Fiscal Cliff - Payroll taxes not extended (mortgage, financial, salary)
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.
We have a mess that would not have been as painful to have addressed ten years ago and no where as painful if we don't now and wait any longer. Someone in leadership needs to be honest with people and have a fireside chat with the nation.
What does the payroll tax not be extending have to do with the debt limit discussion from this point forward? The payroll tax has not been extended and we still are just now getting into the meat of the debt limit discussion. How many Democrats stood up advocating for extension of the payroll tax holiday?
So was Obama serious when he wouldn't offer the specific reductions in spending and changes in SS to get a consensus on extending the tax holiday? Or was it more campaign style smoke screening? Up to the individual I guess. Am I correct you are willing to allow more stress on the stability of SS or are you supporting raising the retirement age? Please don't start the lifting the cap as that is just more taxation and wealth transfer.
Actually I think the age should be lifted, benefits cuts are my personal preference (YES, a bush proposal!), partly privatizing. Unfortunately the latter will never happen. SOMETHING needs to be done. It is unacceptable this congress is worthless and nobody has any confidence anything will happen.
We have a mess that would not have been as painful to have addressed ten years ago and no where as painful if we don't now and wait any longer. Someone in leadership needs to be honest with people and have a fireside chat with the nation.
Maybe a webinar? Get Ross Perot to bring some charts....
Someone in leadership needs to be honest with people and have a fireside chat with the nation.
I wonder if Americans are still receptive to leadership or responsive to fireside chats. Seems that whatever President Obama says or does, a significant number of Americans simply hate him and reject his message. President Bush received essentially the same treatment from true believers on the other end of the spectrum.
Perhaps we can thank an earlier President who ran on the idea that "government is not the solution; government is the problem."
I wonder if Americans are still receptive to leadership or responsive to fireside chats. Seems that whatever President Obama says or does, a significant number of Americans simply hate him and reject his message. President Bush received essentially the same treatment from true believers on the other end of the spectrum.
Perhaps we can thank an earlier President who ran on the idea that "government is not the solution; government is the problem."
This is very real. My wife works in an environment where most employees are quite hostile to President Obama. One woman she works with refused to accept the fact he was really an American citizen even after his birth certificate was made public. There are more people out there like this than one realizes and they believe some pretty strange things. All the logic and evidence in the world won't persuade them. I think its because hatred can really take on irrational dimensions.
When there is a republican in office next time, some democrats will probably do the same thing.
I'm getting a little tired of party politics. I used to think it was a good thing. I'm starting to believe it may turn out to the ruination of the USA.
Last edited by markg91359; 01-06-2013 at 09:37 AM..
This is very real. My wife works in an environment where most employees are quite hostile to President Obama. One woman she works with refused to accept the fact he was really an American citizen even after his birth certificate was made public. There are more people out there than one realizes and they believe some pretty strange things. All the logic and evidence in the world won't persuade them. I think its because hatred can really take on irrational dimensions.
When there is a republican in office next time, some democrats will probably do the same thing.
I'm getting a little tired of party politics. I used to think it was a good thing. I'm starting to believe it may turn out to the ruination of the USA.
Mark, perhaps you can now understand my attitude. I am not the social moderate I once was because stupidity has made many a bed on America.
I'm getting a little tired of party politics. I used to think it was a good thing. I'm starting to believe it may turn out to the ruination of the USA.
I'm actually in a perverted way more optimistic and yet simultaneously cynical. Party politics is what keeps the Congress from achieving things, which generally is a great thing as generally what they do is counter productive. If we'd had some good old-fashioned partisan politics, Bush's Medicare Part D would never has passed which is twice as expensive as it should be because Medicare is the only major insurer not to negotiate discounts on prescription drugs. Unfortunately, with the Republican controlled Senate and House there weren't enough Democrats to prevent the Republicans from spending 100% more than anyone else for the same drugs (based on what the VA pays in comparison to Medicare).
Partisan politics would have ensured a better bill without 100% markup quid pro quo graft to big pharma would haven been necessary. Heck they could have just bought the drugs from the VA, who does negotiate prices, at a 20% markup rather than negotiate prices at all. The VA would get some much needed money reselling drugs at inflated prices to Medicare and Medicare (and the tax payer) would still save a bundle.
I wasn't trying to imply that she would have prudently invested the money if she had it to invest, simply refuting a previous poster's claim that Social Security somehow represents a "store of value."
When I calculated the numbers several years ago it was in the context of federally mandated investing as opposed to contributions to FICA. So her actual history of savings isn't really relevant. There are reasons she retired without much in the way of savings that I won't bother going in to.
In a followup post I stated that the $500K figure represented contributions from both parents. They both made pretty good money for most of their careers, and contributed for many years when interest rates were very good even on guaranteed investments. If anything it's a conservative number.
What do you consider an "average retirement?" I found one study that showed the average retirement age to be 60-62 for women and 62-64 for men. The average life expectancy for a 62-year-old is 22.31 years. To draw $500,000 over that period of time you would have to draw $22,411 a year. Do you really think a lot of people get that much social security? Especially someone signing up that early...
You acknowledge that she might have nothing had she not had SS to fall back on. Or to be less specific, many people would have nothing.
If referring to both parents, then both would have their own contributions, plus two employers contributions. The outcome of that for two people who made "good money" would be far superior to what the illusionary savings might have provided. And would not have run out even if your mother lived to be even 105 years of age. (Consider this: Americans who reached age 65 in 2011 are projected to live another 21 years to age 86, on average. If these same Americans reach age 86, their life expectancy would extend to age 93. a 60-year old man today has a 20 percent probability of reaching 95 and a 60-year-old woman has a 30 percent chance, there is a 40 percent chance that at least one member of a married couple at the same age will live until 95.
My wife and I are estimated to receive $30K in SS benefits starting at age 62. That is with my wife only working part time for 8 of the last twenty years. Much more at full retirement age.
There is no employer contribution. Employers higher labor based upon positive marginal profits. Any expense, which includes their FICA contribution, is computed. Employers don't care what you make. All they care about is what you cost.
Junk economics.
In that case, no one actually gets paid or receives any benefits from their labor, because it is all passed on to the consumer.
Junk logic.
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.
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.
? Get Ross Perot to bring some charts....
