[Rapier7]

After seeing Romney's remarks at that private fundraiser and the ensuing political fallout, it occurs to me that we should just eliminate FICA.

Originally, it was used to fund Social Security and Medicare trusts. But the Medicare tax portion has long been outpaced by how much Medicare costs. Social Security just passed that point too, even when you don't count the 2% cut in FICA.

We already started pooling up FICA revenues with other tax revenues to pay for other government spending back in the 90s. That's why the US Treasury started keeping track of intragovernmental holdings, which denominate how much money Congress reappropriated from the Social Security and Medicare trusts for other spending programs. Given the fact that both programs are now going to run permanent deficits, we should just get rid of FICA and make up for the lost revenue by increasing revenue raised from Federal income taxes.

Currently, FICA gets applied on 7.65% of an employee's wages. Your employer kicks in another 7.65% on your behalf. If you're self employed, you have to pay the full 15.3%. So why not just eliminate completely? Bake it into the Federal income tax rates so that we raise the same amount of revenue. It simplifies the tax system, and it eliminates distortions over who really pays taxes at the Federal level. It also eliminates the bias against self employed workers, because employers shield employees away from half of FICA, and they just subtract that amount from what their salary would have been anyways.

This simplifies the tax system for regular people and it will better help them determine what tax policy they would prefer. It's time to end the charade that is FICA.

[TurkeyButt]

I'd rather see the Fair Tax implemented.

[licence2kill]

I agree

[licence2kill]

"Originally, it was used to fund Social Security and Medicare trusts."

This, however, is false. It always just went into a general pool. It was never explicitly broken up with other revenues.

[StellarKnight]

Originally Posted by licence2kill

"Originally, it was used to fund Social Security and Medicare trusts."

This, however, is false. It always just went into a general pool. It was never explicitly broken up with other revenues.

If this is the case, then there's absolutely no point in retaining a distinction between FICA and general income tax.

Our tax code has got to hold some sort of historical record for length and needless complexity. Anything to chop down redundancies is in my book.

[drgonzo]

As long as the removal of FICA is accompanied by a progressive increase in taxes to solve the revenue problem, this is a great idea. FICA's regressivity is one of the biggest financial problems social security and Medicare face.

[barrel roll]

So there is no hope unless the government plunders more from us?

[情けない]

Originally Posted by drgonzo

As long as the removal of FICA is accompanied by a progressive increase in taxes to solve the revenue problem, this is a great idea. FICA's regressivity is one of the biggest financial problems social security and Medicare face.

You can't "solve the revenue problem" just by raising taxes.

[yesme]

Originally Posted by barrel roll

So there is no hope unless the government plunders more from us?

Plunders ALL sir, until they plunder it ALL.

[FreeEnterprise]

Maybe we should force our government to stop spending money they don't have?...

You know a balanced budget requirement.

Oh wait, Obama hasn't passed a budget since the liberals took over... In fact, his budgets that he has put to congress have all gotten exactly ZERO votes...

maybe we should vote for more big spending liberals then!

[barrel roll]

Originally Posted by FreeEnterprise

Maybe we should force our government to stop spending money they don't have?...

You know a balanced budget requirement. ...

You'll have to amend the constitution for that idea, friend. Art. 1 Sect 8.

[kjjm4]

Originally Posted by 情けない

You can't "solve the revenue problem" just by raising taxes.

In gonzo's world you can. Raising taxes will also lead to low unemployment, a thriving economy, a chicken in every pot and a car in every garage. It may also cure AIDS.

[Swerve22]

That's why nobody takes gonzo seriously.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Swerve22

That's why nobody takes gonzo seriously.

I just hate when he plays dumb to make an argument.

[drgonzo]

Originally Posted by barrel roll

So there is no hope unless the government plunders more from us?

Who's "us"? 94.2% of American workers are under the current FICA cap.

Originally Posted by 情けない

You can't "solve the revenue problem" just by raising taxes.

Of course you can, in fact that's the only way as taxes are the government's main source of revenue.

We've known for years that eliminating the FICA cap would nearly solve social security's revenue problem by itself, so if you get rid of FICA obviously you need to replace it with something else that effectively does the same thing. That's the point of this thread, astonishingly, as posted by Rapier7.

If anyone's playing dumb here, it sure isn't me.

Originally Posted by FreeEnterprise

Oh wait, Obama hasn't passed a budget since the liberals took over... In fact, his budgets that he has put to congress have all gotten exactly ZERO votes...

Mostly false.

[FreeEnterprise]

Gonzo, name a single member of Congress who voted for obamas budget... or point me to ANY budget passed since Obama took over!...


Seriously you have zero credibility when you act like my statement is "mostly false " when it is exactly accurate.

Course it does prove that liberals lie...

