Obama's Tax Plan

[FUCK THE POLICE]

And anyway, if it goes to the person you sold the stock to, it still isn't "locked out" of the international economy.

 

[uscitizen]

Well, I'm sure seniors love that idea. But what about people in my position. If you're just starting out and you aren't at the poverty level you're getting screwed on multiple levels

#1) Older homeowners are paying mortgages on homes that they bought years ago - you can't even compare payments unless a person's refinanced. I'm already paying like 3 times what they are paying for their homes.

#2) I'm paying ~7% for a government annuity/insurance that I'm likely never going to see a penny of which seniors today can benefit from.

#3) We're not operating on surplus anymore as you know republicans have been in office, which means that the shortfalls from that cut is going to have to be found somewhere. And yes, it will likely come from more than just he top 1% of earners. I think its foolish to believe otherwise.

In short, I'm paying for seniors today's retirement, I have less savings for myself in the future, in addition to having to pay 3X what they are paying for their homes. Great for seniors, not so great for people just starting out.

so what you are young and can handle it.

I felt exactly the same way when I was 21....
This is strange....

But SS is still here.
I bought a few homes.
I have lived a pretty good life....

 

[TheDanold]

That's all true, but there is more to the story. The cost of living for seniors is up, up, up, and many simply can't afford to retire.

The only argument here is that the idea of a tax cut for people in this age group is not that loopy; they're not all golfing at the country clubs...

And housing prices are up, up, up, up, up, up, up.
Many of them could easily retire if they wanted to sell their house (and live in an apartment or out in a rural area), but they don't. It's not my business either way, but painting a picture of the poverty stricken senior is mostly bullshit. Poor by income, not by wealth.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Well, I'm sure seniors love that idea. But what about people in my position. If you're just starting out and you aren't at the poverty level you're getting screwed on multiple levels

#1) Older homeowners are paying mortgages on homes that they bought years ago - you can't even compare payments unless a person's refinanced. I'm already paying like 3 times what they are paying for their homes.

#2) I'm paying ~7% for a government annuity/insurance that I'm likely never going to see a penny of which seniors today can benefit from.

#3) We're not operating on surplus anymore as you know republicans have been in office, which means that the shortfalls from that cut is going to have to be found somewhere. And yes, it will likely come from more than just he top 1% of earners. I think its foolish to believe otherwise.

In short, I'm paying for seniors today's retirement, I have less savings for myself in the future, in addition to having to pay 3X what they are paying for their homes. Great for seniors, not so great for people just starting out.

Raising taxes on top earners to 50% would almost certainly pay for it. I just mentioned it because it's completely politically impossible to do so.

 

[LadyT]

so what you are young and can handle it.

I felt exactly the same way when I was 21....
This is strange....

But SS is still here.
I bought a few homes.
I have lived a pretty good life....

Yeah, but I don't think it was on the verge of busting when you were 21 and politicians weren't using it as an endless piggy bank back then.

 

[LadyT]

Raising taxes on top earners to 50% would almost certainly pay for it. I just mentioned it because it's completely politically impossible to do so.

I stand corrected. If you raise the taxes to 50%+ it might do the trick.

 

[Cancel7]

You're such a hypocrite, you've given tons of stories of people you've known, and come to think of it who here hasn't?
People correlate anecdotal stories to their own experience and observations, it's certainly relevant, not highly so, but somewhat none the less.

Anecodotal evidence is essentially meaningless when used to try to prove what financial position seniors in this country are in. Bottom line.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

That's all true, but there is more to the story. The cost of living for seniors is up, up, up, and many simply can't afford to retire.

The only argument here is that the idea of a tax cut for people in this age group is not that loopy; they're not all golfing at the country clubs...

Quite true. But why? Could it be because everyone and their brother is being told they need the new wonder drug? Then they need the drug that will take care of the side effects of that new wonder drug. Then they need the drug that takes care of THAT drugs side effects... etc...

Not to say that there aren't legitimate needs out there for some of these meds.... but too many people in this country are over-medicated. In my opinion this stems in large part from the ability of pharma to advertise their new wonder drugs.

My father is a perfect example of what is wrong. He is diabetic and has had heart problems. He was on 16 friggin drugs. Now he is on two.... why? Because my brother altered his diet and got him to exercise. He is now down 30 pounds after a year and no longer needs most of the meds.

Also want to make it clear... we still need to focus on cutting healthcare costs and stopping the ever increasing spiral upwards. But simply handing out tax breaks does nothing but shift the cost from one person to another. It is an attempt to hide the problem. It pisses me off and is bad economic policy. Robbing peter to pay paul is not good policy.

 

[Onceler]

No one talks about Social Security anymore. It's a damned shame.

I wasn't opposed to some form of private investment as an alternative. The returns on SS, over time, are horrible...

 

[Cancel7]

Bullshit, you work a good job (doing copyright work). If you're not rich it's because you spend a lot, your income isn't low doing that line of work.

Since you apparently do not know what a copywriter is, and believe it has something to do with copyrights, I can't imagine you would have any idea what one makes.

