Fiscal Cliff Avoided but

Your taxes will still be going up. The deficit was not addressed and nothing has changed with the Eurozone either. Debt, debt and more debt everywhere equals higher taxes and prices too.

Be careful before going all in on some temporary rally. Once everything is digested the markets have to come down based on nothing with any meaning being fixed or even addressed.

Just more can kicking!

As you pointed out 'gambler , the deficit was not addressed in the fiscal cliff agreement.    This was only a stopgap measure and not a solution.  Changes must be made to the entitlements (Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security), if we are to fix this country's debt problems. These are the main drivers of the debt issue.
Just get used to the notion that the retirement age will be increased, and will have less of a payout once you do get your SS checks.



It's unfortunate so many folks are duped by the media and fall prey to this victim mentality...  like it's the rich that are causing this country's problems.    
Memo to you folks, particularly you on the left... Taxing the rich more might make you feel better, but it's not what caused us to get here... and it won't fix the country's debt problems. 

Well Rush51, I disagree on the so-called entitlements. I believe there would be more than enough money in the coffers if our elected officials didn't rob them to fund other things that weren't meant to be funded by SS.

On a side note: if our reps were in the SS pool as well, things would be quite different.

BTW, I am retired so let's abolish the IRS and have a  federal sales tax of say 15% or (whatever % it works out to) on anything one purchases?  Everyone pays the same %, with no deductions, no state or local taxes either.

Just a flat sales tax for everything would pay for everything. Retirement, health insurance, military, welfare, section 8 housing or whatever. Even the free loaders would pay something.

Interesting....

gambler,

I 100% disagree. SS is not properly funded, you are biased like my inlaws and parents are biased. You are a current taker of SS so of course you think it should not be modified or changed. That does not mean it should not be changed..you are just taking now and not willing to sacrifice. SS was never meant as a retirement entitlement, it just evolved into such.

Politicians do not keep their jobs by properly funding SS and especially Medicare. But know this..you are being paid out of the pockets of current workers, so thank your kids and grandkids who are paying for your retirement.

Medicare is positively underfunded by a million percent. You contributed how much in your life into Medicare? At 2% it isnt much..consider how costly secondary insurance is for you, that is merely secondary. I know my inlaws pay close to 500 bucks a month for reasonable secondary insurance. How much would private insurance cost you for even what Medicare provides? You would whip through your 2% contribution (it was even less when you were younger) in a mere few years based on premiums alone..let alone the benefit you gain in excess of premiums.

My father in law had a few surgeries like hip replacement etc and consider how much that costs and all the constant doctor appts senior citizens need.

Who pays for your Medicare coverage? Is it the magical government? No it is the taxpayer..you are receiving medical insurance off the back of the current working class.

So easy with the taking when you are complaining about other parts of government. You are receiving  HUGE social benefit and that has a cost..a cost that is borne by the current payee.

I agree with you here, Wall... 

'Gambler, there are plenty of factors that require a change to SS... One of them being folks are living much longer than they were when SS was created.   What was the average life expectancy when created ?   Now, folks are living 20+ years longer than when it was created. 

Now, compound what I just mentioned with the fact that Baby Boomers are gonna sock the system dry.  Just so many folks to support, and so few payees (i.e. workers) to support  the system... and the trend will not get any better soon.


Long story short.. Change is gonna come... And we all should start planning for a retirement less funded by our government.

Just collecting what I and my employers have contributed. I agree change is necessary for the younger peeps and yes, they will contribute more but then so will their employers.

Once again a flat federal  sales tax (of an unknown % by me) could get us in the black rather quickly. This garbage doesn't seem like brain surgery to me.

Yeah I know SS will be changed but not on the backs of those already collecting and living off that income. We are also the ones that put our lives on the line to protect YOUR freedom so you can girl about everything.

Wall, I said that politicians are NOT included in SS. They get their salary for LIFE along with FREE medical as well.

Well that goes both ways..

My inlaws worked for a government agency for 25 yrs each, they get the government pension/401k depending on when they started..they do not get SS but they do not contribute, since in theory it is overlap..

So the point about politicians and SS isnt fully accurate..whatever they contribute into SS in the private sector they get in SS, if they dont contribute via the government they do not get SS..so its a flat ending equation.

Not flat ending if the taxpayers still foot the bill and who pays for your in-laws medical?

