Virtual Congress Vote. This bill is brought to the floor by Congressmen Skinner (R) of Massachusetts and Mattwall1 (D) of California. The Bipartisan Social Security Reform Act of 2013 is available in the comments.
This bill is cancelled by it's authors to be reintroduced with the Amendment made by the Congressman from New York.
Aside and apart from the controversy over section 2, will the increased age have a phase-in? People make plans for the next ten years or so premised on planned retirement age.
The voting on this bill is placed on hold pending an Amendment motion.
I would like to propose an amendment to eliminate Section two
And section 1
No no no. If I pay into the system all my life, and end up being successful, I STILL WANT my money that I've paid into the system my whole life. I urge a nay vote.
Would you still feel that way if it meant other retirees' benefits had to be reduced in order to pay you back?
Delete paragraph 2 and I would support this. Can we get away from the view that the redistribution of wealth is the primary function of the federal government?
It's unjust to cap the opt-out clause. It will probably also stifle production by those who earn somewhere in the $275,000 - $350,000 range, as people intentionally earn less to duck below the bar.
Contributions are capped at just over 100k anyway. People don't intentionally earn less to avoid paying social security taxes, and someone who avoids going from say 250k to 300k bc they are worried about SS needs a heart-to-heart with their CPA.
I just followed the virtual congress; is there anything I need to know? Or do I just vote & comment?
Basically and you can bring forth bills and try to get elected for positions when that time comes around
Oh. Cool. Someone recommended me to this user.
Only thing is please don't share the polls which are votes on legislation. Only Congressmen are allowed to vote.
Ok. That'll be easy, I've only shared one poll lol
I'm honored then because that was my poll.
Yeah, it was actually.
Back to Committees; Section II needs to be reformed.
And three needs an explanation.
Nay to 2
Would you like to call fr an amendment removing that section?
Are you able to access your Skype?
Accept my contact request
If you remove section two, the cost of social security will rise.
I don't think it would rise significantly. The issue I have is why we keep punishing success.
Where and how is success being punished?
Because the more you earn, the more they take from you, despite the fact that the more you earn, the less you need or want SS in the first place.
So we should have a tax system where you pay less if you earn more?
We should have a tax system where everyone pays the same, where wealth is not redistributed, where everyone pays less, and where you aren't punished for earning.
The top 1% makes 95% of all income gains in America and you call that punishment? Why does the CEO of chase pay less taxes than me if they 're being punished?
He didn't pay less in taxes than you. He paid a hell of a lot more. Did he get 10,000 ballots for his taxes? Maybe his own U.S. Army brigade? No.
Why should he pay more for the exact same liberty and citizenship as you?
The Carried interest provision allows hedge fund managers, etc. to pay 15% in taxes. I pay 35%. And now that money is speech, he could've bought 10,000 votes. Are you implying money doesn't influence politics?
I can't support this bill. I don't like the fact that the recipient age has been raised to 70. Plus, I am not overjoyed at creating a means test, although I have gone back and to on whether or not I support a means test. I do like section 3.
We agree? Maybe I need to wake up and drink coffee cause I might still be sleeping lol I agree with everything you said here
Remove Section 2 and I'm in.
You can just use 3 to opt out. I'm out of it.
No, people making over $300,000 would still pay the tax but get no 'benefit.'
If that's true this makes it even worse than it is today.
I don't like how people making over 300,000 don't get benefits at all. It should be "reduced", not completely gone
The Bipartisan Social Security Reform Act of 2013
Sec. 1: the age at which Americans shall receive Social Security benefits is hereby raised to seventy years.
Sec. 2: those persons who have an income level that exceeds $300,000 a year shall not receive Social Security benefits.
Second. 3: those persons who earn less than the previously stated income level may opt out of the program.
Reform it to just sections 1 and 3
Since Social Security has always been billed as benefits for participants, are the earners described in paragraph 2 exempt from SS taxes?
You need to clarify if we can avoid paying in if we take option 3.