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.
You can show as many charts as you want, it doesn't change this simple fact: The median household income in the United States is 69K. If most of the people who make less than that don't pay much Federal Income Tax, but pay thousands in sales taxes and fees, why would I care so much if my Household income is 3 or 4 times that?
Because I've been sold a bill of goods from right wing media that this is somehow some grave injustice, and something which certain people on this forum bear as some sort of cross for god knows what reason.
Why would yo be so damn angry that someone who is taking in 50K is paying a lower percentage of income tax than you making $200K? I do not for a second wish to switch places with them, what level of internal bile to you have rising up that this is your internet "cause", to belittle them and claim you are some kind of victim?
SS is a separate fund from the general fund we funnel income tax collections into.
You really think there's a SS "lock box?" Congress has been raiding SS revenue for decades.
Quote:
People pay into SS, they don't get refunds out of it.
Too many people, including the middle class LOSE money on SS. They never collect in benefits what they've paid in SS taxes.
Quote:
Benefits paid out of SS are irrelevant to this conversation. The benefit and contribution are two separate issues.
They shouldn't be as SS benefits are directly related to earnings, but NOT payments. One can pay NOTHING into SS via the payroll tax (I've given the explanation of how that happens, earlier) and still collect benefits:
Quote:
"Social Security benefits are typically computed using "average indexed monthly earnings." This average summarizes up to 35 years of a worker's indexed earnings. We apply a formula to this average to compute the primary insurance amount (PIA). The PIA is the basis for the benefits that are paid to an individual."
You could eliminate the funding cap and it wouldn't impact the benefits being paid to anyone.
Actually, it would. As already posted, the SS Admin determines SS benefits by calculating "a worker's indexed earnings." Currently, that's limited to $137,700. Remove that cap and that changes higher-income earners' indexed earnings thereby increasing their benefits correspondingly.
You can show as many charts as you want, it doesn't change this simple fact: The median household income in the United States is 69K. If most of the people who make less than that don't pay much Federal Income Tax, but pay thousands in sales taxes and fees, why would I care so much if my Household income is 3 or 4 times that?
Because YOU are paying the federal income tax they they aren't. That's how a progressive federal tax system works.
Why should anyone have a later federal income tax free day (tax slave emancipation day) than anyone else? Shouldn't we ALL be paying our "fair share," something the left always promotes?
not really. you dont see the massive leap until you hit the top 0.1%
Yes and no. Theres a ton of trickle down at the 2% and 1% level. But thats also where very little money is. I know for most people a 6 or 7 figure income sounds insane, but its not. Im in the top 10% for single earners I think, so for me yeah-you make a LOT more then me. But my family is....hmm...how to put this. My father made more in one year then I have made in the last 50 years. Ive seen a grand total of...$3,000 of it when he gave me some help with my house down payment-and even that was transactional shall we say. Its not that we are estranged so much as my father has seen other children ruined by parents helping too much. Ive seen someone get a fully paid ride to Harvard and Yale, everything. A license to print money.....and they have failed in life. Horrifically.
So I've lived on estates with maids, and gardeners when I stayed with him during summers as a child....and Ive lived with my mom in abject poverty the rest of the time. It was....eye opening.
So when you get a tax break, you still spend a lot of it. It DOES trickle down. When the top .1% gets one...nothing changes. They dont do things that move that money, they're spending a million a year in things....but taking in tens of millions more. their spending doesn't change much, but their investments crowd everyone else out at the bottom end.
And...theyre completely unaware of how life actually works. A speeding ticket for them is more about the time the cop wastes in writing it, then it is the money. If they really want to they can destroy someones life using pocket change. Its a different world entirely. And trickle down just doesnt occur because most are spending all they really want or need too.
Wow, this gives me some insight as to why you view things the way you do. Your anecdotal example shows how personal experience has warped your political/ideological view.
It is no different than someone growing up always being taken advantage of, because of the type of people they have lived around. They assume everyone is a cheat and out only for themselves, instead of realizing most people are decent, and life does not work that way in our culture. Whether it be someone born and bred on the mean streets of NYC, then going to Montana, a kid raised in juvey, then being adopted to a decent home with love and values.
Funny enough I knew a kid who had a very wealthy family, but they did not spoil him. Ironically enough, he became resentful (mainly of his dad) for not allowing him to enjoy the lifestyle of his friends, always needing money to do XYZ (like a trip to Vail). He wanted to be part of a group of privileged kids, but hung out with us more than he thought he should.
As it turns out, to the best of my knowledge he is doing fine now, as he has matured and seen how people without a ton of money can enjoy life. Whether he got a big inheritance or not probably wont adversely effect him, either way.
The bottom line is that "trickle down" works in ways you failed to say or maybe understand. Most people in America want an average life, and do not envy the rich. Instead, the motivated ones continue to strive to have a better life and maybe attain more wealth through hard work, and/or building a better mousetrap. Sadly the leftists want to look only at the ills of capitalism, and do not see it is the single greatest way human beings can strive to improve themselves.