However, I am in the position to know that I am not rich. And I just feel I might also be in a better position to know what kind of people I know, and have known, throughout my life, than you are. Maybe that's crazy talk, but you know what a nut I am.

 

[TheDanold]

Well, I'm sure seniors love that idea. But what about people in my position. If you're just starting out and you aren't at the poverty level you're getting screwed on multiple levels

#1) Older homeowners are paying mortgages on homes that they bought years ago - you can't even compare payments unless a person's refinanced. I'm already paying like 3 times what they are paying for their homes.

#2) I'm paying ~7% for a government annuity/insurance that I'm likely never going to see a penny of which seniors today can benefit from.

#3) We're not operating on surplus anymore as you know republicans have been in office, which means that the shortfalls from that cut is going to have to be found somewhere. And yes, it will likely come from more than just he top 1% of earners. I think its foolish to believe otherwise.

In short, I'm paying for seniors today's retirement, I have less savings for myself in the future, in addition to having to pay 3X what they are paying for their homes. Great for seniors, not so great for people just starting out.

I'd say you're paying way more than 3 times.
My Dad got his first house in 1972 for around $15,000, I know there is inflation of course, but even so, right now that house retails for over $300,000.

Honestly Tiana, I think you should buy now. I bought a house in 2002 for about $60,000 more than what my sister in law paid in the same area (similar house) and I had feelings about waiting, hoping things will "cool down" and prices will lower but luckily my smarter wife talked me into it and now the house is worth probably at least another 60000 more than what we paid for it.

I don't think housing prices will ever really fall much.
It always seems to outpace inflation so probably better to bite the bullet sooner.

 

[LadyT]

I'd like to note that while I don't see this as something good for me, I'm not deluded into thinking that seniors are out and about living the high life. I'm just pointing out that I see nothing advantageous in his plan to myself or anyone else in my income and age bracket.

 

[Bonestorm]

No one talks about Social Security anymore. It's a damned shame.

I wasn't opposed to some form of private investment as an alternative. The returns on SS, over time, are horrible...

Well, it isn't an investment. It's insurance.

What type of return do you expect from your health insurance? Auto insurance? Life insurance?

 

[Onceler]

It was certainly worth looking up:

- Leaving aside Social Security income, nearly one of every two elderly people — 46.8 percent — has income below the poverty line.[1]
- Once Social Security benefits are taken into account, just one in twelve — 8.7 percent — is poor.

http://www.cbpp.org/2-24-05socsec.htm

Certainly more than the 2 old wino's that Dano "observed"...

 

[uscitizen]

I'd like to note that while I don't see this as something good for me, I'm not deluded into thinking that seniors are out and about living the high life. I'm just pointing out that I see nothing advantageous in his plan to myself or anyone else in my income and age bracket.

I was the same way when I was in your age bracket.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I stand corrected. If you raise the taxes to 50%+ it might do the trick.

Sorry... I thought you were referencing my comments on that...

I've said we should probably raise the upper-line taxes up 15% to 50% before, but I know that it would be nearly impossible, even with a Democratic congress and pres.

 

[Cancel7]

It was certainly worth looking up:

- Leaving aside Social Security income, nearly one of every two elderly people — 46.8 percent — has income below the poverty line.[1]
- Once Social Security benefits are taken into account, just one in twelve — 8.7 percent — is poor.

http://www.cbpp.org/2-24-05socsec.htm

Certainly more than the 2 old wino's that Dano "observed"...

Wow. And, the poverty level is so stupid. As if anyone living just above it, is just living the high life flying all over the place, with money to burn. Hardly, plenty of them are also poor, by pretty much any Westernized standard.

 

[Onceler]

Well, it isn't an investment. It's insurance.

What type of return do you expect from your health insurance? Auto insurance? Life insurance?

Yeah, but we're talking about keeping Social Security viable, and keeping it from bankrupting America. Mathematically, it just doesn't work right now. Increase the dividends/growth, and it might.

No one is worried about auto insurers going bankrupt...

 

[TheDanold]

Since you apparently do not know what a copywriter is, and believe it has something to do with copyrights, I can't imagine you would have any idea what one makes.

However, I am in the position to know that I am not rich. And I just feel I might also be in a better position to know what kind of people I know, and have known, throughout my life, than you are. Maybe that's crazy talk, but you know what a nut I am.

Sorry typo. Anyway I just went on payscale.com and the average salary for a Copy Writer in New York City, New York comes in at $65,294
You're hardly doing badly...

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Investing money in foreign countries doesn't take money out of THE ECONOMY. THE ECONOMY is international, and the money you put in foreign economies comes back anyway. That's nationalist bullshit.

Water... my degree is in economics... I respect your desire to learn and develop your knowledge base, but please don't act as if you have an understanding on economics yet. You obviously do not. While the global economy is certainly becoming more intertwined... it is not completely so.

IF I take a million and invest it in Chinese start-up companies, the Chinese benefit. People in this country will not benefit from that investment. That money may not ever come back to this country as I will likely continue to invest that money over seas.

It you prefer an example closer to home.... If I live in Colorado and invest in a start up in Mississippi.... who benefits the most? The people in CO? or the people in Mississippi? (HINT: Where are the jobs going to be?)