How to Fix Social Security

Blessed are those who happily count their peanuts. How do you propose we tackle this monstrosity (http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/) on top of tax cuts? It's easy to say cut spending but from where?

I'd like to see our post-Iraq defense budget slashed by hundreds of billions, which would preclude us from going into places like Iraq and Bosnia. That alone would save us trillions within a decade.

I think I agree with partial privatization. My concern is with privatizing the entire thing, and then expecting people who have never taken any interest in planning for retirement to invest wisely. Partial privatization gives at least a small fallback cushion.

OK, so what's the real difference between leaving your money to a total stranger vs leaving it for your children? Suppose I leave the money to someone that isn't my child? Should it be taxed? Should preferential tax treatment be given to your own kids?

I'm sorry but passing down wealth without taxing it is akin to a pyramid scheme. People at the top of the scheme will perpetually be at the top and the income gap in this county will grow exponentially. Not only that but a larger burden of the tax bill will be shouldered by the middle class.

Finally, I assure you you would do well to be my kid. Having a wealthy dad is awesome I tell you :) My kids will be well taken care of. When they are ready to go to college or buy their first car/home I will be there for them. I will prepare them to succeed in this world, I just won't hand them my estate upon my death. The estate is already earmarked for charity.


So you agree with the death tax and want to raise it? You say that you are going to buy your kids a car and pay for college. Well say you have that money set aside for them, and you die. That 100k for school you set aside will be reduced to 50k, that 25k you set aside for the jetta is now 12.5k. Where is the logic in that?

I have mixed feelings about the estate tax and this is going to sound cold, but those business owners should have better business sense. Death isn't exactly an unforeseeable event. Someone who owns a closely-held/family-owned business and who wants his or her family to continue the business should buy life insurance naming the successors and/or the business itself as beneficiaries. Life insurance isn't cheap, but it shouldn't force well-run businesses to go under.
Your right and when they realise that their is an issues and now are much older and now need a large life policy the premimums can be THOUSANDS PER MONTH and allot of times it is not affordable. You also think that its ok for the goverment to put such a burden on small family busnesses? Remember the tax is based on the value of the business and not the income that the family makes off the business. So if your a small business makeing X and you have a plant with 20 workers that the goverment says is worth 5,000,000 then thats what your taxed on even though you may only make $120,000 per year.

Check "Revelations". You won't be needing it

Well I'm certainly learning a lot, and I hope others are too. I tend to lean toward the "allow people to take a portion of the tax and invest it into a private account" school of thought.

The free market is ALWAYS the best option for the whole economy and for the individuals.

The absolute WORST way, LEAST efficient and most likely to FAIL way to spend a dollar is to hand it over to the bureaucratic mess of the Government. They have no discretion when spending billions of dollars they have not earned, but you and I will be careful with every dollar we've worked for and will make a more responsible choice with it.

I'd like to see our post-Iraq defense budget slashed by hundreds of billions, which would preclude us from going into places like Iraq and Bosnia. That alone would save us trillions within a decade.

The current military budget is insanely enormous and the fundamental question is does it need to be as big as it is? A 480 billion dollar budget (http://www.defenselink.mil/comptroller/defbudget/fy2008/fy2008_greenbook.pdf) (pay attention to the expenditure break down on page 15)? One often hears the defence budget relative to the GDP, but what you really should be hearing about is the budget relative to federal revenue.

I don't think it's wise to lump Iraq and Bosina as they are fundamentally different in principle (war vs peach keeping) and budgetary requirement. I would even go further and say that we alone should not be shouldering the burden when it comes to peace keeping missions. The fact that we have such a huge budget gives other nations a free pass to delegate their responsibility to us (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2034rank.html). Perhaps Europe is too smart or poor?

Finally i want to make it clear that the defence budget should be dynamic. There should be a base budget and money should be allocated based on need. Currently, the default budget even when we are not in a time of war is enormous for reasons not apparent to me.

Check "Revelations". You won't be needing it

Great answer! :D


But, He'll be coming like a thief in the night, when we are not expecting.

Much like the Government. :D

The current military budget is insanely enormous and the fundamental question is does it need to be as big as it is? A 480 billion dollar budget (http://www.defenselink.mil/comptroller/defbudget/fy2008/fy2008_greenbook.pdf) (pay attention to the expenditure break down on page 15)? One often hears the defence budget relative to the GDP, but what you really should be hearing about is the budget relative to federal revenue.

I don't think it's wise to lump Iraq and Bosina as they are fundamentally different in principle (war vs peach keeping) and budgetary requirement. I would even go further and say that we alone should not be shouldering the burden when it comes to peace keeping mission. The fact that we have such a huge budget gives other nations a free pass to delegate their responsibility to us (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2034rank.html). Perhaps Europe is too smart or poor?

Finally i want to make it clear that the defence budget should be dynamic. There should be a base budget and money should be allocated based on need. Currently, the default budget even when we are not in time of war is enormous for reasons not apparent to me.

It's huge now because it was starved to death in the previous Administration and needed to be rebuilt.

So you agree with the death tax and want to raise it? You say that you are going to buy your kids a car and pay for college. Well say you have that money set aside for them, and you die. That 100k for school you set aside will be reduced to 50k, that 25k you set aside for the jetta is now 12.5k. Where is the logic in that?

You assume incorrectly. If I happen to die prematurely I have a financial plan that insures their basic needs are taken care of foremost.