U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [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 10-16-2012, 11:20 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles area
14,017 posts, read 18,906,658 times
Reputation: 32439

Advertisements

Various news media, often in connection with announcing the Social Security COLA for 2013, have also reported on another determination by the Social Security Administration, namely the increase in the wage taxation cap from the current $110,100 to $113,700 for 2013. I don't know the basis for that determination, but it represents a 3.3% increase.

An interesting side tidbit is the estimated number of wage earners who will be affected. Of the estimated 163 million workers who will pay Social Security taxes in 2013, nearly 10 million will pay higher taxes as a result of the increase in the cap to $113,700. Those 10 million people represent 6 percent of workers subject to SS taxes on their wages and salaries.

From where I sit, people making over $110,100 per year are rich. Now I realize that calling them "rich" is a bit of an exaggeration, but my point is I was surprised by how many of those folks there are: 6 per cent of workers, or 10 million people! Lots of folks are doing quite well, and more power to them.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-16-2012, 11:49 PM
 
15,835 posts, read 28,180,123 times
Reputation: 27249
Well, part of it is location. I live in a high COL area and $110k isn't rich at all, but is hardly a hurtin' thing, either. Certainly people might make that much on a salary. For instance, RNs in this area can get up to that much with decades of experience, shiftwork, etc.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2012, 12:57 AM
 
13,969 posts, read 12,898,677 times
Reputation: 5293
How many millions do they expect this small raise on the cap to net the fund?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2012, 01:55 AM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,136 posts, read 22,197,507 times
Reputation: 15219
'Bout time.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2012, 04:09 AM
 
15,835 posts, read 28,180,123 times
Reputation: 27249
The cap goes up a couple of thousand dollars every year. Why can't it just be set up a whole lot higher?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2012, 04:24 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles area
14,017 posts, read 18,906,658 times
Reputation: 32439
Quote:
Originally Posted by brightdoglover View Post
The cap goes up a couple of thousand dollars every year. Why can't it just be set up a whole lot higher?
The cap could be eliminated entirely by an act of Congress signed into law by the sitting President. The logic of having a cap - and having it at the level it is - is that benefits are also capped at that level. The removal of the cap on both taxes and benefits wouldn't net very much into the system, but the removal of the taxation cap while leaving the benefit cap in place would only increase the subsidization of low wage earners by high wage earners, which in turn would (on a political level) lend fuel to the fire of those who call Social Security welfare. Social Security is not welfare, basically, but it does have certain slightly welfarish aspects, i.e., modest wealth transfers via the benefit formulas.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2012, 07:14 AM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
4,217 posts, read 4,692,991 times
Reputation: 7853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escort Rider View Post
Various news media, often in connection with announcing the Social Security COLA for 2013, have also reported on another determination by the Social Security Administration, namely the increase in the wage taxation cap from the current $110,100 to $113,700 for 2013. I don't know the basis for that determination, but it represents a 3.3% increase.

An interesting side tidbit is the estimated number of wage earners who will be affected. Of the estimated 163 million workers who will pay Social Security taxes in 2013, nearly 10 million will pay higher taxes as a result of the increase in the cap to $113,700. Those 10 million people represent 6 percent of workers subject to SS taxes on their wages and salaries.

From where I sit, people making over $110,100 per year are rich. Now I realize that calling them "rich" is a bit of an exaggeration, but my point is I was surprised by how many of those folks there are: 6 per cent of workers, or 10 million people! Lots of folks are doing quite well, and more power to them.
The wage taxation cap is determined by the national average wage index. In 2011, the average wage index increased 3.3%. National Average Wage Index

We only see 6 percent of workers impacted by the cap because of the large income disparity in this country. The wages of those 6 percent are included in determining the national average wage index, thus making it appear as if the average Joe had a significant pay raise. Of course, this isn't true.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2012, 08:34 AM
bg7
 
7,696 posts, read 9,029,853 times
Reputation: 15201
Quote:
Originally Posted by brightdoglover View Post
The cap goes up a couple of thousand dollars every year. Why can't it just be set up a whole lot higher?

Sure, but seeing as its basically pay in - pay out linked, if you do that you should give those subjected to this new increased amount the chance to opt out of social security and pay their premiums into private pension plans, like they do for example in the UK.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2012, 09:02 AM
 
1,272 posts, read 1,183,544 times
Reputation: 1875
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte View Post
How many millions do they expect this small raise on the cap to net the fund?
If all ten million make at least $113,700, it should raise an additional $4.464 billion. Since some people would fall in between $110,100 and $113,700 it would be somewhat less.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2012, 09:18 AM
 
2,691 posts, read 6,918,783 times
Reputation: 2761
Kind of funny hearing this cap issue.When I started work in the 50's we called it old home week,generally around June-July we would get our pay with no SS taken out.We were working for $1-3 per hour and we did better than today,you need a wheelbarrow full of money to survive today.The split between the have's and have not's is large money wise now.Today college is like high school was than.Without HS diploma you did not generally get first consideration.
Rate this post positively 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
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

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 > Retirement

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top