A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Bush Threatens Veto Of Any Bills That Don't Include User Fees For Everyone Talking To ATC!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #25  
Old June 30th 08, 11:20 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 721
Default Bush Threatens Veto Of Any Bills That Don't Include User Fees For Everyone Talking To ATC!

Mike wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
...
On Jun 30, 2:35 pm, "Mike" wrote:

Unfortunately, SS has been expanded over the years and the
elgibility age
hasn't been raised to reflect the reality of people living longer.
The SS
maximum income level also hasn't kept pace with increases in
income, and the
whole trust fund idea is a disaster.


The reason the max income level hasn't increased as fast is because
the max payout has been reduced. Incomes over that amount don't
contribute to increased future distributions. Allowing people to pay
into SS at higher income levels than they can ever collect on totally
throws out the idea that its a "savings" plan as sold by FDR.
In anycase, if they cut the SS tax in 1/2 by allowing people to opt
out of ever collecting on it people would retire with several times
more money by investing the saved 1/2. However, that doesn't allow
the gov't control over your money so it will never fly.


FDR never billed it as a "savings plan" to begin with.

You might want to look up what the "I" in FICA stands for. I'll give
you a hint. It's the same thing as the "I" in OASDI.

The max payout has never been reduced. The max payout is capped by
contributions as it's always been and the payout rate is reduced at
higher contribution levels, but again this is always as it has been.

Looking at SS as a "savings plan" and allowing people to "opt out"
defeats the entire intent of the program.

For an economic expert, you sure are ignorant about a lot of things.


Why don't you demonstrate your expertise by answering the question below?


Mike wrote:

I guess your reading comprehension skills aren't all that great. Obama
proposes raising the SS maximum income level, which is
currently $102,000 which affects less than 5% of the population. The
payroll tax rate would remain the same. And you claim to be an
economic expert?


Seems to me if a larger income level is subject to the same tax rate a
higher net tax is the result. Do you disagree?


 




Thread Tools
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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bush Demands ATC User Fees Larry Dighera Piloting 3 May 6th 08 12:56 AM
Bush Spinning Airline Delays To Support User Fees Larry Dighera Piloting 0 November 20th 07 05:26 PM
Not user fees anymore, service fees... Blueskies Owning 36 October 1st 07 05:14 PM
Not user fees anymore, service fees... Blueskies Piloting 35 August 4th 07 02:09 PM
Not user fees anymore, service fees... Blueskies Home Built 35 August 4th 07 02:09 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.