cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
schnurrbart
Veteran Advisor

Re: Neutralizing the elderly votes to allow entitlement reform

Where did you find the figure of "52" paying in for 1 collecting?  This seems to say a little different but not sure.

 

http://www.visualeconomics.com/the-social-security-situation/

 

Also, it would seem to be an easy answer to tax all income at the same rate instead of putting a cap on it to fund the SS

dagwud
Senior Contributor

Re: Neutralizing the elderly votes to allow entitlement reform

Don: "Those surplus dollars are invested in US gov't securities and the money is given back to rich people in tax cuts. With 14 trillion in debt you still insist on the tax cuts for rich folks."

 

 

So in your opinion lowering the tax rate "rich folks" pay is giving them tax payer's money?  Is it not still the rich folk's money and that Uncle Sam is now just collecting taxes from them at a lower rate?  This seems to prove the claim that some liberals think all the money is the governments and it is up to them to decide how much the people should get to keep.  

 

 

Reminds me of a bumper sticker I saw on the back of a trailer on I 35 a couple of days ago.  "Don't steal.  The government doesn't like competition."

 

 

"Targeting labor is exactly right no matter who does it. A governor in wisconsin or a farmer in Wright county. You see workers as the problem when they merely want to share in the promise of America like you do."

 

 

Again with the false claim that I see workers as the problem and don't want them to do well.   While you at you could say I want to starve old people and children as well. It won't be true either but will probably make you feel as good saying it. 

 

 

Where I see a problem is with certain unions and how they have gotten to much in concessions causing tax payers to pay more for public workers and putting a severe strain on city and state's budgets.   If you doubt me on this you may want to ask a few Dem leaders in charge of some budgets.

 

 

There have also been some private sector unions such as the UAW that has gotten to many concessions making it hard for their employers to stay competitive resulting in many UAW jobs being lost.   Kind of hard for me to see something as a gain when it results in many workers losing their jobs.

r3020
Senior Advisor

Re: Neutralizing the elderly votes to allow entitlement reform

Don: "Those surplus dollars are invested in US gov't securities and the money is given back to rich people in tax cuts. With 14 trillion in debt you still insist on the tax cuts for rich folks."

That is the money being used to finace government worker's pensions.

kraft-t
Senior Advisor

Re: Neutralizing the elderly votes to allow entitlement reform

Their losses are fully deductable over a number of years. People take risk investing. How does that help my fellow citizens if I buy 80 acres for $5000 per acre. I haven't done anything to help anyone but myself. If I sell it for $7000 per acre it would be a gain of $160K which would be subject to a 15% tax on the gains. What do you suppose the tax would be on $160K of ordinary income. A working stiff would have to pay $14K in fica taxes alone inaddition to a good deal of federal income taxes. Evidently, You think I offer more to america by buying a farm than Joe Blow does working for his $160K

 

Income is income and if we tax allof it we can afford lower rates for everybody. Giving sweetheart deals to other types of income raises the required rate on most of us.

kraft-t
Senior Advisor

Re: Neutralizing the elderly votes to allow entitlement reform

You sir are arguing against workers. You want to cut their wages and their benefits and exclude them from collective bargaining. How os that not anti worker?

 

You have this midget mind and the petty jealousy to determine what a government worker is worth. When you have no idea what their responsibilities are and how well they do it. You're just certain they are overpaid because you think they are.

 

Union workers are not responsible for budgetary shortfalls. They negotiated in good faith and those that signed the other side of the contract failed to lay funds aside for the the benefits they promised in the contracts. Now you can buy a new tractor and sign a financing contract. When you fail to honor your contract you can complain to the lender that he drove too hard a bargain and that it is impossible for you to hold up the end of your agreement. Tell him you want out of the deal and he will not be able to negotiate the next contract. Tell him you want to do all the deciding your self.

 

See if he likes being treated like a union worker..

r3020
Senior Advisor

Re: Neutralizing the elderly votes to allow entitlement reform


@kraft-t wrote:

You sir are arguing against workers. You want to cut their wages and their benefits and exclude them from collective bargaining. How os that not anti worker?

 

You have this midget mind and the petty jealousy to determine what a government worker is worth. When you have no idea what their responsibilities are and how well they do it. You're just certain they are overpaid because you think they are.

 

Union workers are not responsible for budgetary shortfalls. They negotiated in good faith and those that signed the other side of the contract failed to lay funds aside for the the benefits they promised in the contracts. Now you can buy a new tractor and sign a financing contract. When you fail to honor your contract you can complain to the lender that he drove too hard a bargain and that it is impossible for you to hold up the end of your agreement. Tell him you want out of the deal and he will not be able to negotiate the next contract. Tell him you want to do all the deciding your self.

 

See if he likes being treated like a union worker..


