|
|
Post by JOCAZTEC on Jan 13, 2013 9:08:51 GMT -8
I have been hearing it all week. Everyone receiving a paycheck is madder than a cat in a swimming pool. Holy batman.
The two percent increase in the horrific gross wage tax on everyone's wages is causing more anger. It is no wonder that the US government is trying to get everyone to come down with the flu, norovirus (stay away from Utah).
Oh, did you not know this when you cast your vote in the last election?
Just wait for the rest of the new taxes to kick and kill us all.
TAXTAXTAXTAXTAXTAXTAXTAXTAX
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jan 13, 2013 14:14:27 GMT -8
This issue is funny.
|
|
|
|
Post by JOCAZTEC on Jan 19, 2013 8:04:43 GMT -8
Oh my, I overheard on the bus to the salt mine yesterday two young "dudes" talking about their paychecks, and wow, were they angry! Wow nelly. They had a "good" opinion what your US government should about guns, your Congress and the Prez.
Hey, speaking of fun, why don't you try this, this weekend? Find someone who loves Prezident Osama and who voted, again for the cheater, and then ask them how they like their New, Osama-second term, Net Paycheck! But, be sure to stand back a step or two when you ask.
Oh, and just remember, employees, your Prezident DID not give the employer that same two percent discount. And, why not?
TAXTAXTAXTAXTAXTAXTAX
|
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Jan 19, 2013 10:15:58 GMT -8
More to add to the President's promise that no middle class taxpayer would see a tax increase under his presidency. My rake home pay has eroded due to govt imposed taxes and increased costs such as health care.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using proboards
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jan 20, 2013 11:29:33 GMT -8
What I find really funny or strange about this issue is that the increase in withholding is just restoring the income stream that goes to fund Social Security. If you see it as a tax increase, you are right. If you saw it originally as making a tax cut to the wrong tax, you are really right.
What we really should be talking about is getting Social Security on sound ground. We should be thinking about cutting spending on wasteful programs and looking to enhance revenue to the government by looking at the tax code overall for fairness and simplification.
I abhor paying taxes to fund waste. I would not mind a modest increase in my taxes if spending was reined in and we got on a permanent path to cutting the deficit.
Cut the Departments of Energy and Education and we have a start.
|
|
|
|
Post by tuff on Jan 21, 2013 9:46:00 GMT -8
To all the morons who voted for this jerk, you get what you pay for. Didn't anyone tell you Santa Clause is fake.? Cutting the dept. of energy, education and labor are good starts.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jan 21, 2013 13:46:21 GMT -8
What I find really funny or strange about this issue is that the increase in withholding is just restoring the income stream that goes to fund Social Security. If you see it as a tax increase, you are right. If you saw it originally as making a tax cut to the wrong tax, you are really right. What we really should be talking about is getting Social Security on sound ground. We should be thinking about cutting spending on wasteful programs and looking to enhance revenue to the government by looking at the tax code overall for fairness and simplification. I abhor paying taxes to fund waste. I would not mind a modest increase in my taxes if spending was reined in and we got on a permanent path to cutting the deficit. Cut the Departments of Energy and Education and we have a start. Most of your post I agree with. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jan 21, 2013 13:49:27 GMT -8
To all the morons who voted for this jerk, you get what you pay for. Didn't anyone tell you Santa Clause is fake.? Cutting the dept. of energy, education and labor are good starts. Sequester will take care of the cuts. |
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Jan 21, 2013 13:57:17 GMT -8
To all the morons who voted for this jerk, you get what you pay for. Didn't anyone tell you Santa Clause is fake.? Cutting the dept. of energy, education and labor are good starts. Sequester will take care of the cuts. Sequestration is an abrogation of congresses duties. I support a movement to fire all of them if they fail. Both sides. Sent from my DROID RAZR using proboards |
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Jan 22, 2013 11:51:28 GMT -8
What I find really funny or strange about this issue is that the increase in withholding is just restoring the income stream that goes to fund Social Security. If you see it as a tax increase, you are right. If you saw it originally as making a tax cut to the wrong tax, you are really right. What we really should be talking about is getting Social Security on sound ground. We should be thinking about cutting spending on wasteful programs and looking to enhance revenue to the government by looking at the tax code overall for fairness and simplification. I abhor paying taxes to fund waste. I would not mind a modest increase in my taxes if spending was reined in and we got on a permanent path to cutting the deficit. Cut the Departments of Energy and Education and we have a start. Most of your post I agree with. Me too. My opinion is that the original 2% reduction should have never been done in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jan 22, 2013 13:21:07 GMT -8
Dang! Common ground! What is up? Earthquake on the way?
|
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jan 22, 2013 14:13:21 GMT -8
Dang! Common ground! What is up? Earthquake on the way? You are leaving the darkside... and coming to the light.  |
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Jan 22, 2013 14:27:42 GMT -8
Dang! Common ground! What is up? Earthquake on the way? |
|
|
|
Post by gocoaztec on Jan 23, 2013 18:41:19 GMT -8
Most of your post I agree with. Me too. My opinion is that the original 2% reduction should have never been done in the first place. Why not make it voluntary? Even if you are forced (coerced) to invest the same amount, why not let us choose? The ss rate of return varies from criminal to pathetic. But the worst aspect is that the program "balances", and I use that term loosely, on the fact that a certain number of people will die before they receive any benefits. In many cases all of their "investment" is lost. This type of "investment" is one of the reasons that we have so many families that have lived in America for generations yet have accumulated little to no wealth. SS is an inefficient gov't program that is a bad deal for many Americans. Have you ever wondered why the very vocal supporters of SS in the congress have exempted themselves from the program? |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jan 23, 2013 21:59:03 GMT -8
Me too. My opinion is that the original 2% reduction should have never been done in the first place. Why not make it voluntary? Even if you are forced (coerced) to invest the same amount, why not let us choose? The ss rate of return varies from criminal to pathetic. But the worst aspect is that the program "balances", and I use that term loosely, on the fact that a certain number of people will die before they receive any benefits. In many cases all of their "investment" is lost. This type of "investment" is one of the reasons that we have so many families that have lived in America for generations yet have accumulated little to no wealth. SS is an inefficient gov't program that is a bad deal for many Americans. Have you ever wondered why the very vocal supporters of SS in the congress have exempted themselves from the program? It is not an investment. It is a tax. If you want to choose to invest for your retirement you have plenty of options. It is really a plan to keep our lower income citizens from penury in their elder years. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jan 24, 2013 6:46:04 GMT -8
Why not make it voluntary? Even if you are forced (coerced) to invest the same amount, why not let us choose? The ss rate of return varies from criminal to pathetic. But the worst aspect is that the program "balances", and I use that term loosely, on the fact that a certain number of people will die before they receive any benefits. In many cases all of their "investment" is lost. This type of "investment" is one of the reasons that we have so many families that have lived in America for generations yet have accumulated little to no wealth. SS is an inefficient gov't program that is a bad deal for many Americans. Have you ever wondered why the very vocal supporters of SS in the congress have exempted themselves from the program? It is not an investment. It is a tax. If you want to choose to invest for your retirement you have plenty of options. It is really a plan to keep our lower income citizens from penury in their elder years. Good point, but I would add that it is an inefficient tax in that the expenses that the tax funds are projected to overwhelm the program in the not too distant future unless relatively simple changes are made. |
|
