Category Archives: Social Security

Democrats Brand New Plan: Raise Taxes On Rich, No Spending Cuts

Say hello to the new Democratic plan, same as the old the Democratic plan

So the new Democratic plan, as laid out by resident scumbag Chuck Schumer is to raise taxes on the rich and cut nothing.  I’m glad the Democrats aren’t a broken record that have only one policy, but rather embrace a myriad of different ways to improve the economy and never stick to a plan after it has already failed the last 100 times it was tried. 


Senator Schumer, who has never met a tax hike or Constitutional violation he didn’t like  is suggesting this new tax hike on millionaires to offset the cost of continuing the tax break on the payroll tax we have all enjoyed for the last year.

And you know what, I like the payroll tax break.  Better that I get to keep my money than it goes to the Social Security system where it is guaranteed that I will never see it again.  I’m kind of like that; I prefer my money to remain in my wallet instead of the wallets of highway robbers.  I guess I’m just greedy.

But how about this we don’t need to raise taxes on anyone.  Do you know why?  Well first because Schumer’s tax those who make more than a million a year plan is just laughable.  You could tax everyone in the country who makes more than a million a year and still not have enough to shore up social security.

Let’s take a look. [2006 figures]  U.S. Census figures don’t list go above $250,000 a year but let’s use that.  After all $250,000 a year is rich and those bastards deserve to have everything taken from them anyway.  So there are 2.2 million households with an income of $250K or higher (There are 116 million households so this group is about the top 2% of the number of households).   The whole group has an average income of $448,687 (which if you take the time to think about it means most of them are below the million dollar mark, but they’re still evil rich bastards).  So the total income for this group is 987.1 Billion dollars.  So if Chuck put an additional 10% on their income that would yield 98.7 Billion next year.


But that won’t solve much.  You see Social Security was already taking in 29 Billion less than it was spending in March of 2010then in December of 2010 Obama signed the 2% Payroll tax holiday for a year, which is what Schumer wants to save.  That saved Americans about $100 Billion that wasn’t sent to the thieves at Social Security.  Oh wait, we were already spending more than we were taking in, then we cut income by a $100,000,000,000.00.  Hmmm and if Chuck got a 10% hike on everyone at $250,000 or more that would supply 99 Billion.

But Chuck only wants to tax those making over a million.  Which, since they’re a small portion of that top 2% means the tax rate will have to be even higher to make up the difference.  So we’re at what, a 20% increase?  30%?  And you’re still not making up for the initial $29 Billion shortfall that we started with before the payroll tax cut.

And let us not forget the baby boomers are starting to retire.  A massive generation of losers who expect to be taken care of.  Yeah I’m sure that won’t jack up costs.

And I’m sure a 30% tax increase on income won’t possibly slow down the economy at all.  No, not at all.

And it’s even more ridiculous as most people who make over a million a year make it through investments which is an entirely different type of income than the type Schumer is talking about.  So don’t worry Warren Buffet, your Democratic pals aren’t coming after a single cent of your income.

How about this, Chuck.  Instead of your plan which won’t work and is only there to stir up the class warfare, how about a plan that works.

If you’re on Social Security right now, you’re taking a 10% cut in benefits.  If you’re going on it in the next 3 years you’re taking a 15% cut.  If you’re not retiring in the next three years, guess what you’re really not retiring in the next three years because we’re raising the retirement age from 67 to 71…and look forward a 20% cut in benefits.  And if you’re under 50 right now you’re retirement age is 75 and a 25% cut in benefits.  This will get costs in line.

And then we should lower benefits for everyone 45 or younger even further but offer these people a privatized system that is self sustaining and not a ponzi-scheme like entitlement program.
But that would actually work.  And Chuck Schumer isn’t interested in things that work…he’s interested in things that get him and his ilk elected so they can be exempt from all payroll taxes and all insider trading laws.


Filed under Budget, Capitalism, Congress, Conservative, Constitution, Debt, Economics, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, GOP, Government is corrupt, Laws the GOP should pass, liberal arrogance, Long Term Thinking, People Are Stupid, politics, Social Security, Taxes, Tea Party, Unjust legislation, Welfare

Why Social Security doesn’t work

I know some of you know this in the theoretical, but sometimes seeing the actual numbers helps.

The average person earns 1.2 million dollars in the course of their life (if you only have a High School Diploma) in current dollars. Assuming they go to work at 19 that averages out to $25,000 a year, probably making somewhere near $40,000 at retirement assuming an average raise of 1% per year (it’s more because I’m giving a you a 1% raise in real dollars), I’m being generous. In reality you’d probably end up with a much higher number.

At present FICA is 6.25%. Currently it has been lowered but let’s assume that the average 6.2% will hold (if I accounted with the lower FICA this would have even a more outrageous ending).

