How to Fix Social Security

Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10

firstdown
03-26-2008, 02:13 PM
If the business purchases life/key-man insurance on the CEO/President/Founder, it's deductible. A few thousand dollars a year is not going to tank a business worth millions. Also, the estate tax only affects individuals worth $2M (including his/her interest in any business he/she owns in part or whole). So, it's not as though the guy who runs the candy shop or down the street or his family is typically unaffected by the estate tax.
Well the reason that smaller businesses do not have this problem is because Bush (I think Bush) raised the value of an estate before it is subject to these taxes. I'm not sure if or what a business can write off because this is a tax on ones entire estate and not just for the business. So if a person has a personal worth of 1.2 mil and owns a business which is valued at 3.2 mil then his death tax is on 4.4 mil.. Also this problem usuall arises later in someones life and these policies can be very expensive not just the few thousand that you mentioned. I sell life Ins. (I do not do estate planning that whay I'm not sure of the write off) and was contacted by a customer who's Atty. did an estate planning and he determind that he needed 2 mil in life ins..This man made a good living but was not rich and provided around 20 jobs. He was older and had a few health issues and for him to purchase 2 mil in coverage was very very expensive and would only get more expensive as he got older. He did not purchase the policy (which he could not afford) and latter passed away. His family lost the business due to taxes and the city lost a tax paying buisness and 20 people lost their jobs. This was all because of the federal goverments death tax. Yes, maybe he waited too long but he never realized he was worth that much because he only made a small fraction of that. This happens everyday in the US.

That Guy
03-27-2008, 06:19 AM
get rid of it. teach people about investing, employer matching, and roth IRAs.

I don't want to pay social security because I can get a far better return then some crap annuity by myself and I could really use that money for better things.

annuities just aren't a good deal, and that's how most pension plans are run... investment accounts (401k's/IRA's/Roth IRA's, etc) give a much better return, and more control (though safe(r) funds exist for those not knowledgeable in investing but interested in getting more than the .07% a bank gives or the 5-6% on a bank's CD).

Monkeydad
03-27-2008, 11:54 AM
get rid of it. teach people about investing, employer matching, and roth IRAs.

I don't want to pay social security because I can get a far better return then some crap annuity by myself and I could really use that money for better things.


BINGO!

Now if only Congress could understand such a SIMPLE truth, we'd be far better off.

onlydarksets
03-27-2008, 11:56 AM
That's beyond privatization. What do you do about the strains on the welfare system for those who don't invest anything?

Monkeydad
03-27-2008, 12:12 PM
That's beyond privatization. What do you do about the strains on the welfare system for those who don't invest anything?

If they're not working and paying FICA tax now, they wouldn't be losing out on anything.

Are taxes deducted from welfare checks?

70Chip
03-27-2008, 01:52 PM
Check "Revelations". You won't be needing it

It's "Revelation", not "Revelations". Sorry, but this is one of my pet peeves.

onlydarksets
03-27-2008, 02:38 PM
If they're not working and paying FICA tax now, they wouldn't be losing out on anything.

Are taxes deducted from welfare checks?

I'm talking about the people who are working now and contributing to SS. What do you do when they decide not to contribute because they have bills to pay now, but then end up penniless and unable to work at 70?

Again, like my question above, I'm not opposing your suggestion - just asking for the full picture.

saden1
03-27-2008, 03:03 PM
I'm talking about the people who are working now and contributing to SS. What do you do when they decide not to contribute because they have bills to pay now, but then end up penniless and unable to work at 70?

Again, like my question above, I'm not opposing your suggestion - just asking for the full picture.

Possible solution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_booth)?

jsarno
03-27-2008, 03:26 PM
BINGO!

Now if only Congress could understand such a SIMPLE truth, we'd be far better off.

People can't have it both ways. Congress is assuming we are too stupid to figure this out on our own...but why would they think otherwise when we have SOOOO many programs to help aid the ignorant, or lazy?

Monkeydad
03-28-2008, 09:00 AM
I'm talking about the people who are working now and contributing to SS. What do you do when they decide not to contribute because they have bills to pay now, but then end up penniless and unable to work at 70?

Again, like my question above, I'm not opposing your suggestion - just asking for the full picture.

It's not a choice to pocket the FICA tax and do what you want. Privatization allows you to invest those funds in the market rather than trusting the government to hold it for you. It won't change your take-home pay. It does however, help you establish a better retirement AND you will know it WILL be there for you, unlike with Social "Security" which is anything but secure.

EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum