500K+ tax hike / medicare reform compromise on the table?

[halik]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-05/republican-defectors-ready-to-back-tax-rate-compromise.html

Sounds reasonable to me; bump up that medicare eligibility age, people live longer anyway.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I agree earners above $500k make more sense and many people are working in their late 60's these days.

 

[halik]

I agree earners above $500k make more sense and many people are working in their late 60's these days.

Yeah, $250K tends to catch catch doctors/lawyers that are sitting on 100-300K of school debt.

 

[Genx87]

Means testing these entitlements needs to be done along with raising the age if they are to survive.

 

[halik]

Means testing these entitlements needs to be done along with raising the age if they are to survive.

In other words reduce benefits for the wealthy, while having them taxed on ssoc at the same rate? That doesn't make sense on the face of it, as ssoc is supposed to be an insurance program. If you want to tax progrssively do it with income taxes.

 

[Nemesis 1]

I agree earners above $500k make more sense and many people are working in their late 60's these days.

Thats because Employers will hire retired babyboomers ahead of todays youth . They just aren't good workers they lack drive and endurance. SO employers op out for the retired good workers

 

[Nemesis 1]

Without big cuts to welfare its all fail

 

[Genx87]

In other words reduce benefits for the wealthy, while having them taxed on ssoc at the same rate? That doesn't make sense on the face of it, as ssoc is supposed to be an insurance program. If you want to tax progrssively do it with income taxes.

Supposed to be but it is for all practical purposes a seperately taxed elderly welfare program. Why beat around the bush? It is imo the best way to ensure both survive long term since privatization is to evil to contemplate. And also not break the budget in the process.

 

[nehalem256]

Supposed to be but it is for all practical purposes a seperately taxed elderly welfare program. Why beat around the bush? It is imo the best way to ensure both survive long term since privatization is to evil to contemplate. And also not break the budget in the process.

Except why would I support an elderly welfare program?

The reason SS enjoys support is that nearly all people view themselves as benefiting from it.

 

[Genx87]

Except why would I support an elderly welfare program?

The reason SS enjoys support is that nearly all people view themselves as benefiting from it.

Why does anybody support welfare? What is the practical difference between SS and a typical welfare program for individuals or business? I understand people believe it is some kind of retirement account. But lets start calling it what it is. And it, and medicare need to be addressed if they are to be there in any form for people when they are elderly.

And define nearly everybody? I pay in and dont view myself as benefitting from it. In fact I look at it as a sink hole where my money goes to maybe come back less than it was originally worth. My expectation is by the time I retire SS will only have squandered the money I put into it. That is not a benefit at all.

 

[halik]

Why does anybody support welfare? What is the practical difference between SS and a typical welfare program for individuals or business? I understand people believe it is some kind of retirement account. But lets start calling it what it is. And it, and medicare need to be addressed if they are to be there in any form for people when they are elderly.

And define nearly everybody? I pay in and dont view myself as benefitting from it. In fact I look at it as a sink hole where my money goes to maybe come back less than it was originally worth. My expectation is by the time I retire SS will only have squandered the money I put into it. That is not a benefit at all.

Then it should be set as a supplemental program and funded with general income taxes much like TANF, food stamps etc. We already have medicaid and medicare for that stuff anyway.

Geico doesn't pay out less on my car claim because I have more money than their average policy holder, I don't see why SS should.

 

[Genx87]

Then it should be set as a supplemental program and funded with general income taxes much like TANF, food stamps etc. We already have medicaid and medicare for that stuff anyway.

Geico doesn't pay out less on my car claim because I have more money than their average policy holder, I don't see why SS should.

I'd have no problem doing that. Put it in the general fund and make people qualify for it like they do any other welfare program. But if we are going to continue down this road of keeping SS, and we surely are. Then modifications are going to have to be made for it to not eat up the remainder of our budget over the next 20ish years.

Geico is a private company I would buy insurance from in case of catastrophic scenarios. Getting old isnt a matter of if, but a matter of when. SS disability can be dealt with on its own or moved into Obamacare.

 

[hal2kilo]

I agree earners above $500k make more sense and many people are working in their late 60's these days.

I know a lot more people who are within 6 to 7 years of retirement age (65,66) who have no jobs, and for all practical purposes won't find any employment until then. What are they supposed to do. Medicaid is all they have at this point.

This mythical work forever because we live forever now is bullshit.
Maybe some young people might need some work in their lifetime.

"Work you fingers to the bone, what do you get, bony fingers, bony fingers".

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I know a lot more people who are within 6 to 7 years of retirement age (65,66) who have no jobs, and for all practical purposes won't find any employment until then. What are they supposed to do. Medicaid is all they have at this point.

This mythical work forever because we live forever now is bullshit.
Maybe some young people might need some work in their lifetime.

"Work you fingers to the bone, what do you get, bony fingers, bony fingers".

I know more people who are in the mid 60's that still working and will do so until they are penalized by the system for working.

 

[werepossum]

In other words reduce benefits for the wealthy, while having them taxed on ssoc at the same rate? That doesn't make sense on the face of it, as ssoc is supposed to be an insurance program. If you want to tax progrssively do it with income taxes.

I agree on principle, but Congress long ago blew all the excess receipts. Like a lot of things, the moral decision becomes no longer practical due to previous immoral decisions. Social Security/Medicare will soon simply have to be treated as just another wealth redistribution program to keep it solvent, which means you don't get it if you don't "need" it and the cap disappears because we're no longer pretending that government is taking that money for your benefit. Sucks for high earners, but that's kinda like how Affirmative Action sucks for while males; white males are still doing fine, and I suspect high earners will do fine also.