Presidential Cantidate Barrack Obama today proposed a similar plan to what John Edwards has mentioned to change Social Security. Social Security was set up as a contribution based insurance system to make sure people could live if they lived extremly long lives or became disabled. It was designed as a voluntary system that people could join to gain security. Over time it was shifted to a mandatory system, but they maintained the contribution based system that promises you get back most of what you put in. Now, Obama and Edwards want to change that. They think that those making over 97,000 a year should now be forced to pay payroll taxes on the amount over 97,000. This in fact changes the system form a contribution based system to a new method of wealth distribution. While it seems nice to make others pay it is a further encroachment of our Federal Government, and a step towards the socialization of America. These were not the principles that our country was founded on. We need to look back and decide what America really needs and it is not a method to tax our way to sucess. We must look for creative solutions to fix our problems and make our society better but increased taxes and socilaization is not that path.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 13
http://bestoftoday.gather.com/
All this hype about SS running out of money is BS. If the government would quit stealing SS funds for the general fund there would be plenty.
They are saying there would be no cap. In Edwards case he says there should be a bubble where no ones income in taxed from 97,000 to 200,000. I am fine for adjusting due to inflation and such but removing a cap is just changing the purpose of the program.
This plan of Obama's will be lauded as forward thinking and proof that Dems really care about the "little people" even though it will leave them with less because the government can't make a profit and inflation will eat the real value of what people get.
It was indeed a form of wealth re-distribution. It could have been avoided if those with more in that society had been more considerate of those with little or nothing. It was identified that one of the biggest reasons people with little had little was because industry leaders of that time were low-balling the work force so that owners could get richer (think Andrew Carnegie).
Social Security has not been a savings account for quite sometime now. The money paid in goes back out to pay those who are on it. It is also no longer voluntary, at least as far as I know.
Collecting more money from people that make over $97,000 per year, and only applying an increased withholding on the amounts above $97,000 doesn't sound all that crippling. There are darn few places in our country where an income of $97,000 doesn't allow for a pretty comfortable living.
Wealth distribution in our country has always been top heavy; and the social conditions that brought about the creation of Social Security have not been solved, primarily because those with more continue to low-ball those with less for the sake of personal profits.
If you want government forced wealth re-distribution to stop, then develop and promote another way to make sure that all people can earn enough to live on throughout their whole lives.
ModernDay Publius - I'm curious, are you also anti the corporate socialist programs that our government has slathered on our business spheres?
ss hasn't been volunatry for decades...its a regressive form of taxation that does not even produce cash to beat inflation. Any form of wealth redistribution produces a political climate of corruption, everyone tries to be one of those not getting raped and they have to pay off congress/government for the privilage of keeping some of what they earn. Notice SS hits people working, if you live off dividend income like a Kennedy, you're fine.
Lastly, do some research, SS was a preemptive strike against the Charles Townsend plan and Huey Long. FDR did not care about Americans, he cared about power. He was afraid of those two and votes they might take from him. After all, it was FDR who's meddling gave us such a period like the Great Depression.
Lastly, Publius has written against corporate welfare before. Just because he dislikes SS does not mean he likes other kinds of welfare....