So, over a lifetime the average high school graduate will contribute $74,400 and their employer will contribute $74,400 for a total of $148,800. (If you’re self employed you get to put up all of it.)

If they retire at 67 they get full benefits (if they retire before this it is reduced benefits, but actually those reduced benefits end up costing more in the long run).

If they’re making $40,000 (not an outrageous sum) at full retirement their benefits are going to be about $1,300 a month.

The average life expectancy is currently 78.3.

So, retiring at 67 means they’ll be collecting benefits for 11 years 4 months.
1300 x 11.3×12=$176,280. That’s right, they will draw $176,280 from social security if they retire today and live 11.3 more years (but as we know life expectancy keeps going up so in 11 years the life expectancy will probably be around 79 or 80 which only makes this next paragraph even worse).

$176,280 is $27,480 more than the $148,800 they and their employer put in. We all knew that everyone gets more than they put in, but now you know by how much. Times every person who retires. Yes social security is currently funded ….because it’s stealing from the rest of us. But this Ponzi scheme has to go.

Oh and let’s ask what you could have done with $148,000 more in your lifetime…oh maybe buy a house and have enough credit that you didn’t need to get a subprime loan. Maybe pay for your kids to go to college. Or if we cut that in half and didn’t just force that money out of your employer’s bank account maybe they could have hired someone else (or maybe a dozen other employees)…or maybe take care of your parent (what an idea)…or how about even saving for retirement. Even the compound interest of a basic CD would yield a lot more that measly 27K overage. A myriad of things could be done which would have made the economy infinitely more healthy.

But no. We had to have an entitlement program. Great plan.  And it only gets worse the more you make.

Now we can cut benefits or we can raise the retirement age or we can tell people that if they’re not a certain again, tough they’re just not getting anything they put into this failing system (or all of the above).  But the fact remains that more is coming out than is going in and that makes this nothing more than an elaborate pyramid scheme that needs to be stopped.

Oh and we didn’t even talk about the obscene cost of Medicaid and Medicare

Leave a comment

Filed under Budget, Capitalism, Debt, Economics, Government is useless, Long Term Thinking, Social Security, Welfare

Death of A Thousand Cuts

“No single raindrop believes it is responsible for the flood”

So a few people emailed me to complain that my suggestion that elected officials stop taking retirement benefits above and beyond what the rest of us get. They said that it was a meaningless suggestion as it wouldn’t be enough to solve the budget problems. To this I have two responses. First, that I was quite clear it wouldn’t solve the budget problems and that is was a symbolic move more than anything else. Secondly, I would like to quote a friend of mine:

“I’m tired of people saying that the proposed budget cuts are ‘drops in the bucket’ at the state or federal level. A lot of drops will FILL THE BUCKET. You have to start somewhere and trim fat no matter how small – it will make it more likely that we keep the meat.”

Quite frankly if Congress, every state legislature, every county, every city took this attitude of a death of thousand cuts to their budgets and every day came in looking for a couple million, hell even a couple thousand dollars, to be cut every day…hmmm….let’s guess how long our budget problems would last?
Logically they wouldn’t last all that long. However, no rational person has ever accused the Democratic party of being logical. Case in point: Wisconsin. We all know that unions have outrageous benefits and give us nothing in return. We all know these retirement plans are obscene, and so Walker wants them to pay for some of it (heaven forbid that you pay for something that you want!) but the Democrats are staging protests as if Constitutional rights are being violated.

Another case in point. NPR and PBS. Many liberals like to bitch that we need to fund these things. Why? They like to say that it provides quality news reports that aren’t biased…but these are the same people who say the general media isn’t biased to the left, so that point is out. (In case you’re wondering, yes I do believe FOX News is biased to the right, but the difference is that people on FOX will challenge people on the left on their idea instead of name calling). Then there’s the argument that we need shows like Sesame Street. Bull. As a teacher let me tell you there is no show in existence more abhorrent than Sesame Street. Nothing has contributed as much to ADD instant gratification bratty children more than that crappy show (okay, bad parenting has contributed, but it was bad parenting that let children watch that excuse for a show). Trust me if there is anything remotely decent on PBS or NPR, the private sector will pick it up very quickly. (Five bucks says the private sector won’t pick up much). But Democrats in Washington are raising holy-hell over the proposals to cut funding to these worthless organizations as if the government was the only group funding these groups and as if this was on the level of overturning laws against murder.

My point is that while the GOP needs to get off some of its stupid legislation (i.e. anything dealing with homosexuals or abortion) and start cutting everything with a machete, the Democrats need to either return to the reality where every state and the federal government are massively in debt. Now if they want to return to sanity and start making deals like “we’ll give you this cut for closing this tax loophole” I’m actually okay with that. But that would require them to deal in a sane reality. Something I don’t think I can ever attribute to Democratic politicians.


Filed under Budget, Government is useless, Laws the GOP should pass, liberal arrogance, Long Term Thinking, Social Security