Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Citigroup Inc. Message Board

  • master_of_the_universe_heman master_of_the_universe_heman Sep 18, 2011 8:28 AM Flag

    If Obama get his tax on millionaires...

    It won't hurt millionaires too much, but it will hurt the principles of freedom and personal liberties.
    He will really make more damage to the poor people than to the rich people. He will corrupt the poor people legitimizing different treatment for each social status.
    He will make poor people more dependent on government and less on themselves.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • SS was designed to be a PONZI,if the intention was supplemental income on retirement for those who dont have any other incomes then ss payements should have been made to people who are at poverty levels and keep them above limits and not to millionares although they have contributed to SS.(ss wages have a cut off limit at $105k)anyone earning over $105k are not cotributing proportionately to their earnings. e.g a person who earns $1M/YR, needs only one day's earnings to pay for SS versus a earners of $20k needs to work for a week for his contribution.
      here it is better explained..
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States)

    • ur definitely not a reallyradumbass.

      Most intelligent post I've seen on here today, if not ever.

      The bottom 4 are my top 4.

    • You also leaving out da ho's. Dem beeches be makin all kinds of coin and don't pay a dam bit o taxes.

      My jobs bill fissin to change all of dat.

      You can get some possy anytimes you want legally and dey will be payin they taxes.

      My 2012 slogan gonna be "once you go ba rack, you can't go ba back".

      I know I be relectioned and continue livin large especially if I gets out my tell'emprompter.

    • New millionaire tax will not affect Citigroup dividends as you would have to be receiving dividends from $35 million worth of stock to hit the poverty level for a family of two.

    • I would like to add religious leaders to the list.
      thank-you.

    • "You just don't get it.

      The government does not produce anything to earn money as you or I would have to in order to pay interest on a loan (bonds). The government has to TAKE or TAX it from us, the tax payers.

      The bonds currently in the SS fund are an accounting gimmic to account for the money the Washington jerks "borrowed" from SS. It has nothing to do with paying interest on the individual's accounts. The SS and general fund are all one big account that spent more than they have. No matter how it is accounted for, interest on bonds in the SS fund comes from taxpayers, paid back to tax payers.

      It is as simple as the basic family of four. Each member can loan each other any amount at any interest rate and charge each other anything they want for their family services. But in the end, the family as a whole is NOT ONE PENNY richer. Our government is that family.

      That is the problem with liberals; they believe they should get more than they give by taking it from someone else. We are all in this together and I am not willing to pay more into the system than I will get out just to enable someone else to get more than they put in.

      It is not magic. The government CANNOT pay out more than it takes in.

    • "The government did not, will not and cannot pay any kind of interest."

      ureallyreallyradumbass

      Have you ever heard of a US Treasury Bond?

      The SS fund is full of them.

      The 30 yr is currently paying about 3.5%.

      You're below the "wasting my time" threshold.

      Come back when you can get more than two braincells firing rapidly and in the proper sequence.

    • "If you earned just 4% on your money over 50 years it would be worth 7 times what is was 50 years ago. On SS, the employer also matches what is taken out of your salary. If you think you deserve only what you put in, that the government doesn't have some kind of fiduciary responsibility to give you a return on your investment, then ureallyradumbass."

      IF, IF, IF. There is NO IF. The government did not, will not and cannot pay any kind of interest. They never promised any interest or growth. There is no way for the government to earn interest. The government is not an investment bank, lender, manufacturer or producer of anything it can sell to produce any income. It simply takes money from taxpayers and gives to anyone it sees fit.

      I am not defending the idiots in Washington that lied all of these years. The true reallydumbasses are those that think the government can give back more than it takes in.

    • Have you ever heard of interest?

      If you've been paying since you were 16 and are getting ready to retire, you started paying around 50 years ago.

      If you earned just 4% on your money over 50 years it would be worth 7 times what is was 50 years ago. On SS, the employer also matches what is taken out of your salary. If you think you deserve only what you put in, that the government doesn't have some kind of fiduciary responsibility to give you a return on your investment, then ureallyradumbass.

      "The government is not an investment vehicle."

      If the government is not an investment vehicle, if it isn't obligated to provide a return on the investment, then why does it guarantee government workers a large portion of their salary for the remainder of their life in the form of pensions when they retire after 20 years?

      "Maybe it's time to cut back on the benefit to be more in line with distributing what you put in over your expected remaining years."

      Maybe it's time to cancel all nonmilitary government worker pensions.


      This is why have politicians getting away with screwing tax payers year after year. The US is full of reallydumbasses.

    • I've also been paying in since age 16 and getting ready to "reap my benefits".

      As mentioned, the system has not collected enough to pay beyond 8 years at the benefit I am assigned. I remember around 5 or so years ago when the Republicans tried to stop the automatic benefit increases that were more than the rate of inflation. The hue and cry was deafening.

      The system was designed to be no better than putting your money under the mattress. No investment or growth, plus losses due to inflation. The government is not an investment vehicle.

      Maybe it's time to cut back on the benefit to be more in line with distributing what you put in over your expected remaining years.

    • View More Messages
 
C
46.28-0.45(-0.96%)Apr 29 4:01 PMEDT