That is what this budget battle is all about, the government signing contracts the tax payers can not honor. It is easy to bargain when you are spending other's money. Especially when the ones on the other side of the table are the ones who keep putting you into office.

dagwud
Senior Contributor

Re: Neutralizing the elderly votes to allow entitlement reform

I would argue Don that it is you that are anti-worker.  I believe some public workers are over paid compared to those doing similar jobs in the private sector there by increasing the tax load on all workers.   I believe public workers should not be allowed to unionize since their unions pool their money together to "donate" to the campaigns of the very politicians that make the decisions on their raises and benefits which again results in higher taxes paid by all workers.   I believe past concessions made to public unions which allow for double dipping and other ways to milk the system cost all workers to again pay more in taxes.  Your answer to all this is to simply raise taxes on everyone which would once again raise the tax burden on all workers.  And I have never gone out of the country for dental work to save a few bucks thereby denying American dental workers of my business.  (Nor have I bought a foreign made car.)

 

 

"They negotiated in good faith and those that signed the other side of the contract failed to lay funds aside for the the benefits they promised in the contracts."

 

 

The trouble with that Don is that in government you constantly have new people elected to be in charge and they are saddled by past agreements made with the unions by others before them.  Take Gov. Branstad who is stuck trying to balance the budget when his predecessor Gov. Culver in his last days in office agreed to what ever the unions were asking for.

 

 

Take New Jersey Gov. Christie who comes into office after his predecessors had failed to properly fund the union retirement accounts.

 

 

Here is one report I found on public workers wages compared to the private sector?   I have no problem if you run a private business and want to pay your employees more then the average wage but when it comes to public workers and tax payers paying the wages I think differently.  Why do we require governments to ask for competitive bids when building roads, bridges or buildings?

 

 

Are Public Sector Workers Overcompensated?

Several analyses of average wages and benefits in the public and private sectors reveal that state and local government workers earn more than private sector workers. According to the most recent Employer Costs for Employee Compensation survey from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, as of December 2009, state and local government employees earned total compensation of $39.60 an hour, compared to $27.42 an hour for private industry workers-a difference of over 44 percent. This includes 35 percent higher wages and nearly 69 percent greater benefits.

 

 

Data from the U.S. Census Bureau similarly show that in 2007 the average annual salary of a California state government employee was $53,958, nearly 32 percent greater than the average private sector worker ($40,991).  In addition, as noted by reporter and Calpensions.com blogger Ed Mendel, in 2006 the state conducted a comparison of state and private sector compensation for the first time in two decades.  While the Department of Personnel Administration survey did not include all job classifications, the analysis determined a number of benchmark job classifications and found that state compensation was greater than private sector compensation for clerical jobs, accountants, custodians, electricians, stationary engineers, and analysts, but lagged in medical occupations.

schnurrbart
Veteran Advisor

Re: Neutralizing the elderly votes to allow entitlement reform

I suggest that "never having gone out of the country for something" is more because it isn't convenient more than your moral high ground.  I live about 200 miles from the CA/Mex border where many Americans go for dental work among other things and when it is quality work for less than 50% of what it is here, I will go.  Are you trying to say that you don't buy foreign goods?  I hope not because I really don't want to call you a liar.  Also would like to know what you mean by unions allowing double dipping?  Union contracts are rarely more than 2-3 years and I can tell you that letter carriers and other postal workers make LESS than their private counterpart on retirement.  Believe that salaries are close.  Virtually ALL union jobs pay more than non-union.  Looks to me like ALL workers should be glad to have a union to negotiate for them.  It isn't that unions have broken the govt.  It is that the starting of wars that we have no business being in and other such crap are breaking the bank.

GoredHusker
Senior Contributor

Re: Neutralizing the elderly votes to allow entitlement reform

You do realize that SS wasn't implemented in 1965.  I don't doubt there were only 6 paying in for every 1 collecting in 1965.  By the late 60's, there were only 5 paying in for each 1 drawing.    When SS was first implemented, 52 paid in for every 1 drawing.  By 1939, there were 40 paying into SS for every 1 drawing.  As life expectancy improved, there were fewer and fewer paying in for each 1 drawing because people drew from SS a lot longer.  In 1935, when the Social Security Act was passed, life expectancy was 60 years. Congress set the age at which benefits began at 65 in the full expectation that more than half the people would receive no benefits.   

GoredHusker
Senior Contributor

Re: Neutralizing the elderly votes to allow entitlement reform

Fine, I'm completely in agreement with you that income is income as long as you agree to a loss is a loss.  I'm not talking about a $100,000 loss being spread out in $3,000 increments annually either.  The same piece of ground you paid $5000 per acre for could just as well be worth $4000 per acre when it's sold.  There's a lot of houses on the market right now being sold for significantly less money than what was paid for them by those same "working stiffs" as you call them. 

 

If we'd just impose a national sales tax on everything, we wouldn't have to worry about some getting a "sweetheart" deal while others do not.  The tax code we currently have is so big and cumbersome that it allows all sorts of loopholes.  Since you like to go after the big boys with their investments, how could you be against charging Berkshire Hathaway sales tax on a purchase like Burlington Northern?  Those investing would be charged sales tax on each and every share they buy.  Just think of the taxes generated by the day traders.