25 Jan 08
4 edits
Year Annual Social Security Wage Base Social Security Tax Rate Maximum Annual Social Security Tax Withholding Annual Medicare Wage Base Medicare Tax Rate
2008 $102,000 6.2% $6,324.00 No annual limit 1.45%
2007 $97,500 6.2% $6,045.00 No annual limit 1.45%
http://www1.umn.edu/ohr/payroll/tax/wagelimits.html
*Sorry the list became a mess in posting. You can sort it easily enough. Note for 2008 it rises to a limit of $102,000 for the 6.2percent and there is no cut-off. Everything gets 1.45percent for Medi-Care no limit.
26 Jan 08
Originally posted by MacSwainI was wrong about the cap, that was the 2001 figure, and hadn't realised they raised the level, but I am right about the percentage, it is 7.65%. 6.2% SS tax + 1.45% medicaire tax (to SS admin.).
Just googled your numbers. Your social security is collected up to $97500 at 6.2 percent. You error is only 22 percent. 😳
When you say your wife has the brains in the family, you aren't joking are you? 😉
Try reading the websites you posted instead of glancing at the first numbers you see.
My point still stands however, that the rich pay a disproportionately smaller amount to social security, they should pay that rate with no cap.
26 Jan 08
Originally posted by MacSwainwho said anything about deciding how much someone earns? Are you actually literate, or are you a monkey randomly pounding on the keyboard? I don't care how much money someone makes, I just believe that those who have gotten the most out of society, are oblidged to give the most back. Seems fair and reasonable to me.
I read all the rubish in this thread, as in many others before it. Has reason become extinct?
Seriously, who posting here HONESTLY feels they have the right or ability to decide how much money another human being may earn?
The absurdity of anyone not seeing it would take an egotistical dolt to hold themselves in judgement of the living of anothers life is mind numbing.
26 Jan 08
Originally posted by duecerYOU! You have done nothing but pontificate about how much someone earns and be allowed to keep! It is practically all you talk about, I am hard pressed to think of a more envious individual, even on rhp. You continually make statements concerning how much money other individuals should be "allowed" to have.
who said anything about deciding how much someone earns? Are you actually literate, or are you a monkey randomly pounding on the keyboard? I don't care how much money someone makes, I just believe that those who have gotten the most out of society, are oblidged to give the most back. Seems fair and reasonable to me.
Even in this very post I am responding to: You lament that you are being falsly charged with "deciding how much someone earns", at the same time state, once again, you have decided those who've gotten "most??" are "oblidged to give the most back."
Who the hell are you to make such a decision regarding another human beings finances, Mr. Egomaniacal Man?
26 Jan 08
Originally posted by MacSwainI repeat...exactly which post did I say that?
YOU! You have done nothing but pontificate about how much someone earns and be allowed to keep! It is practically all you talk about, I am hard pressed to think of a more envious individual, even on rhp. You continually make statements concerning how much money other individuals should be "allowed" to have.
Even in this very post I am responding to: ...[text shortened]... u to make such a decision regarding another human beings finances, Mr. Egomaniacal Man?
Its all I talkabout? Every rethuglican in debates cries about how they're overtaxed, including you. My wife and I earn over $140K a year, Iam not envious of what others have, you on the other hand seem to be. I have no problem with equitable taxes. If you don't have enough money, maybe you should shut your 'puter off and get a second job.
26 Jan 08
Originally posted by duecerI agree, but thing of progressive taxation not as an increase in tax rate for richer people, but a decrease in tax rate for poorer people and it makes lots more sense.
who said anything about deciding how much someone earns? Are you actually literate, or are you a monkey randomly pounding on the keyboard? I don't care how much money someone makes, I just believe that those who have gotten the most out of society, are oblidged to give the most back. Seems fair and reasonable to me.
26 Jan 08
1 edit
Originally posted by scottishinnzIt makes no sense at all to take more from someone simply on the basis that you feel they can afford more. It is not moral, it is not fair, it is not right.
I agree, but thing of progressive taxation not as an increase in tax rate for richer people, but a decrease in tax rate for poorer people and it makes lots more sense.
Under a flat rate system rich folk pay more.
Under a graduated, punish the rich scheme they pay a second time.
On top of this rich folk make lesser demands on a risky public health system and a dodgy education system,
So they pay a third time.
They will likely buy more so at 12.5% GST (NZ)
They will pay a fourth time.
