just my guess on the amount of a Social Security pension. Doug says its
eleven something if you max out.

Dana

Heald, Tim writes:

> What is this 8K number you keep throwing around?
> 
> Tim 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:       Dana Tierney [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent:       Monday, June 02, 2003 5:10 PM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject:    Re: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for
> > 
> > so 13800 a year max and 8k is realistic for say a woman that did not work
> > for several years?
> > 
> > Dana
> > 
> > Doug White writes:
> > 
> > > The max Social security payout monthly is around $1150.00
> > > for those who maxed payin over their working careers.
> > > 
> > > ======================================
> > > Stop spam on your domain, use our gateway!
> > > For CF hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com
> > > ISP rated: http://www.forta.com/cf/isp/isp.cfm?isp_id=772
> > > ======================================
> > > If you are not satisfied with my service, my job isn't done!
> > > 
> > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 3:45 PM
> > > Subject: Re: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for
> > > 
> > > 
> > > | You start paying Social Security at about $100 of income. I havene't
> > looked
> > > | it up but I know it's under $1000. EIC is a federal income tax credit
> > and a
> > > | different matter. I'd say it reaches somewhat above the truly needy
> > level
> > > | though -- and it fact up to a point it increases with income. And it's
> > > | based on taxable income, not actual income.
> > > |
> > > | Dana
> > > |
> > > | > How do you figure?  The truly needed don't pay taxes, in fact they
> > get the
> > > | > EIC.
> > > | >
> > > | > ----- Original Message -----
> > > | > From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > | > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > | > Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 3:15 PM
> > > | > Subject: Re: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for
> > > | >
> > > | >
> > > | > > but we already reditribute, only from the needy to the affluent.
> > > | > >
> > > | > > Kevin Schmidt writes:
> > > | > >
> > > | > > > How do you determine that it matters or not?  Maybe you don't
> > think it
> > > | > > > matters to someone with money in the bank, but they might.
> > Trying to
> > > | > > > determine what someone needs rather than making it equal across
> > the
> > > | > board it
> > > | > > > starting down the path of redistribution of wealth, which is a
> > bad road
> > > | > to
> > > | > > > travel down.
> > > | > > >
> > > | > > > Kevin
> > > | > > >
> > > | > > > >From sunny Las Vegas!!!!!!!
> > > | > > >
> > > | > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > | > > > From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > | > > > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > | > > > Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 1:28 PM
> > > | > > > Subject: Re: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for
> > > | > > >
> > > | > > >
> > > | > > > > I'd agree with you if I thought everyone would get their 8k.
> > Maybe.
> > > | > But
> > > | > > > > since we all know it isn't going to work out that way, why
> > should poor
> > > | > > > > people subsidize the affluent white elderly? The current
> > system is
> > > | > just
> > > | > > > > grotesque. If you are going to cut, cut where it wont hurt,
> > geez. As
> > > | > for
> > > | > > > > need, that is to be determined. I proposed a cutoff of 100,000
> > but it
> > > | > > > could
> > > | > > > > be anywhere; that is just my perception of where 8k doesnt
> > matter too
> > > | > much
> > > | > > > > any more. The point is there should be SOME point where it
> > cuts off.
> > > | > > > >
> > > | > > > > Nick McClure writes:
> > > | > > > >
> > > | > > > > > So you determine if a person needs the money before you send
> > it back
> > > | > to
> > > | > > > > > them? What gives the government the right to decide that
> > this person
> > > | > > > needs
> > > | > > > > > the money or not?
> > > | > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > If the person gets the 8K check, then goes and spends it
> > buying
> > > | > stuff,
> > > | > > > then
> > > | > > > > > hasn't that done more for the economy than the government
> > keeping
> > > | > the
> > > | > > > money?
> > > | > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > The sense is, that the 8k is that person's money, not matter
> > how
> > > | > much
> > > | > > > money
> > > | > > > > > they have, it is still there money. We must tax people
> > equally, I
> > > | > almost
> > > | > > > > > have a problem having a staggered tax bracket.
> > > | > > > > >
> > > | > > > > >
> > > | > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > | > > > > > > From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > | > > > > > > Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 2:07 PM
> > > | > > > > > > To: CF-Community
> > > | > > > > > > Subject: Re: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for
> > > | > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > my point is I fail to see the sense in sending checks for
> > what, 8k
> > > | > a
> > > | > > > year,
> > > | > > > > > > to multi-millionaires. Sure a means test would be
> > bureaucracy, but
> > > | > if
> > > | > > > it
> > > | > > > > > > saves money would't it be a necessary evil?
> > > | > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > Dana
> > > | > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > Heald, Tim writes:
> > > | > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > > I advocate not giving out any money.  No problems with a
> > budget
> > > | > when
> > > | > > > the
> > > | > > > > > > > budget is $0.
> > > | > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > > Tim
> > > | > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > | > > > > > > > > From: Dana Tierney [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > | > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 7:51 PM
> > > | > > > > > > > > To: CF-Community
> > > | > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for
> > > | > > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > > > what, you advocate indiscrimiately handing out money?
> > That
> > > | > helps
> > > | > > > > > > balance
> > > | > > > > > > > > the budget, fer sure....
> > > | > > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > > > Dana
> > > | > > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > > > On Fri, 30 May 2003 07:21:50 -0400, Heald, Tim
> > > | > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > | > > > > > > wrote:
> > > | > > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > > > > A means test?  From a small government advocate?
> > > | > > > > > > > > > Sometimes................
> > > | > > > > > > > > > Nevermind.
> > > | > > > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > > > > Tim
> > > | > > > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> From: Dana Tierney [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 5:34 PM
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> To: CF-Community
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> Subject: Re: What the Bush tax cut could have paid
> > for
> > > | > > > > > > > > >>
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> yep. I can I can. It's not that I begrudge people
> > their
> > > | > > > pensions,
> > > | > > > > > > its
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> just
> > > | > > > > > > > > >>
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> that hey I was paying this when I was driving a cab
> > gettign
> > > | > > > robbed
> > > | > > > > > > for
> > > | > > > > > > > > a
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> living in DC to feed my kids and people with many
> > times my
> > > | > > > income
> > > | > > > > > > where
> > > | > > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> saying hey we paid in so we are entitled. I paid in
> > too and
> > > | > I
> > > | > > > doubt
> > > | > > > > > > I
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> will
> > > | > > > > > > > > >>
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> ever see mine. Personally I think social security
> > pensions
> > > | > > > should
> > > | > > > > > > have
> > > | > > > > > > > > a
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> means test. Maybe $100 000 a year and below.
> > > | > > > > > > > > >>
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> Dana
> > > | > > > > > > > > >>
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> On Thu, 29 May 2003 14:52:14 -0500, Doug White
> > > | > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > | > > > > > > > > >>
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > |
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > | Also, we could make Social Security a
> > progessive not a
> > > | > > > > > > regressive
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> tax.
> > > | > > > > > > > > >>
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > But
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > | that would end the subsidy of the affluent
> > elderly and
> > > | > > > > > > politically
> > > | > > > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> would
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > | never happen as those people vote.
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > |
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > | Dana
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > |
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > I paid in to SS (and with employer match) from
> > the
> > > | > beginning,
> > > | > > > and
> > > | > > > > > > > > just
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > now am
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > reaping the so-called benefits.  Thankfully,
> > there are a
> > > | > > > couple
> > > | > > > > > > of
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> other
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > retirement pensions, and investments to help out,
> > plus I
> > > | > am
> > > | > > > still
> > > | > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> working, in a
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > way, that is.
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > You Betcha we do <grin>   and likewise support a
> > very
> > > | > active
> > > | > > > and
> > > | > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> effective
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> > lobby, as well.  Can you spell AARP?
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > | > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > | > > > > > > > > >>
> > > | > > > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > > >
> > > | > > > > >
> > > | > > > >
> > > | > > >
> > > | > >
> > > | >
> > > | 
> > > 
> > 
> 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5

Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in 
ColdFusion and related topics. 
http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm

                                Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
                                

Reply via email to