Tax the rich!
Yet another call to "tax the rich" to fund a program that can't fund itself.
WASHINGTON - Hillary Rodham Clinton has given a private clue on an issue she has refused to discuss publicly - how to preserve Social Security in the long term.
The Democratic presidential contender told an Iowa voter she would be willing to consider an idea that her Democratic rival John Edwards has been promoting - raising Social Security taxes on high-income earners.
Social Security is the poster child for unstable government programs. But then again Ponzi schemes are inherently unstable.
One of the "deals" struck with taxpayers way back when was the amount you would eventually receive from Social Security was proportional to the amount you put in. What Democrats are a proposing to do is to end that and make a lot of people (whom they refer to as "the rich" but in reality means "the middle class") pay for the benefits of others without regard to who pays in what amount.
Ah...it always comes back to socialism with Hillary, doesn't it?
If her plan is so good why must people be forced to participate and why must some people pay in more than they will ever receive from the system? What kind of "retirement" plan is that?!
WASHINGTON - Hillary Rodham Clinton has given a private clue on an issue she has refused to discuss publicly - how to preserve Social Security in the long term.
The Democratic presidential contender told an Iowa voter she would be willing to consider an idea that her Democratic rival John Edwards has been promoting - raising Social Security taxes on high-income earners.
Social Security is the poster child for unstable government programs. But then again Ponzi schemes are inherently unstable.
One of the "deals" struck with taxpayers way back when was the amount you would eventually receive from Social Security was proportional to the amount you put in. What Democrats are a proposing to do is to end that and make a lot of people (whom they refer to as "the rich" but in reality means "the middle class") pay for the benefits of others without regard to who pays in what amount.
Ah...it always comes back to socialism with Hillary, doesn't it?
If her plan is so good why must people be forced to participate and why must some people pay in more than they will ever receive from the system? What kind of "retirement" plan is that?!