Bono (from U2) with his rose colored glasses, use to think capitalism was bad. Then he saw the light, realizing it was mainly the countries fueled by it, that were able to do the most good of the poor and needy.
America did just become a great society because we discovered some resource like oil and got fat and rich off of it overnight. Instead the individual freedom it affords, the ethic of hard work to get ahead, and charity to help to the truly needy people within our society (i.e. physically disabled)has been what has made us what we are.
Sadly leftists want equality of outcomes, not equality of opportunity.
You can show as many charts as you want, it doesn't change this simple fact: The median household income in the United States is 69K. If most of the people who make less than that don't pay much Federal Income Tax, but pay thousands in sales taxes and fees, why would I care so much if my Household income is 3 or 4 times that?
Because I've been sold a bill of goods from right wing media that this is somehow some grave injustice, and something which certain people on this forum bear as some sort of cross for god knows what reason.
Why would yo be so damn angry that someone who is taking in 50K is paying a lower percentage of income tax than you making $200K? I do not for a second wish to switch places with them, what level of internal bile to you have rising up that this is your internet "cause", to belittle them and claim you are some kind of victim?
The rich pays far more local sales and fees. What’s the fair share the poor should pay?
The tax share argument is a junk stat. If anything it shows how unevenly wages are distributed if the tax share burden is shifted to higher income earners.
Everyone has access to almost all the same tax breaks, rich and poor. The fact that baseline tax credits wipes away to tax liability for a large part of the population is proof that most wage earners are earning at a subsistence level.
If $1000 tax credit is given to 100 people and 98 of them pay $0 as a result, I'm not crying for the 2 people who paid 100% of taxes collected.The problem is that too many of those 98 people aren't being paid enough to be able to pay more in taxes. The solution isn't to cut taxes so those 2 people who still collect their lion's share of wages, pay less in taxes. The solution is to increase what more of the 98 are being paid so they also pay more in taxes.
The only way to evenly distribute wages is to slaughter or threaten to slaughter a lot of people.
That idea has been tried in the past 100 years in many countries across different cultures and geographical areas. The more sincere they were, the more people were murdered. Those experiments causes 100 million death and still counting.
Total BS as SS benefits ALSO cap out, and the SS Admin has already admitted that SS benefits are progressive. Those who contribute the least get the greatest return and those who contribute the most get the least return
It's an insurance program, not a savings or investment program.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Urban Institute is a left-wing think tank.
No, they're a Göbbels think tank.
From your quote:
A married couple retiring last year after both spouses earned average lifetime wages paid about $598,000 in Social Security taxes during their careers. They can expect to collect about $556,000 in benefits, if the man lives to 82 and the woman lives to 85, according to a 2011 study by the Urban Institute, a Washington think tank
What's wrong with that picture?
They lied.
If a married coupled paid $598,000 in FICA taxes, then what was their FICA taxable income?
Simple: $598,000 / 6.2% = $9,645,161
So, this couple that Göbbels Institute holds out to be a typical American couple made $9.6 Million in their lifetime.
If they both worked 40 years then they're average yearly income was at least $241,129 which is hardly representative of America.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabchuck
How much bigger is the average home now, compared to 1980 ? Just curious.
A helluva lot bigger.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo58
Average might be $320k, but average is not a good measurement, because multimillion dollar mansions skew the average upward. Median is better.
According to Zillow....
Nobody cares what Zillow says, so stop shilling for them.
There are three different measures of Life Expectancy used by actuarial scientists (and Social Security):
1) Life Expectancy from Birth
2) Life Expectancy from Age 35
3) Life Expectancy from Age 65
Life Expectancy from Birth and from Age 35 have declined but not from Age 65.
It has ZERO to do with healthcare.
Other countries do not have a Baltimore or Chicago or Cincinnati or Detroit or St Louis where Blacks indiscriminately murder Blacks on a daily basis.
You do understand that 6.2% of your population commits 54.9% of all murders, right?
The other cause of low Life Expectancy from Birth is drug-over doses, which other countries do not experience either.
Having universal healthcare will not stop 6.2% of your population from committing 54.9% of murders nor will it stop drug over-doses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bertwrench
In 1980 the average house value was $47k, today it is $320k. Wages in no way have kept up with that.
State the Law, Theorem or Corollary in Economics that says wages must keep pace with housing prices.
Oh, that's right, you cannot. Thanks for playing anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bertwrench
The argument goes beyond just inflation.
You're right. It's Demand-pull Inflation.
Demand-pull Inflation is not caused by the Federal Reserve. It occurs when Demand for a good, service or resource far exceeds both the available Supply and Rate of Increase of Supply.
In the 44,698 housing markets in the US, the Demand, the Supply and the Rate of Increase of Supply are not uniform nor should they be,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Bell
I do not hold a political label and Okay I miss spoke. What part of it doesn't matter that you don't get ....