The other gummint rort is that in NZ you move into the 38% tax rate at an income of 60k, with inflation this means that every year more people move into this bracket. scam, scam,scam.
Edit, quote added: "Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." --- Frederic Bastiat
26 Jan 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Wajomait is a great scam that the rich pay more (as😵 in taxes. the upper middle class and rich have far more deductions, which helps to narrow the gap. the other perspective is to look at taxes as a percentage of discretionary monies, in that case, the upper and middle class pay far fewer taxes than the poor.
It makes no sense at all to take more from someone simply on the basis that you feel they can afford more. It is not moral, it is not fair, it is not right.
Under a flat rate system rich folk pay more.
Under a graduated, punish the rich scheme they pay a second time.
On top of this rich folk make lesser demands on a risky public health system and a which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."[/i] --- Frederic Bastiat
edit: 😵 this smiley came up it was supposed to be % then ), haha crazy computers
26 Jan 08
1 edit
Originally posted by duecerYou asked Barbara, so as you requested - here are examples of how you make yourself arbiter god of others finances. Who the hell are you to make decisions regarding another humans finances and life style, Mr. Egomaniacal Man? Enjoy.
I repeat...exactly which post did I say that?
Its all I talkabout? Every rethuglican in debates cries about how they're overtaxed, including you. My wife and I earn over $140K a year, Iam not envious of what others have, you on the other hand seem to be. I have no problem with equitable taxes. If you don't have enough money, maybe you should shut your 'puter off and get a second job.
You must be pitifully poor, as no one who actually has money brags about their family income as you do and your hatred of those with wealth is chilling.
Originally posted by duecer
“where and how did those who have much, get much? that part of the equation needs to be factored in.”
“I just believe that those who have gotten the most out of society, are oblidged to give the most back. Seems fair and reasonable to me.”
“People earning(not family income) over $80K do not pay social security on income over that amount, yet ironically, they are the ones with the most security.”
“If you have assets totaling $1Million, you are rich by anyones standards.”
“The super rich are not affected ether, as they can afford very smart lawyers and estate planners”
“no I understand the death tax, and I know that it doesn't affect me, or any of my relatives.”
“The dems districts may be wealthier, but probably has more to do with education level.”
“The dems districts may be wealthier”
“The average CEO makes 450 times what the average factory floor worker makes.”
“As far as companies paying taxes and passing that on to us...that is a whole different thread”
“you will have time to hide all of your assest's”
“increase taxes on the top 2% in our country, it is highly unlikely that anyone on this site is in the top 2%.”
“it seems the dow jones is in a bit of free fall today.”
“Its the greedy F'ers out there who are taking a pounding.”
“5) people living within 1.5 miles of work, must walk to work, if within 3 miles , they must ride a bike, all others must carpool, or use public transport”
Now, show me my posts that back you charge that I have "cried about being over taxed and a post of mine where I have exhibited envy of others possesions. It will be a long wait..and since you will be unable to do it...you will fall back on your usual name calling rants to divert attention from the challenge. Please use some new slurs..your usual menu is a bit stale!!
28 Jan 08
1 edit
Originally posted by MacSwainSeriously, who posting here HONESTLY feels they have the right or ability to decide how much money another human being may earn?
You asked Barbara, so as you requested - here are examples of how you make yourself arbiter god of others finances. Who the hell are you to make decisions regarding another humans finances and life style, Mr. Egomaniacal Man? Enjoy.
You must be pitifully poor, as no one who actually has money brags about their family income as you do and your hatred of t tention from the challenge. Please use some new slurs..your usual menu is a bit stale!![/b]
The absurdity of anyone not seeing it would take an egotistical dolt to hold themselves in judgement of the living of anothers life is mind numbing(in responce to a discussion about taxes)
---
INFLATION: In the 70s, inflation rates were over 14%,
INTEREST: Federal Reserve System - Bank Prime Loan Rate 18.50 %
GOLD: 1970's price of gold peaked, in 2007, inflation adjusted dollars, gold was over $2100 per ounce.
Summation of your "high tax 70's": An economic shambles!
---
Who the hell are you to make such a decision regarding another human beings finances, Mr. Egomaniacal Man?
----
Instead of business seeing a need and proceeding to fill it, for the last half century, they tend to stand back, perhaps even lobbying, to first attract government (tax payer - because governments have NO money) funding. Please think and consider this point seriously(seems you have aproblem with taxes here)
------
I could probably find more, but I have made my point on that note. I spoke in generalities about conservatives regarding this position, but I still believe it applies to you nonetheless.
