the top of the food chain and those in the middle will bear the brunt.

I have been around long enough to see what a mess the politicians can make of sales tax with its multiple exemptions and complexity. Most states sales tax laws are incredibly complex, but it is a flat tax. I'm not worried about being unemployed because politically it is always expedient to use some form of taxation as a tool to either get elected or to perform some percieved social good.

Taxman,

What difference does it make how a company makes it's money??? If your company nets $100,000.00 this year and XYZ Construction nets $100,000.00 this year, what the h3ll differance does it make??? You shuffled paper with numbers on it and charged the customer, the contruction company built something and charged the customer. You paid out more in payroll and XYZ paid out more in material. Both made the same to pay tax on...

This is part of what's wrong with our tax system. Some want to make it more complex than it needs to be.

Flat tax would also do away with 50 to 75% of the IRS also!!!

Regards, Hamshog