Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihuxw.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ihuxw!kalm
From: kalm@ihuxw.UUCP (James )
Newsgroups: net.legal,net.taxes
Subject: Re: Abuse of social contracts. (tax system) (fica)
Message-ID: <1056@ihuxw.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 19-Feb-85 14:54:20 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxw.1056
Posted: Tue Feb 19 14:54:20 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 22-Feb-85 07:07:03 EST
References: <2748@dartvax.UUCP> <445@ahuta.UUCP> <399@lsuc.UUCP> <287@petrus.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 27
Xref: watmath net.legal:1418 net.taxes:686


> I'm not sure a progressive system is fairer!
> It came about in the US because when it was first started,
> it really only hit the upper class.  With inflation a good
> deal of the middle class has moved into the progressive region.
> Also, in the US social security is a very regressive system,
> it only taxes the first $38000 (at 7%) of income.
> 
> Rich Hammond

Be careful about pointing out that FICA is regressive.
This is the area of Federal taxes that has no "loopholes"
(read: opportunities for a tax refund).
Unless, of course, you believe that you're going to see
that money again, ha-ha!

One hope is that by the time I'm 65 I'll receive a pay check
in December with no FICA deduction, Maybe I can start an IRA with the
extra amount received.

Let's not give the government the idea that we'd like to see FICA
become progressive.
-- 
Jim Kalmadge -  AT&T Bell Labs IH 4b409
8-367-4325
(312) 979-4325
ihuxw!kalm