Investors expect REAL returns on their investments. Contributors to Social Security and Medicare expect REAL returns on the money confiscated from their pay. A contractual return on a worker's Social Security contribution should be no less legally binding than the interest government pays on government securities. (Notice the absence of spousal and survivor benefits in the previous statement.) Do you think an investor would buy a Jumbo CD ($100k) or purchase a Government Security, or buy an Annuity, or an Endowment policy or a dividend paying stock if he was told the return would be subject to his marital status and/or the needs of his co-investors? An investor exercises control. He can buy or sell based on self- interest and on the merits of competing alternatives.

Participants in Social Security should have no less control over their own choices than private investors. Political promises of future benefits doesn't hack it. A legally binding contract for future benefits based on accumulated assets is essential to a just joint retirement system established for mandatory public participation. Calling FICA contributions "VOLUNTARY" doesn't make it so.

President Bush went on to say:

"During this session of Congress, we have the duty to reform domestic programs vital to our country...This country has many challenges. We will not deny, we will not ignore, we will not pass along our problems to other Congresses, to other presidents, and other generations. (Applause.) We will confront them with focus and clarity and courage."

Debtism, Commentary:

We agree with the President and Mr. Greenspan that unfair double taxation of dividends be ended. We would also like to end the double taxation on Wages and Salaries, and end the income tax on Social Security benefits.

We should strengthen the economy by treating wages more equitably in our tax laws. It is fair to tax wages one time. It is not fair to tax it again, and again.

It's fair to tax workers' incomes, equally. It is not fair to treat a bachelor's income differently than the income of his married co-worker performing identical tasks at identical pay. WHO APPOINTED THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO BE PAYMASTER? It is the government's responsibility to PROMOTE the general welfare! It is not their job to administer SOCIALISM! It is not their MONEY!

The tax code should not be used to dispense charity. Abuses in the current system are apparent to those who want to see them. Government should be in the business of protecting the rewards of labor not confiscating it. If a man has more family than he can afford, let him get a second job. In our younger days my wife and I didn't want nor did we expect the government to confiscate money from co-workers to subsidize our household. Other than the injustice, it would have been embarrassing.

To boost worker confidence, and to help the 140+ million employees that work to support themselves and their dependents; It is time to end the unfair double taxation of dividends and wages and to level the playing field between investors and workers. Today's workers, if treated justly, will become the investors of the future, not dependents on a welfare system reliant on baseless political promises, unfunded liabilities, and unredeemable Trust Fund IOUs.

Finally, ending the income tax on social security benefits may help restore the US governments' credibility with regard to welfare reform considerations that might involve reducing unwarranted benefits or utilizing other sources of revenue to support charity instead of a disproportionate reliance on wage earners income taxes. Money that finances Social Security and Medicare has already been taxed twice (FITA & FICA) and the government made promises that the benefits would NOT be taxed (a third tax). For almost 50 years the government honored that commitment, until it faced bankruptcy in the late 1970s, early 1980?s. It's time to set things right. If not now, when? Elimination of the Income Tax on Social Security could easily be paid for by means testing spousal and survivor benefits. Having said that, I can already hear the squeals from freeloaders and the uproar from AARP. (See Article #6, "Social Security Freeloaders")

The entire spectrum of taxes and welfare needs to be examined. A balanced adjustment between equity, fairness, social justice and fiscal discipline needs to be developed. The trend toward a socialist welfare state and predictable fiscal mayhem should be altered by whatever means it takes. The absence of concern over multiple taxes on legitimate labor (and the benign import of cheap illegal labor) is a suggestive of a socialist, welfare state to far advanced to be changed. But, maybe not!

I am in the process of developing a proposal for a joint, self-directed Individual retirement account. Tentatively, what is envisioned is a 3-3-3 contribution system with the employee/employer/government putting in equal shares to develop a safety net retirement plan owned and controlled by young workers. Workers would be permitted to roll-over funds from existing IRA, 401k into the new plan and add 3% of gross wages annually. Employers could divert 3% from existing FICA and/or contributions to defined benefits plans into the new IRA. Government would divert 3% (real money) of the workers FICA contribution into the Self Directed IRA instead of crediting the entire FICA income tax to the OASDI Trust Funds to buy more government debt. Claims on future Social Security benefits would be adjusted accordingly. The only thing being sacrificed with the new arrangement is government would have 3% less FICA money to be squandered on other than intended purposes.

Double Taxation of Dividends and Wages - (Art#7)