U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-06-2019, 09:56 PM
 
Location: Ontario, NY
2,649 posts, read 5,999,245 times
Reputation: 2634

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
IMHO, the aggregate tax load of 39% - 44% (depending on state) is the reason why Americans are struggling.
In 1910, the total tax taken was 0.8% of the GNP.

A worker who keeps 99.2% of his wages versus one who has 56% . . . that's a tough one to figure out.
The answer to that is simple, there was no such thing as Social Security and Medicare in 1910, these two government programs alone account for 60% of the federal budget today. The United States Military uses up another 15%, in 1910, the Military cost about 1% of the GNP of the country, it's almost 5% today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-07-2019, 12:34 PM
 
1,194 posts, read 614,249 times
Reputation: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by the tiger View Post
The logic is most people don't have any financial intelligence, yet alone financial IQ.
https://apnews.com/1d31cf4b56e449769ab4cb456237ea1f
The Tiger, USA's median wage's purchasing power indicates the financial condition of USA's middle-income bracket's earners. If the purchasing power of our federal minimum wage rate's insufficient, then our median wage rate cannot be sufficient.

Our federal minimum wage rate to some extent bolsters ALL USA wage scales, (but it doesn't bolster them all equally).
It's effect is proportional to the difference between the minimum and as the job's rate. It has a greater proportional effect upon lower, and a lesser effect upon higher wage rates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2019, 02:57 PM
 
Location: Ohio
18,488 posts, read 13,578,259 times
Reputation: 14442
Quote:
Originally Posted by TechGromit View Post
The answer to that is simple, there was no such thing as Social Security and Medicare in 1910, these two government programs alone account for 60% of the federal budget today.
No, they don't.

Download the most recent federal budget, or any of the historical federal budgets and show us where Congress allocates monies to Social Security or Medicare.

You can't.

Neither Social Security nor Medicare are part of the federal budget, nor have they ever been.

Both programs are off-budget and have been since their inception.

Both programs are totally self-contained. If and when there was a surplus of FICA or HI (Medicare) tax revenues collected, the excess revenues were transferred to the Treasury Department, not Congress.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montezia View Post
I think people with families and people over 50 are struggling to get by.
You thought wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not in Kansas any more View Post
Surprisingly, the US is not as wealthy as you might think. The latest OECD figures...
The OECD is expressly anti-American and has an agenda.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
There are definitely more mass murder/shootings these days than years ago. Numbers escalated throughout the last century.
No, they haven't.

As a percentage of the population, nothing has changed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2019, 03:02 PM
 
67,064 posts, read 68,036,576 times
Reputation: 44990
Quote:
Originally Posted by TechGromit View Post
The answer to that is simple, there was no such thing as Social Security and Medicare in 1910, these two government programs alone account for 60% of the federal budget today. The United States Military uses up another 15%, in 1910, the Military cost about 1% of the GNP of the country, it's almost 5% today.
never let facts get in the way of a good story ----this would be false!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2019, 04:33 PM
 
Location: Northern Michigan
1,059 posts, read 491,539 times
Reputation: 4084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
No, they don't.

Download the most recent federal budget, or any of the historical federal budgets and show us where Congress allocates monies to Social Security or Medicare.

You can't.

Neither Social Security nor Medicare are part of the federal budget, nor have they ever been.

Both programs are off-budget and have been since their inception.

Both programs are totally self-contained. If and when there was a surplus of FICA or HI (Medicare) tax revenues collected, the excess revenues were transferred to the Treasury Department, not Congress.



You thought wrong.



The OECD is expressly anti-American and has an agenda.



No, they haven't.

As a percentage of the population, nothing has changed.
Thanks for being a voice of reason. There are few around these days.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2019, 06:53 AM
 
Location: North Dakota
7,304 posts, read 8,481,664 times
Reputation: 9912
Quote:
Originally Posted by the tiger View Post
The logic is most people don't have any financial intelligence, yet alone financial IQ.
https://apnews.com/1d31cf4b56e449769ab4cb456237ea1f
I know plenty of people who don't understand money. They don't understand what cost of living means, they need constant entertainment, they reproduce when they can't afford it, buy houses they can't afford, and do things like spend $5 to safe $.50.

That being said, the middle class squeeze is very real. As the article state, medical bills are another major problem.

Some people have genuine struggles and some struggle due to poor choices.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2019, 12:10 PM
 
Location: Ontario, NY
2,649 posts, read 5,999,245 times
Reputation: 2634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
Neither Social Security nor Medicare are part of the federal budget, nor have they ever been.

Both programs are off-budget and have been since their inception.

Both programs are totally self-contained. If and when there was a surplus of FICA or HI (Medicare) tax revenues collected, the excess revenues were transferred to the Treasury Department, not Congress.
You thought wrong.
I did? The original poster stated "A worker who keeps 99.2% of his wages versus one who has 56% . . . that's a tough one to figure out". Whether it's a Federal Budget tax, or a Social Security and Medicare tax, it still comes out of a workers paycheck. Taxes that did not exist in 1910.


Also the so called "self contained program" are anything but. The Federal Government has been using this money to issue bonds to fund the federal government every year, there no Social Security account in a bank somewhere that has 2.8 trillion dollars in it, it's mostly in the form of government bonds that the Federal Government will never be able to afford to pay back when the net Social Security benefits are greater than the net Social Security deposits.


I think your in for a rude awaking if you honestly believe the federal government will be able to pay your full Social Security benefits after 2035. A partial benefit is the best you can hope for.

Last edited by TechGromit; 01-08-2019 at 12:31 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2019, 12:38 PM
 
67,064 posts, read 68,036,576 times
Reputation: 44990
wages should be the same . why should the same exact job function be worth anymore ?

most of us earn more by learning more skillful jobs . we don't sit in the same slot for decades . if we do our wages will rarely grow. if the wages go up for the same job consider yourself lucky . if anything low end jobs are becoming less and less valuable .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2019, 12:48 PM
 
8,494 posts, read 3,635,904 times
Reputation: 1657
Quote:
Originally Posted by TechGromit View Post
I did? The original poster stated "A worker who keeps 99.2% of his wages versus one who has 56% . . . that's a tough one to figure out". Whether it's a Federal Budget tax, or a Social Security and Medicare tax, it still comes out of a workers paycheck. Taxes that did not exist in 1910.


Also the so called "self contained program" are anything but. The Federal Government has been using this money to issue bonds to fund the federal government every year, there no Social Security account in a bank somewhere that has 2.8 trillion dollars in it, it's mostly in the form of government bonds that the Federal Government will never be able to afford to pay back when the net Social Security benefits are greater than the net Social Security deposits.


I think your in for a rude awaking if you honestly believe the federal government will be able to pay your full Social Security benefits after 2035. A partial benefit is the best you can hope for.
Best would be 100%. There should be no limit, as there is no limit that the Federal Gov't can credit each SS account. Assuming appropriate legislation. i.e. politics could be our limit, not necessarily USD.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2019, 08:13 PM
 
1,421 posts, read 696,816 times
Reputation: 1997
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
wages should be the same . why should the same exact job function be worth anymore ?

most of us earn more most by learning more skillful jobs . we don't sit in the same slot for decades . if we do our wages will rarely grow. if the wages go up for the same job consider yourself lucky . if anything low end jobs are becoming less and less valuable .
This is true. For example, a receptionist job pays the same now as when I was doing it 25 years ago. Why should it pay more? There is no shortage of receptionists and it is unskilled, easily replaced if you should quit. Maybe not the best example, but I agree with mathjak107.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top