Bruce -- Other than envy, why shouldthey? Remember that, say, 10% of half a million is already a heckuva lot more money than 10% of $25,000, so under a completely flat system the rich would still pay a lot more than the poor.

Not even close, buddy. It's $97,500 for 2007 and it goes up about $3,000 each year. Nice little multi-hundred dollar increase for the Feds annually, forever, until we all are crushed.

All you young people who live in cities and have good jobs who think SS and leftism are so great, do the math on how much you pay in taxes each year.

You are being ROYALLY SCREWED.

Do you have any idea what $14917.50 a year (FICA and Medicare totaling 15.3% on $97,500) compounded at 8% over your entire working lifetime of 45 years comes to?

I do.

About $6,527,750

And you are going to be lucky to get ANY of it back.

But just keep supporting Democrats and believing that you aren't "paying your fair share."

If not it seems that there is an effective cap on payout.

He is referring to lifetime payout being essentially unlimited. As long as you are alive, you collect $x per year (adjusted yearly).

James,
BTW, the payback diminishes related to the payin the closer you get to the $90k limit, so richer people are getting less for their money WRT to the forced pension. I would say that makes it mildly progressive.

James, the payout isn't capped for anyone. It's the rate of payout that's capped.

My understanding and the understanding of everyone I have seen writing on this from all over the political spectrum is that we pay 12.4% of income to SS on the first 90K earned. Is their a difference in this payment for someone with a taxable income of 90K and someone with a taxable income of 100K? 250K? 1000K? If not it seems that there is an effective cap on payout. If so could you link to a source that show these differences?

BC says

Only a few anarchist cranks are complaining about the level of taxation necessary to fund basic government functions.

in defense of

Excuse me? I have no obligation to society. I have commited no crime. If I choose to associate with others, I do so voluntarily, on terms agreeable to all of us, and I do not agree I owe something to anyone just because I live and work here.

and

"we all have an obligation to help support our society."

Who decided THIS and why wasn't I asked first????

very nice

Rather, the gripe is with the increasingly common but no less morally and intellectually bankrupt attitude that it's justifiable to tax people at confiscatory rates, in order to pay the debts of perfect strangers, merely because we all live and work here.

This begs a few questions,
What is a confiscatory rate?
Given the definition of confiscatory aren't all mandatory taxes confiscatory?
At what rate do taxes become intellectually and morally bankrupt?
What makes a tax morally bankrupt? intellectually bankrupt?
Do you simply live and work in the US or are you a participating member of our society?

Without the government and courts to enforce property rights, you wouldn't have a house, or a stock portfolio, etc.

Apples and oranges. Only a few anarchist cranks are complaining about the level of taxation necessary to fund basic government functions. Rather, the gripe is with the increasingly common but no less morally and intellectually bankrupt attitude that it's justifiable to tax people at confiscatory rates, in order to pay the debts of perfect strangers, merely because we all live and work here.

Social Security also has features of a tontine, especially if you are not married and have no dependents.

And finally, Social Security lacks even the meager protection of the PBGC. An act of Congress could end Social Security tomorrow.

Tax rates: all federal tax payments as a percent of income (with income defined to include all cash income and inkind payments):

poorest 20% 4.5% tax rate
second poorest 20 10% tax rate
Third poorest 20 13.9% tax rate
fourth poorest 20 17.2% tax rate
richest 20% 25.1% tax rate
richest 10% 26.0% tax rate
richest 5% 28.5% tax rate
richest 1% 31.1% tax rate

Government corrupts the equation. But then what doesn't government corrupt?

You're ok with charging rich people more in the workplace. Why is the grocery store different?

Our current system might well be rocked and reformed by making it a 'closed system', but collapse is overstating the case - while simultaneously ignoring that it isn't anything inherent in capitalism that caused the issues.

None of the defenders of social security have ever claimed otherwise.

Only opponents of social security try to make other claims as part of their opposition to social security.

Social security is not a pension plan -- it is a supplement to pension plans.