your own humble brag. Tell us if the stool softeners worked today and you were able to limit your grunting and straining to 20 minutes before you had to take the first flush so as to not have it run over onto the floor. Now THERE'S an accomplishment by you that's worth bragging about, humble or not.
with Pocohontas to propose bipartisan legislation removing the cap on Social Security contributions in order to save the Social Security fund. It amounts to a small extra tax on the richest Americans and the only sticking point will be whether to continue to require employers to match the individual's contribution. I usually cap out in the Spring, while Elon Musk caps out at 12:01am on New Years Day. Lol I don't mind paying more if the billionaires are paying the same percentage I am.
Why should the very richest Americans get a pass on paying such a small amount? I don't know how anyone survives on Social Security alone anyway.
There are always openings for Walmart greeters to add some hours at minimum wage to boost their SS benefits. The cap this year is $184,000 at 6.2 percent. That's a contribution max of $11,408 per person even if you are making millions. Just increasing the cap to $1,000,000 ($62,000 contribution) would make SS completely solvent for decades to come. The only ones that get screwed are the self-employed (like tradespeople) who pay both the individual and employer contribution. The cap might have to be lower for them.
The self-employed are able to deduct 50% of their Social Security and Medicare taxes when calculating their adjusted gross income.
higher than "employed" workers. A deduction of half is only relative to their marginal tax rate. The self-employed pay about 15%, versus 6.2% for those employed, but if your individual marginal tax rate is 20%, then your social security contribution is not 7.5%, it's 12%. A percentage of a percentage diminishes the savings. I think if they actually kept that 7.5% in their pocket, they would be okay with it, even though it's more than someone employed by a business owned by someone else, or shareholders.
While I am not really interested in discussing the US tax code, there are significant tax advantages to being self employed from expense write-offs to health insurance premium deductions to higher retirement plan contributions. I also know many self-employed who accept cash payments and who knows how much of that income gets reported.
and at the end of the day you only benefit in an amount equal to your marginal tax rate, but I will agree that the best reason to be self-employed is the opportunity for unreported income if you know how to not get caught, which most people don't.
The only issue with this is the fact of...... How much would you be getting back when you retire in SS benefits?
The issue is that SS is you get back what you pay in type situation. IE: If you earn more and pay in more you get HIGHER SS than others. So will these millionaires get more since they pay in more? See the issue that would arise. So anyone who pays the extra $49K.... would their payments received go up when they start to draw on SS? Will their payments go UP when they retire since they paid in more and have higher income level getting TAXED.
It is a great idea in theory, but you know what will happen..... People will scream: WHY DO THOSE PEOPLE GET MORE IN THEIR SS CHECK?
I can't even understand the second paragraph.
Please get help and stop posting word salad on this board.
Your first sentence shows you don't even understand the issue. It has ZERO to do with "How much would you be getting back." It has to do with the fact that the Social Security Trust Fund is going to run out of money at some point and will have to reduce benefits unless its funding increases.
I don't know. I think he's been much more incoherent than this especially when he gets himself all in a lather about something or goes off on something totally off the deep end. I think I get his issue despite his inartful writing. The solution is to raise the earnings contribution cap and to means testing for wealthy retirees. Of the right-wingers will scream "socialism" or "communism" so nothing will get done in Congress.
If there's any government program that's outright socialist it's that one, along with Medicare.
can't end the program without massive new investment. There are only three ways out, 1) buy everyone out of their SS equity, or 2) Start a separate program for those under a certain age so that those that are too old to work will still get what they paid into it, including the cost-of-living increases over the years. 3) Require a 401K that is funded by both the employee and the employer much the same way that SS is funded now, only without the government trying to run it. Let banks manage their client accounts that would be backed by FDIC insurance. Leaving employees on their own to fund their own retirement accounts by themselves without any rules is a bad idea. It will only increase the number of homeless old people.
yeah i could have explained it better. But it will come down to getting more in return. Otherwise WHY PAY IN MORE? You can freely do that now if you wish.
So you don't understand that that level of money you receive in Retirement SS is based on your income. So if you pay in more you get more back.... then benefits are capped at $184K "income". So it caps out the highest amount you can get back.
So with this plan do the people who pay in more up to $1M.... will they get wont get more back? Right now you are capped at $184K income and that benefit. So will the benefit raise for the people who are now paying in on $1M? That is the fucking issue and road block they will hit. Like I said people can pay in more out of good will if they wish.
And, yes, I understand all of it but that's not the point. Which is that the trust fund is running dry and a simple fix like raising the amount of income that is taxed is fair and will fix this problem.
NO SHIT it is running dry. But with SS it is you get back a portion or what you pay in. That portion is valued higher if you put more into the fund. So if you "bump" it up to $1M gets taxed..... the system would need to "kick back" more to those people who pay in..... GET IT.
What I am saying is that this proposal DOESNT DO THAT.... it just taxes more. See the issue. So why "make more money" when you don't get the benefits in return? It is what SOCIALISM is.
So unless they "bump" up the return when you retire because you pay in more..... it will be fought tooth and nail.
