[Info-vax] HP stopping VMS paper documentation ?

[AEF]

On Dec 12, 11:53 am, Kenneth Fairfield <ken.fairfi... at gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Friday, December 9, 2011 6:50:17 PM UTC-8, AEF wrote:
> > On Dec 9, 10:54 am, Kenneth Fairfield <ken.fa... at gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
> > > BTW, I agree with the gist of George's follow-up: the "temporary" reduction in SSI tax is not a good idea.  For one thing, it makes its financials look worse, and therefore lends credence to the <false> claims by the right that this an "entitlement", e.g., "welfare", program.  OTOH, eliminating the cap solves all its solvency (real or imagined) problems well beyond the foreseeable future.
>
> > Wait a minute. Didn't you just pooh-pooh eliminating the cap just one
> > short paragraph above? Which do you advocate? Elimination or not?
>
> It occurred to me after by last post that there may be a misunderstanding of what "eliminating the cap" means.
>
> The current situation is that earned income is subject to SSI tax (one of several "payroll taxes") on all income *up to* $106K.  Earned income in *excess* of $106K is *not* subject to SSI tax.  The "cap" being discussed is that *maximum* of earned income that is subject to SSI tax.  Eliminating that tax means that earned income in excess of $106K is *also* subject to SSI tax.
>
> So I see no inconsistency in my previous statements.  If you still think there is, please clarify.
>
>    Thanks, Ken

I think you meant ". . . Eliminating that cap . . . ", not "that tax".

AEF