Goodbye, California: Rich States, Poor States (San Francisco, Stanford: rental, health insurance, credit card) - (CA) - Page 4 - City-Data Forum

SportyandMisty · 04-26-2018, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by payutenyodagimas

its laughable for many of these retirees drawing SS and Medicare to hate taxation when the benefits they are getting now are from our taxes.

Not taxes. Insurance premiums paid over the course of 50-ish years of working. FICA: Federal Insurance Contribution Act

SportyandMisty · 04-26-2018, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DKM

People who pay a lot of tax in CA earn many hundreds of thousands to millions a year. For them, its worth it or they wouldn't be here. They aren't going to leave because their federal taxes go up a few %.

The authors find a causation effect in the data.

Still, you're right; high CA earners face the choice of (a) staying and bearing the full cost of their state taxes, or (b) leaving and earning far less money.

Clearly, most people in the prime of their careers stay. Clearly, some retirees are voting with their tax return.

davidt1 · 04-26-2018, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by payutenyodagimas

I don't work for the government. dont need extra services like sec 8 from the gov/state or local. I just want good service especially good education.

10 kids in public schools? Sorry, but those who are OK with high taxes benefit from high taxes one way or another. My neighbor for example, with their 4 kids in public schools, is not going to have a problem with higher property taxes because they benefit.

movedintime · 04-26-2018, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finper

unfortunately I can't pick or choose who gets my tax money.

Wouldn't it be nice if you could.

Then the reds and the blues could just draw lines around their own territory.

Finper · 04-26-2018, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by movedintime

Wouldn't it be nice if you could.

Then the reds and the blues could just draw lines around their own territory.

Yea I'd be awesome. I was having a day dream about what I'd spend it on earlier. And more important what wouldn't get a dime

payutenyodagimas · 04-26-2018, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidt1

10 kids in public schools? Sorry, but those who are OK with high taxes benefit from high taxes one way or another. My neighbor for example, with their 4 kids in public schools, is not going to have a problem with higher property taxes because they benefit.

I have only one kid. we volunteer and donate too, even though our property tax should take care of it

payutenyodagimas · 04-26-2018, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

Not taxes. Insurance premiums paid over the course of 50-ish years of working. FICA: Federal Insurance Contribution Act

whether you call it FICA or whatever, do you honestly believe that what you contributed was more than enough to cover your Medicare and SS in your retirement?

whats the reason why the GOP wants SS and Medicare to be privatized? the reason is the contributions by the members was not enough and they don't want the shortfall to be funded with taxes

wac_432 · 04-27-2018, 08:07 AM

This has been a flyover fantasy forever. That saving a few bucks in taxes is going to make the rich and the powerful move to fumbuck Texas.

Get a clue. Nobody rich or talented wants to live in your awful states. Making them more awful by cutting taxes, services, and consumer/environmental protections won't solve your problem.

Those people that are there are the ones who can't make enough money to escape to CA, or the Californians who couldn't hack it and moved out to fumbuck. I ditched my hometown in the poison fields for just this reason. A great job (there aren't any) 0% taxes across the board couldn't make me move back, and I'm not even one of California's billionaires. I would actually feel a real benefit from a tax break, since I'm not insulated from the effect of tax laws by scads of money.

Saying rich people are going to move out of CA because of taxes is like saying we're all going to move to China for cheap noodles.

SportyandMisty · 04-27-2018, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by payutenyodagimas

whether you call it FICA or whatever,

That's playing fast and loose with facts. It isn't about what they are called; it is about what they are. They are insurance programs, and the trustees of those insurance programs have a legal responsibility to ensure their financial solvency.

Quote:

Originally Posted by payutenyodagimas

do you honestly believe that what you contributed was more than enough to cover your Medicare and SS in your retirement?

First, your question is irrelevant.

Second, the program’s benefit formula favors lower-wage workers. Benefit amounts are based on the lifetime earnings history. The first dollars of a worker’s wages are replaced at a 90 percent rate. Earnings in a second bracket (mechanically like an income-tax-rate bracket) are replaced at a 32 percent rate. And any earnings above that level are replaced at only a 15 percent rate. Thus, although higher-wage workers receive more dollars in absolute terms, they receive less back in Social Security benefits per dollar of tax paid over their lifetimes. At the extremes, the difference in the implicit rate of return on those contributions is enormous.

Third, a key program feature is that a large portion of Social Security benefits can be subject to income taxation on a progressive basis – and then the income tax that applies to those included benefits itself is progressive.

So, much Social Security distributions to the elderly flows back to the Treasury in the form of income taxes. Once a beneficiary’s total income (including half of Social Security benefits) exceeds $25,000 ($32,000 for a married couple), the first dollar of benefits begins to be taxable, up to inclusion of one-half of benefits. And once income (including half of Social Security benefits) exceeds $34,000 ($44,000 for a married couple) the portion of benefits included in taxable income begins to rise further, up to a maximum inclusion of 85 percent of benefits. This provision is designed to have no effect on the low-income elderly, while gradually increasing its impact as total incomes rise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by payutenyodagimas

whats the reason why the GOP wants SS and Medicare to be privatized? the reason is the contributions by the members was not enough and they don't want the shortfall to be funded with taxes

I realize this isn't the economics forum, but your view of the reason is remarkably naive. It would be best to continue the discussion of the economics of Social Security over in the Econ forum. At the end of the day, though, the current situation is untenable and changes must be made. Everyone knows this. Everyone wants the "Other Party" to be held responsible.

SportyandMisty · 04-27-2018, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wac_432

This has been a flyover fantasy forever. That saving a few bucks in taxes is going to make the rich and the powerful move to fumbuck Texas.

Get a clue. Nobody rich or talented wants to live in your awful states.