• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The Social Security tax that taxes SS benefits!!

Discussion in 'General Politics' started by curiouskay, Oct 28, 2017.

should we be taxed on our ss tax benifits?

Poll closed Nov 27, 2017.
  1. yes

    50.0%
  2. no

    50.0%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Barney

    Barney Member

    147
    +57
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    Yes, of course, the employer's half really does come out of the employee's pocket. I was addressing the claim of double taxation in a technical sense. "I paid taxes on my SS contributions, there for I should not pay taxes on my SS distributions." In a technical sense, the employee didn't pay taxes on the employer's SS contribution.

    If you're paid $100, you pay income taxes only on that $100. You don't pay income taxes on the $6.20 the employer pays into SS for you. If you're self-employed, that $6.20 is deductible from your taxable income.
     
  2. FireDragon76

    FireDragon76 Evangelical Catholic Supporter

    +4,110
    United States
    Lutheran
    Legal Union (Other)
    US-Democrat
    plenty of retired people pay rent. Not everybody who is retired owns their own home.
     
  3. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +13,766
    Anglican
    Married
    OK, however my feeling is that our friend considers it unjust enough that he's taxed on his benefits after having been taxed to the tune of only half of the contributions. :wink:

    Incidentally, I am a trifle surprised that no one has calculated how much would have been paid in FICA taxes over a lifetime of work at the maximum level of earnings subject to SS tax...and compared that with the amount the beneficiary will have received back by the time he reaches, let's say, age 80.
     
  4. Hank77

    Hank77 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +5,571
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    And not everybody has paid off their mortgage on their home either.
     
  5. Hank77

    Hank77 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +5,571
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    That is what I said. 50% is 1/2
     
  6. Barney

    Barney Member

    147
    +57
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    No, that is not what you said. Please review carefully.
     
  7. Barney

    Barney Member

    147
    +57
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    I expect a number that barely tracks inflation. I can't do the math myself because I don't know how much SS pays vs. contributions.
     
  8. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +13,766
    Anglican
    Married
    You're right that it's not as easy as pie to track all the variables involved. It was long the case that the beneficiary would get back much more than he put in, assuming he lived to his average life expectancy. For those retiring nowadays, having made the max in FICA taxes all through adult life, I am not sure.
     
  9. Hank77

    Hank77 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +5,571
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    OK, what do you think I am saying above?
     
  10. Barney

    Barney Member

    147
    +57
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    You said that at $32,000, 50% of SS income is taxed. What I said has nothing to with how much of SS is taxed. Your 50% is irrelevant to the 50% I mentioned.
     
  11. Hank77

    Hank77 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +5,571
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
  12. SBC

    SBC Well-Known Member

    +514
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    US-Others
  13. Barney

    Barney Member

    147
    +57
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    See step 1 in your link, only half of SS is counted as income toward calculating the taxable SS. That is what I was saying and you didn't understand.

    SS is one of the best things the federal government does. Most people spend every time they have and would retire in absolute poverty if not for SS. SS has very little administrative cost. SS doesn't finance rich investors nor depend on the state of the stock market.

    The goodness of SS is another issue that how much of it is taxed. But, as I said, I see no problem with the government taxing the people who can most afford to pay taxes.

    For those who are against taxes, start with downsizing the government, then the tax burden will evaporate. But, SS should remain. Those starting with tax cuts for the well-off only increase the taxes on working people, and they do nothing to downsize the government.
     
  14. SBC

    SBC Well-Known Member

    +514
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    US-Others
    I was not arguing SS calculated taxing on receiving benefits.

    SS is a Ponzi scheme. And it along with most of the programs the Feds do, I disagree with. So, you and I would disagree on that point.

    I was commenting in General about the insane fed programs.

    There in lies the problem, You want this, another wants that, another wants something else. And thus we have umpteen collections of the peoples wealth, to pay people to take your wealth, and give it to people who didn't earn your wealth.
    I am not against taxes. I am against corruption, that the District of Corruption perpetuates.

    Specific to your point. I do not believe the Gov't should have perpetuated the SS program as all putting into the pot during their working years, so THEY, could receive a check after retiring from work, when is has been changed to workers put in, but multiple people who never put in are reaping the checks.
    And taxing the workers who put in. H-no.

    God Bless,
    SBC
     
  15. Barney

    Barney Member

    147
    +57
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    Ponzi schemes are frauds designed to fool people into think they'll get back their investment when they won't. SS isn't a fraud and it pays back everyone according to open rules.

    And, yes, everyone wants to save this or that, and that's why the size of the government doesn't, and won't go down in size. But, that doesn't mean that everyone's concern is equally valid. And, ironically, most anti-tax people tend to be in favor of the government's biggest program, the US military.

    SS retirement (not SS disability) is probably the least corrupt of government programs. It's more like a retirement savings than wealth redistribution. And, people who don't put into it don't get anything out of it. At least, that's how it should work.

    SS disability is very corrupt. A huge number of people collect it with little or no disability, and many collect it without ever paying in. The disabled should collect by the same rules as those who retire (which would eliminate SS disability fraud and stop SS disability from being a welfare program).
     
  16. OldWiseGuy

    OldWiseGuy Alpha Male (Retired)

    +3,319
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Others
    The taxes collected are indeed borrowed by the gov't, but first they are credited to the SS Trust Fund, which helps to prolong the SS system, which ensures that those who are taxed will continue to receive benefits.
     
  17. OldWiseGuy

    OldWiseGuy Alpha Male (Retired)

    +3,319
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Others
    All such insurance programs, as well as private insurance programs are Ponzi/Pyramid schemes.
     
  18. SBC

    SBC Well-Known Member

    +514
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    US-Others
    Problem is; "they" had such a influx of funds from baby-boomers - they used the "extra", as a slush fund, a borrowing fund, and to introduce more programs and then comes the baby-boomers to collect their SS, and gee, the funds from the newer generations were not there. So, raise the retirement ages, tax the SS....and IMO hoping they die off before they can collect. Any money the gov't collects for one purpose, sooner or later, they'll find it too tempting to not find another purpose to spend it on. :(

    God Bless,
    SBC
     
  19. OldWiseGuy

    OldWiseGuy Alpha Male (Retired)

    +3,319
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Others
    Many illegals pay into SS but will never collect a dime. That helps legal Americans when they retire. Blacks collect less total SS as their life expectancy is about 6 years less than whites. Latinos however live about 4 years longer than whites (who knew?). Whites do collect more totally as they generally have earned more in their working lifetimes.

    Long term unemployment and underemployment by millions due to the prolonged recession means that although less was paid into SS less will be paid out as well. So there is some balance. The recent recovery of the economy and uptick in employment means that more revenue will flow into SS, so it's not all bleak.
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2017
  20. SBC

    SBC Well-Known Member

    +514
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    US-Others
    I'm not anti-tax. I'm anti-corruption.

    The Military, I think is absolutely a necessity. It however has it's own issues. "gov't spouting the creation of JOBS, via military inductees, the 25% of military budget, collected as taxes in a "secret" fund. Cagey!

    Disagree.

    Design is one thing, effect is another.

    But it is not how it SHOULD be is effected, being the point, the gov't is not an efficient way at being the people's pesudo banker.

    Agree. And aside from what you mention, people who are truly in need, have family, adult able bodied children, able bodied boy friends, girlfriends, sponging off those who are actually the recipients of the welfare benefits. Corrupt!! And sickening!

    God Bless,
    SBC
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2017
Loading...