Liberals on this forum have repeatedly claimed the tax rate was 91% on 100% of income and I repeatedly beat them down with the fact that it was 91% on a tiny portion of income and that because the IRS Tax Code of 1954 and earlier are in no way like the IRS Tax Code of 1986, very few people actually paid more than 55%.
But none of that matters because tax rates have no effect or bearing on the stupidity of The Poor® because The Poor® are stupid.
Period.
Don't you watch TV? There's some turd with $1,200 in butt-ugly tattoos whining that he ain't got $400 cash for an emergency.
The Poor® do everything wrong. They got $125 for dope but they ain't got $125 to spend at the vocational school on a MIG/TIG welding certification course that will allow them to double, triple or quadruple their hourly wage.
The only way to help The Poor® is to assign them a Life Coach who would live in their home and tell them every second of their pathetic lives what to do and what not to do so they don't screw it up and be a burden on the restivus.
It's an insurance program, not a savings or investment program.
No, they're a Göbbels think tank.
From your quote:
A married couple retiring last year after both spouses earned average lifetime wages paid about $598,000 in Social Security taxes during their careers. They can expect to collect about $556,000 in benefits, if the man lives to 82 and the woman lives to 85, according to a 2011 study by the Urban Institute, a Washington think tank
What's wrong with that picture?
They lied.
If a married coupled paid $598,000 in FICA taxes, then what was their FICA taxable income?
Simple: $598,000 / 6.2% = $9,645,161
So, this couple that Göbbels Institute holds out to be a typical American couple made $9.6 Million in their lifetime.
If they both worked 40 years then they're average yearly income was at least $241,129 which is hardly representative of America.
A helluva lot bigger.
Nobody cares what Zillow says, so stop shilling for them.
There are 44,498 housing markets in the US.
The CDC lied.
There are three different measures of Life Expectancy used by actuarial scientists (and Social Security):
1) Life Expectancy from Birth
2) Life Expectancy from Age 35
3) Life Expectancy from Age 65
Life Expectancy from Birth and from Age 35 have declined but not from Age 65.
It has ZERO to do with healthcare.
Other countries do not have a Baltimore or Chicago or Cincinnati or Detroit or St Louis where Blacks indiscriminately murder Blacks on a daily basis.
You do understand that 6.2% of your population commits 54.9% of all murders, right?
The other cause of low Life Expectancy from Birth is drug-over doses, which other countries do not experience either.
Having universal healthcare will not stop 6.2% of your population from committing 54.9% of murders nor will it stop drug over-doses.
State the Law, Theorem or Corollary in Economics that says wages must keep pace with housing prices.
Oh, that's right, you cannot. Thanks for playing anyway.
You're right. It's Demand-pull Inflation.
Demand-pull Inflation is not caused by the Federal Reserve. It occurs when Demand for a good, service or resource far exceeds both the available Supply and Rate of Increase of Supply.
In the 44,698 housing markets in the US, the Demand, the Supply and the Rate of Increase of Supply are not uniform nor should they be,
Wrong. I do get that. I've repeatedly said so.
That's why "91%" is in quotes.
Liberals on this forum have repeatedly claimed the tax rate was 91% on 100% of income and I repeatedly beat them down with the fact that it was 91% on a tiny portion of income and that because the IRS Tax Code of 1954 and earlier are in no way like the IRS Tax Code of 1986, very few people actually paid more than 55%.
But none of that matters because tax rates have no effect or bearing on the stupidity of The Poor® because The Poor® are stupid.
Period.
Don't you watch TV? There's some turd with $1,200 in butt-ugly tattoos whining that he ain't got $400 cash for an emergency.
The Poor® do everything wrong. They got $125 for dope but they ain't got $125 to spend at the vocational school on a MIG/TIG welding certification course that will allow them to double, triple or quadruple their hourly wage.
The only way to help The Poor® is to assign them a Life Coach who would live in their home and tell them every second of their pathetic lives what to do and what not to do so they don't screw it up and be a burden on the restivus.
I always enjoy reading your posts.
The SS is not an insurance program. It is a Ponzi scheme and it is to forced some people to pay for others.
Last edited by lifeexplorer; 12-24-2020 at 11:11 AM..
A married couple retiring last year after both spouses earned average lifetime wages paid about $598,000 in Social Security taxes during their careers. They can expect to collect about $556,000 in benefits, if the man lives to 82 and the woman lives to 85, according to a 2011 study by the Urban Institute, a Washington think tank
What's wrong with that picture?
They lied.
If a married coupled paid $598,000 in FICA taxes, then what was their FICA taxable income?
Simple: $598,000 / 6.2% = $9,645,161
So, this couple that Göbbels Institute holds out to be a typical American couple made $9.6 Million in their lifetime.
If they both worked 40 years then they're average yearly income was at least $241,129 which is hardly representative of America.
You're forgetting that the Urban Institute allowed for inflation.
The SS is not an insurance program. It is a Ponzi scheme and it is to forced some people to pay for others.
Bingo!
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.
