Subject: RE: A Different Approach to Social Security
A wealth tax. Indiana called this an intangibles tax which was rulled unconstitutional. It also sounds like a property tax. But let's face facts. OASI needs not $600 Billion a year to stay solvent, but $1.3 Trillion a year and growing. You forgot the unfunded liability of $10 Trillion. Do you propose we not attack this problem and let it grow to $60 trillion in the next 30 years?
Because I have saved all my life, you now want to tax me 1% of my networth every year. Hey that may not be too bad. I know a lot of elderly who own a lot of homes worth a lot of money. Think about it. A $250,000 home having to pay $2,500 a year to uncle sam besides the property tax to the county. You might have something here. But I bet you want to exclude them because of age and not income just like the higher deduction and extra personal exemption. What about all the freebies and discounts givent to people who live to 65 not based on need, but age. I think it should be against the law to give discounts based on age. As many businesses told me, they will not be offering these discounts past 2020 becuase of the number of baby boomers. They will go broked doing it.
As a guy at work told me "Save Social Security - Stop feeding the old people!" I would not go that far, but I am 100% behind a means tested program where by your assets are used first before you start coming to me for a handout.