Also like I stated ANYONE can pay in more if they wish...... I wonder why they don't do that.... is it because of what I am talking about by not seeing a "return" in the future.
Because you seem incapable of writing a coherent English sentence. As for it being "SOCIALISM," of COURSE it is. So is Medicare and lots of other programs that people who also voted for Trump fight tooth and nail for. Like food stamps. This is a socialist country. Just not as far socialist as most Western European countries. I have no problem with that.
So you don't fucking UNDERSTAND that the amount you receive in SS is based on the amount you pay into it. If you pay in $184K you get more back than if you paid in $20K. So if you increase the amount of what gets TAXED..... then those people should get more in return. BUT THIS BILL or Talks of this bill don't do that. THEY JUST TAX MORE. Yes it is that simple.
PLUS.... thank you for being a hack and keep up the stereotype by calling names. Also move goal posts.... I never once was talking about SOCIALISM.
I will repeat what I was talking about..... IT IS how the SS system is set up. The more you pay in the more you get in return via SS Checks when you hit retirement age. Now if you increase the amount people pay in.... their benefits (SS CHECK) better increase. Yet this proposal doesn't do that.....they just TAX.
1) YOU DID talk about SOCIALISM. Go back and read your post above. Dimwit.
2) I DO understand "the amount you receive is based on the amount you pay into it" But that was not my point, which you simply failed to comprehend.
3) I am tired of trying to explain simple English to you. You are perhaps the stupidest poster I have ever encountered here So it's no surprise you are unable to understand how stupid you really are. That's not name-calling. That's simply describing reality.
I will leave the last word to you since, as with all dummies it's the only way to shut you up.
YOU ARE AN IDIOT....
I said "isn't that what socialism is?" referring to how this bill actually GOES AGAINST the SS system as it is set up today. Which is what I stated all the way back in the beginning. It goes away from the amount you pay in will come back to a higher amount received. When pay in more and you don't receive more.... that is SOCIALISM. Which is exactly what Warren is pushing for. If they would say that if you pay SS in on $1M you get a higher return when you draw on it..... Then it is inline with the current system. But this bill doesn't do that.
I am tired of trying to EXPLAIN things to you.
Not only is he endlessly repeating himself, he's now endlessly repeating ME but remains incoherent.
What an IDIOT.
It is impossible to EXPLAIN anything to this dolt.
SO.... with this proposal does it increase the benefits received for higher earners? NOPE. But yeah... just keep calling names without refuting what I am saying.
This is just like the "millionaire/billionaire" taxes floating around. They scream TAX THE RICH.... but don't put in safeguards for the middle class. Most to the "tax the rich" proposals don't say that the scale for taxation could be slipped back down to hit middle class. Then they are trying to go after "unearned" or "potential" type wealth. What I mean is they take all of your assets and find the value to TAX. So if someone in CA owns their home outright (1M in a single asset), has a good 401K (200K in it), has two vehicles newer ones (+50K), has a good job making $100K a year, etc.... They could be considered the RICH or 1%. The example I gave is someone who has an "unearned" or "potential" income of over $1.5M in assets that many dem's want to TAX.
We're not talking about a tax proposal that has anything to do with ASSETS. The tax proposals to save SS are simply to continue taxing at the current rate but raise the income cutoff from $184.500 to whatever limit would plug the gap. THAT'S IT!
So stop bringing up other extraneous shit.
Jesus, you really need to get a grip.
OH MY FUCKING GOD...... I gave an example of what CA and others want to do with the assets.
YET YOU STILL HAVE NOT REFUTED that the new SS tax proposal doesn't not increase the benefits that higher earners would get when they draw on SS. They would just PAY IN MORE and not RECIEVE any more in benefits. Which is against how the system is set up right now.
THAT IS THE FUCKING ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. Which makes this proposal FLAWED.
Which you keep ignoring. If this proposal or another one comes in and says to tax up to $1M but then the benefits received for those higher earners also increases.... then it would be a good proposal. The current ones just want to TAX without giving things back which is AGAINST HOW THE SYSTEM IS SET UP.
So a good proposal would be something like this:
Right now if you cap out at the highest income you get roughly:
$3000 a month for early retirement
$4100 a month for full retirement age
$5100 a month for post 70 years.
This is based roughly on taxing $184K at 6%..... 11K a year taxed every year you earn that much income.
NOW if they raise it to $1M you would have to pay roughly $60K a year in taxes every year you earn that much..... now they just need to raise the benefit for those people to something along the lines of....
$4000 a month early retirement
$5100 a month full
$6100 a month for post 70 years
That would mean a gain of $37K a year on those people who earn that amount. It would take about 4 years from one year of taxation for those people to use up that benefit. SO if someone makes $1M a year for 10 years (55-65 year old bracket).... that is $600K in taxes They retire at 65 (full retirement age) they would need to live another 50 years to get the "FULL" benefits of what they got taxed.
BUT THAT TYPE OF THING ISNT IN THE PROPOSAL!!!! They just want to increase the taxable income. Which is against how the system is set up.
MORE STATS for people who say TAX THE RICH...... you know that only 10% of our workers make over $130K a year. 5% make over $200K. 1% make over $500K Middle class is considered $36K to $200K depending on where you live.