[TheSilentAssassin]

Originally Posted by FreeEnterprise

Gonzo, name a single member of Congress who voted for obamas budget... or point me to ANY budget passed since Obama took over!...


Seriously you have zero credibility when you act like my statement is "mostly false " when it is exactly accurate.

Course it does prove that liberals lie...

Did you bother reading the link?

[Tin-Man]

Originally Posted by FreeEnterprise

Gonzo, name a single member of Congress who voted for obamas budget... or point me to ANY budget passed since Obama took over!...


Seriously you have zero credibility when you act like my statement is "mostly false " when it is exactly accurate.

Course it does prove that liberals lie...

You have to make an effort and click the link. Thanks gonzo, I had not read this prior.

So there is the first problem with Romney’s statement. The president doesn’t "pass" a budget. That’s Congress’ job. In Obama’s case, he has submitted his budget request each year he has been in office.

In his speech, Romney faulted Obama for failing to pass a budget. He was correct that the two times Congress voted on the president’s budget requests, both times they were voted down. But the job of passing a budget resolution is not the president’s. That responsibility falls to Congress, and even then the president doesn’t sign it. As Ellis, our expert, put it: "The president has no role in passing a budget. The president can cajole Congress about passing a budget and advocate for positions and funding levels, but in the end, Congress approves the budget resolution for their own purposes." That’s the difference between this and other claims we’ve rated which blamed Congress for inaction on the budget.

Romney’s statement contains a grain of truth, in that two of Obama’s budget requests failed to pass. But citing those votes leaves a wrong impression -- namely that the votes were anything more than political theater. Romney omitted the more critical information that passing a federal budget is the job of Congress. Given all that, we rate his statement Mostly False.

[yesme]

Wait, someone honestly thought the president passes the budgets?

[barrel roll]

Originally Posted by drgonzo

Who's "us"? 94.2% of American workers are under the current FICA cap.

Of course you can, in fact that's the only way as taxes are the government's main source of revenue.

We've known for years that eliminating the FICA cap would nearly solve social security's revenue problem by itself, so if you get rid of FICA obviously you need to replace it with something else that effectively does the same thing. That's the point of this thread, astonishingly, as posted by Rapier7.

If anyone's playing dumb here, it sure isn't me.

Mostly false.

I'm on my phone, on a boondoggle. I will read the pdf once the download completes. If I understand you correctly, you are saying the cap removal won't effect Joe Citizen.

My comment, paraphrased and extra information added: So the only solution to the problem of not having enough money for what we want to spent it on, is too get more money vice trying not to spend add much.

[FreeEnterprise]

Liberals are unbelievable... They lie, lie some more, and then change what you said to something else (strawman).

Seriously READ what I wrote... I'm not Romney, and my words are abundantly clear.

THERE IS NO FEDERAL BUDGET SINCE OBAMA TOOK OVER.

That is because we have a FAILURE in leadership. Because the framework for a budget is brought BY THE PRESIDENT, then the congress uses his ideas to frame the budget.

Obama has put forth 2 budget proposals both of which got ZERO votes. AND YES, your liberal politifact article agrees with me on that, so how exactly is that "mostly false"?...

"After Obama submitted his fiscal year 2013 budget proposal on Feb. 13, 2012, House Republicans put it up for a floor vote.

The result: 414-0 against."

And the ONLY other budget voted on by the congress presented by Obama...

"The same thing happened a year earlier in the Senate. That vote: 97-0 against."


That is ZERO votes. This really isn't as hard as you guys are making it. As it is a SIMPLE FACT.

You guys are hysterical, so blinded by your lies that you can't even see straight.


DO we have a budget? It really isn't a hard answer, you say "YES" or "NO".

The answer is clearly NO. Who is in leadership? Obama, that means HE is responsible, unless you want to argue what the definition of "is" is?...

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-mone...-senate-budget


Politifact is a biased liberal "news" organization, that liberals love to cite as it skews data just like the question above to fit their liberal ideology...

http://www.humanevents.com/2012/08/3...n-left-really/



What is especially pathetic, is that in the article Gonzo cited it says this.

"Everyone understands that the president has a unique and important role in facilitating that process," said spokesman Ryan Williams in an email. "President Obama has been an unprecedented failure in that respect. His FY 2012 budget went down 97-0 in the Senate and his FY 2013 budget went down 414-0 in the House."

PROVING MY POINT. yet gonzo thinks that it is "mostly false".

Yeah, I'm laughing at all three of you "silent assassin, Tin-man and Gonzo"...

But, thanks for proving my point that liberals lie or strawman. Of course I know that the house starts budgets, and the senate approves them, but the framework is supposed to come from the President.

And we have a Failure in the white house, so keep defending his failures.