Thank you, the information is both the truth and a direct refutation of this totally California hating ultra conservative woman. I really do grow very tired of her. There is even an element in California of ultra conservatives that want California to do a Texas type of sillyness and leave the union of the USA. If that was to actually happen then the economy of the US would collapse totally over night, perhaps before this charming woman does another such idiotic cartoon she should think about such a consequence!
Luckily for everybody, there are those of us in California that are genuine unionists, and unlike the tea party types are not still fighting the civil war, so such an insane break will not happen!!
There’s a simple solution to all of the retirement issues. Just SCRAP THE CAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!………….The payroll tax that funds Social Security is levied only on a certain amount of income. This year it’s capped at $117,000. That means most wage earners will pay 6.2 percent of every dime they earn in 2014, but high earners will stop paying after passing the cap. This means some people face a much higher Social Security tax rate than others. Under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA), the Social Security tax is applied as a straight percentage of income; it’s levied at a rate of 12.4 percent of income. That has put the cap at the center of the debate over Social Security reform. Eliminating the cap on income subject to tax has been suggested often as a way to improve the program’s long-term funding gap. New payroll tax revenue could close the gap by 90 percent. Elimination of the cap also figures in a broader discussion aimed at addressing the looming retirement security crisis among middle- and lower-income households. Enhancing Social Security looks like the best solution to that problem.Who would be affected by a change in the cap? A CEPR analysis of 2011 Census Bureau data found that eliminating the cap would affect the pocketbooks of the top 5.2 percent of wage earners; lifting it to $250,000 would hit 1.3 percent. The affected workers would be 97.5 percent male and 98 percent white.More taxes for little return may not sound fair – until you recall that huge difference in the payroll tax rates Americans now pay. But the wealthy get one more benefit from paying higher taxes, argues Virginia Reno, vice president for income security at the National Academy of Social Insurance.“We support Social Security because they hope to get benefits someday, but also because we want to live in a society where everyone has basic security in retirement. High-income people have the ability to pay proportionately, and to live in a society where everyone has basic protection.“Wealthy people should think about the low-income people who contribute to the quality of their live in ways they never see,” she says. “They’re preparing meals for their kids at college, they’re daycare workers or hospital orderlies. Social Security is the only thing they can count on in retirement.”
there is a VAST difference between public pension systems and the Social Security Retirement system.1. the greedy demand to make the “rich” pay it all is a violation of one man, one vote, one tax rate we should have adopted. Fairness was thrown into a black hole early on in our history.-2.Illinois may be #1 in unfunded liabilities for pensions for state workers, including teachers. Politicians promised to high heaven, but did not use honest math and did not set aside monies as private businesses are legally required to do.-3.Illinois was run by Democrats my working lifetime (1948-2006) and Dems made it a high-tax state (long haul truck drivers would fill up in states on the east and west of Illinois before entering Illinois to avoid fillups and highest fuel taxes per gallon. All our state taxes have driven businesses to move away from Illinois. Taxers are stupid to expect all the sheep to lie down and be shorn continually!
California debt still is based in Measure 13 and Reagan measures of the era to cut or eliminate taxes as Governor. Reagan, like “W”, is the gift that keeps on taking, not giving.
The subsidies and giveaways to the “energy” industry btw, will swallow that penison debt, making it look like a tic tac swallowed by a sperm whale.
Libs talking about blue state governments remind me of an old joke. A Baptist, a Catholc, and a Christian Scientist are in hell. The Baptist thinks, “If I’d read the Bible I wouldn’t be here.” The Catholic thinks, " If I’d gone to Mass I wouldn’t be here." The Christian Scientist closes his eyes and covers his ears and repeats, “I’m not here. I’m not here. I’m not here.” Keep up the denial. In the end you can always move to a good state.
In the first place, you take the typical ultra conservative viewpoint here that anybody with an opinion to the left of the likes of Rush Limbaugh must be a liberal. Which is not even close to the truth in my own case. However, I will admit that anyone with a general middle of most issues viepoint must be some kind of a liberal to someone with your own view point, even if that is not the truth either.
If you must know I am a left over 1960’s technologically oriented hippy. I like the life style and cultrure of the 1960’s hippy movement even if I do not always agree with their political viewpoint. I am also very technologically oriented as I worked all my 38 working years in the highly technological area of aerospace. Heck, I was even one of the 400,000 or so people that worked on providing the hardware to place men on the moon.
I also do not quite understand why another California would not at least take a more blanced approach and sometimes at least show a certain amount of pride in one of the best place to live on this planet. Or at the very least stop making dissespecful cartoons about that very state, even if she also does not make any balancing cartoons in support of that state. All I am asking for is reasonableness, even if I am being too optimistic, one way or the other!!
frodo1008 over 9 years ago
Thank you, the information is both the truth and a direct refutation of this totally California hating ultra conservative woman. I really do grow very tired of her. There is even an element in California of ultra conservatives that want California to do a Texas type of sillyness and leave the union of the USA. If that was to actually happen then the economy of the US would collapse totally over night, perhaps before this charming woman does another such idiotic cartoon she should think about such a consequence!