There is only about 160M workers in the USA. These are things that TAX THE RICH never talk about. Why do you think no new tax proposals from many have safeguards in for middle class??? Once they get a "tax the rich" bill passed it opens the door to shift brackets down to different income levels.
Most REALISTS or people with a brain know you can't just TAX THE RICH to get us out of the deficit problem. You also need to CUT SPENDING. Which many on the left don't understand or want to.
I never said ANYTHING about increasing benefits. So you wrote a novel about it. Jesus.
Oh, and "YOUR A MORON" is another bit of word salad. It's "YOU'RE". And you are.
YOU ARE A DUMB FUCKER.....
I never said you did. I SAID THAT THIS BILL DOESNT DO IT. Then gave an example of what the bill should be like and it would gain traction with many if it did have something along the lines of what I stated as an example.
But you are too numb to understand this. The reason why I have been posting on this was the fact that it didn't have the stipulation of increasing benefits..... WHICH IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE PROPOSAL. Like I mentioned in my very first post. Which you are too dumb to fucking comprehend. So you just show you are fucking a TROLL. Or a TYPICAL LIBERAL HACK.
Did you ever think that your posts might be comprehensible if you could write a clear, simple English sentence?
Instead you babble on and blame others: "Poor me! No one understands me! WAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!
That's humble brag number 4,283 for COEUR-DE-CHAPON.
He's claiming he earns $184,500 by "the Spring." That means his salary could be $700,000/year.
When do you suppose "in the Spring" is? I'd say it was April 1 because all CDL's posts are April Fools Day jokes on his fellow righties.
Because he will shortly claim his compensation is MUCH higher than a mere $700K. After all there's stock option exercises and profit-sharing. So I'm sure his actual compensation is several million per year. And please note he's actually in favor of SS taxes on higher income earners so he's really an example of "noblesse oblige."
Cur De Loins = Scrooge McDuck
your own humble brag. Tell us if the stool softeners worked today and you were able to limit your grunting and straining to 20 minutes before you had to take the first flush so as to not have it run over onto the floor. Now THERE'S an accomplishment by you that's worth bragging about, humble or not.
With all you MAGA minions, just like your all-powerful Oz, it's either projection or confession. Please keep your bowel movement stories to yourself next time.
to ignore this "bowel movement story" but you couldn't help yourself, could you, especially at the thought of a massive dump by BigP?
When you post something dumb or untrue I'm going to call you out on it. Get used to it. Get over it and get over yourself.
try to sound butch. It cracks me up.
...to reply to my post and defend your post where you claimed to earn a salary of $184,500 by "the Spring."
But you didn't do that. Instead, you lived up to your name - COEUR-D'UNE-PETITE GARCE - "heart of a little bitch."
You ran away from your post like a little bitch by posting a total NON SEQUITUR, a stupid ad hominem attack in order to deflect and distract from the fact that your salary post was bullshit.
You could have agreed with nicky and said: "Yeah, I'm a CEO. My salary is a draw against profits. That's the ticket! And my wife is Morgan Fairchild."
But you didn't because, in reality, you're just a pathetic Walter Mitty loser like Tommy Flanagan:
could have said, "Fuckin' A, the stool softeners are great and I have gotten to the point that I can always make it to the bathroom in time, so I no longer have to clean up the floor after I lost my shit prematurely", but no, you want to question how much I make, which is none of your business but when we first met, you knew I was spending 6-8 hours a week with Kgirls at $350 an hour including tips. That's a minimum of 2 grand a week and that's just for my hobby, so you can be as insanely jealous as you want. It doesn't affect me in the least.
I do have one question related to my post about you, how do you wipe your ass when you can't even reach it? Do you use a dried corn-cob tied to a stick, or what? Anyone who has seen you would know this is legit question, especially the providers who saw you at a meet and greet and laughed at your attempts to chat them up.
trying to white knight for BigP. Your lack of enthusiasm in just going through the motions is duly noted. Lol
it's not a lack of enthusiasm. It's just that you make it so damn easy.
YOU posted how much you make ($184,500 by "the Spring"), you fucking moron!!!
Why did you post what you supposedly make if it was none of our business, you fucking moron?
CDL: "...you knew I was spending 6-8 hours a week with Kgirls at $350 an hour including tips."
No one "knew" that. YOU posted it - that doesn't make it true - you fucking moron.
And you're still trying to deflect, distract and divert because you can't compete intellectually, you fucking moron. Keep running you little bitch!!
to just do the math like Nicky did. He tried to let you off the hook by telling you what to do, but you insisted on remaining stupid. Do you see the irony in someone who can't do simple math calling someone else a moron? You seem really backed up today. Did you forget to take your stool softeners? A healthy shit that doesn't hurt too much will make you a new man!!! (Trigger Jizzman in 5, 4, 3 . . . . .)
Papi, You're spot on about Cul de Lion. However, I don't think he's a moron. But he's always been a right-wing hack, liar, and troll. I'm sure you've noticed his recent obsession with defecation. I guess that's to be expected from someone who is so full of shit like our own Can Do Lies.