I posted my earnings in response to others posts about deciding why the rich should pay more, the point being that our family has done very well, yet we never complain about our level of taxation.
You said: YOU! You have done nothing but pontificate about how much someone earns and be allowed to keep! It is practically all you talk about, I am hard pressed to think of a more envious individual, even on rhp. You continually make statements concerning how much money other individuals should be "allowed" to have.
well duh! the threads were about those subjects, am I not allowed to have an opinion on taxes? Last time I checked I was a US citizen. I don't care what others make, I just believe that taxes are a neccessary part of society, and how people are taxed is a worthwhile argument, i just happen to completely disagree with you, so I must of course be fixated on others wealth right? get a grip numbnuts.
on a last note a few of those qoutes are taken completely out of context, but I stand by any SERIOUS post I made.
28 Jan 08
Originally posted by duecerThen you must really be a fan of the Bush tax cuts since they've made the tax system even more progressive and increased the burden the wealthy pay?
I repeat...exactly which post did I say that?
Its all I talkabout? Every rethuglican in debates cries about how they're overtaxed, including you. My wife and I earn over $140K a year, Iam not envious of what others have, you on the other hand seem to be. I have no problem with equitable taxes. If you don't have enough money, maybe you should shut your 'puter off and get a second job.
http://ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=15485
28 Jan 08
Originally posted by duecerWell, if they did away with the income cap, then the government would have to declare Social Security for what it is: another welfare scheme that redistributes money from the young to the elderly, which prevents them from getting married, starting a family, buying a house, buying a car, etc., because a big chunk of their paycheck is taken from them and they have no say in the matter.
Ever hear me complain about my taxes being too high? Yes my family makes more than $100k a year. but we didn't always. We know what it is like to be poor and struggle. We know what it is like to have to pay half of one paycheck each week just for daycare. Arguing an equitable tax rate for the top 5%, or even 2%, is not class warfare, its about fairness. Peopl ...[text shortened]... security on income over that amount, yet ironically, they are the ones with the most security.
28 Jan 08
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterSocial Security was intended to be a supplimental pension insurance. Even in some pension plans, the younger workers are 'paying the pensions' of of retirees. It is my opinion that it is a beneficial government service.
Well, if they did away with the income cap, then the government would have to declare Social Security for what it is: another welfare scheme that redistributes money from the young to the elderly, which prevents them from getting married, starting a family, buying a house, buying a car, etc., because a big chunk of their paycheck is taken from them and they have no say in the matter.
I would think you would be in favor of every one paying the same flat rate. If we all payed the same flat rate, then the overall % could be reduced.
Oh and trying to convince me and other liberals with words like "redistribute" isn't going to work...thats our whole point.
28 Jan 08
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterI have no problem with the tax cuts, as long as they cut spending by the same amount. Congress needs to reinstitue paygo
Then you must really be a fan of the Bush tax cuts since they've made the tax system even more progressive and increased the burden the wealthy pay?
http://ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=15485
28 Jan 08
1 edit
Originally posted by duecerWhat is this post supposed to be? Here is a recap for the easily distracted Dr. Stupid:
I could probably find more, but I have made my point on that note. I spoke in generalities about conservatives regarding this position, but I still believe it applies to you nonetheless.
I posted my earnings in response to others posts about deciding why the rich should pay more, the point being that our family has done very well, yet we never complain abou ...[text shortened]... of those qoutes are taken completely out of context, but I stand by any SERIOUS post I made.
I posted: You fixate on what others earn, keep and their tax rates and you asked me to show you: {Originally posted by duecer} “I repeat...exactly which post did I say that?” and I gave you 12 examples.
In trying to defend yourself, you falsely charged I cried about being overtaxed: {Originally posted by duecer} “Every rethuglican in debates cries about how they're overtaxed, including you” To which I challenged you to - SHOW ME MY POSTS.
Now you post some rambling, pissling rubbish that has nothing to do with backing your accusation. So, I repeat my original challenge. SHOW ME MY POSTS WHERE I COMPLAIN ABOUT BEING OVERTAXED. (I am still waiting – please hurry!)
(You and I both know you can’t, because you’ve already tried and such posts don’t exist. Obviously, your scove mouth makes claims you can’t substantiate.)