Luckily for everybody, there are those of us in California that are genuine unionists, and unlike the tea party types are not still fighting the civil war, so such an insane break will not happen!!
nanellen over 9 years ago
and the Dems need to stop being racist, demo-rats
Diane Lee Premium Member over 9 years ago
There’s a simple solution to all of the retirement issues. Just SCRAP THE CAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!………….The payroll tax that funds Social Security is levied only on a certain amount of income. This year it’s capped at $117,000. That means most wage earners will pay 6.2 percent of every dime they earn in 2014, but high earners will stop paying after passing the cap. This means some people face a much higher Social Security tax rate than others. Under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA), the Social Security tax is applied as a straight percentage of income; it’s levied at a rate of 12.4 percent of income. That has put the cap at the center of the debate over Social Security reform. Eliminating the cap on income subject to tax has been suggested often as a way to improve the program’s long-term funding gap. New payroll tax revenue could close the gap by 90 percent. Elimination of the cap also figures in a broader discussion aimed at addressing the looming retirement security crisis among middle- and lower-income households. Enhancing Social Security looks like the best solution to that problem.Who would be affected by a change in the cap? A CEPR analysis of 2011 Census Bureau data found that eliminating the cap would affect the pocketbooks of the top 5.2 percent of wage earners; lifting it to $250,000 would hit 1.3 percent. The affected workers would be 97.5 percent male and 98 percent white.More taxes for little return may not sound fair – until you recall that huge difference in the payroll tax rates Americans now pay. But the wealthy get one more benefit from paying higher taxes, argues Virginia Reno, vice president for income security at the National Academy of Social Insurance.“We support Social Security because they hope to get benefits someday, but also because we want to live in a society where everyone has basic security in retirement. High-income people have the ability to pay proportionately, and to live in a society where everyone has basic protection.“Wealthy people should think about the low-income people who contribute to the quality of their live in ways they never see,” she says. “They’re preparing meals for their kids at college, they’re daycare workers or hospital orderlies. Social Security is the only thing they can count on in retirement.”
kline0800 over 9 years ago
there is a VAST difference between public pension systems and the Social Security Retirement system.1. the greedy demand to make the “rich” pay it all is a violation of one man, one vote, one tax rate we should have adopted. Fairness was thrown into a black hole early on in our history.-2.Illinois may be #1 in unfunded liabilities for pensions for state workers, including teachers. Politicians promised to high heaven, but did not use honest math and did not set aside monies as private businesses are legally required to do.-3.Illinois was run by Democrats my working lifetime (1948-2006) and Dems made it a high-tax state (long haul truck drivers would fill up in states on the east and west of Illinois before entering Illinois to avoid fillups and highest fuel taxes per gallon. All our state taxes have driven businesses to move away from Illinois. Taxers are stupid to expect all the sheep to lie down and be shorn continually!
Dtroutma over 9 years ago
California debt still is based in Measure 13 and Reagan measures of the era to cut or eliminate taxes as Governor. Reagan, like “W”, is the gift that keeps on taking, not giving.
The subsidies and giveaways to the “energy” industry btw, will swallow that penison debt, making it look like a tic tac swallowed by a sperm whale.
manteo16nc over 9 years ago
Libs talking about blue state governments remind me of an old joke. A Baptist, a Catholc, and a Christian Scientist are in hell. The Baptist thinks, “If I’d read the Bible I wouldn’t be here.” The Catholic thinks, " If I’d gone to Mass I wouldn’t be here." The Christian Scientist closes his eyes and covers his ears and repeats, “I’m not here. I’m not here. I’m not here.” Keep up the denial. In the end you can always move to a good state.
frodo1008 over 9 years ago
In the first place, you take the typical ultra conservative viewpoint here that anybody with an opinion to the left of the likes of Rush Limbaugh must be a liberal. Which is not even close to the truth in my own case. However, I will admit that anyone with a general middle of most issues viepoint must be some kind of a liberal to someone with your own view point, even if that is not the truth either.
If you must know I am a left over 1960’s technologically oriented hippy. I like the life style and cultrure of the 1960’s hippy movement even if I do not always agree with their political viewpoint. I am also very technologically oriented as I worked all my 38 working years in the highly technological area of aerospace. Heck, I was even one of the 400,000 or so people that worked on providing the hardware to place men on the moon.
I also do not quite understand why another California would not at least take a more blanced approach and sometimes at least show a certain amount of pride in one of the best place to live on this planet. Or at the very least stop making dissespecful cartoons about that very state, even if she also does not make any balancing cartoons in support of that state. All I am asking for is reasonableness, even if I am being too optimistic, one way or the other!!