I also just saw the FICA aka Federal Insurance Contributions Act aka SS has risen from 4.2% to 6.2% for individuals with jobs. Nice chunk of change there and no one was the wiser until they got their check.

The 4.2 was a temporary stupid move to stimulate the economy, so short term fun and long term pain. The percentage probably needs to be closer to 10% to save the program and it should have been higher for 30 yrs..the 6.2 is what it has been for a very long time, the drop was a bad idea but it is now gone anyway.

Who is paying for Medicare? The current payee and taxpayers. Medicare is not self sufficient, it is a huge cost to the government, it is funded by the taxpayer and the government..meaning government debt..so your Medicare, my in-laws Medicare is paid for by your kids and grandkids..via debt which will be paid back by others than you.

My comment about flat is that if the government employee does not pay IN to SS, they do not get the pay OUT of SS..so it is a net zero equation. No payin and no payout.

Tax system is so complicated... you could spend years trying to understand all of the odds and ends. The super wealthy love it complicated as they can afford to spend $1000 an hour on people who know the laws inside and out and will use the loopholes to minimize their tax liability.

I like the idea of a straight sales tax with a built-in luxury tax. Meaning as the value of the item increases...so does the tax rate. Am sure mathematically the best rates could be calculated to maximize revenue.

Also estate tax should be based on the same premise... the more wealth you have... the higher rate lost to the government.

I would still like to see ALL government employees included in the SS system. It would save billions of dollars of the taxpayers  money but who da hell would vote for that?  This one perk is why most politico's run for office in the first place!

1.  Disagree... the "spending"  side of the equation needs to be better addressed than the "revenue" side of the equation.. Where have we learned this before ?

2.  No thanks.  The Europeans can have their VAT where they tax everything.   Some of you folks amaze me.   You honestly believe your government would do away with other taxes, or reduce them, for the sake of a federal sales tax?    Christ almighty .

3.  It's good to know you older folks know the meaning of shared sacrifice.  I hope you have  a good conversations with your grand kids to let 'em know what's coming !

A more healthy approach to solving problems is view it as "we're all in this together."     Where  you come about with this rich vs. poor is the same type of rhetoric we've come to expect from the President and Media .   It is destructive, achieves no goal,  and pits Americans versus fellow Americans.   I wish it would end.

Why is this is so difficult for folks to understand that is serves no good.

National Rifle Association , Calryle Industries...  ??

Stick to the conversation at hand.. You are on a tangent to Mars.  

"You honestly believe your government would do away with other taxes, or reduce them, for the sake of a federal sales tax?"

 

Of course they won't... why would the wealthy give up one of their biggest advantages? Wealthy people can pay accountants and lawyers $1000 an hour to find loopholes in the system. And those loopholes exist because the people in Washington plan on exploiting it too. Even Warren Buffet mentioned he pays less in taxes than many who work for him. And we all saw what rate Romney paid last year...lower than alot of middle class families.

Rich versus poor debate exists because the issue itself exists.  Wealth is like a country club... they like to pick and choose the members and make rules to totally restrict membership. Lets look at some of the obstacles a poor or middle class kid will face in their pursuit of wealth:

Quality of education:  Poor and middle class children most likely have to attend public schools...often in places that don't have the greatest teachers in the world. Wealthy children have choices on what school or being home schooled.

College:  The impact above then impacts what college a student can attend. Also coming from wealth has its advantages here. Higher education is becoming more expensive and money can get you into your college for the right price and you don't have to worry about student debt.

Post college:  Depending on your degree you will then enter the professional work force. Now days unless you goto a top of the line university or graduate towards the top of your class good luck getting one of the premiere jobs. Also for those poor and middle class kids you begin to feel the pressure of repaying debt.  Most get married at this point of life too. Meaning added pressure to find house and to save money for children. 

Mid-life:  Most people are married at this time and have children. This is the time where poor and middle class people have to pay higher mortgage rates- car insurance rates and might have to worry about credit card interest rates. Rich people do not.

The United States is one of the hardest countries to break out of the economic setting you are born into. The rules are set to keep people right where they are. Yes some do manage to defy the odds with hard work and a little luck. But the vast majority are behind the 8 ball to start.

 

I'm highlighting the two most important words in your post for good reason.   The rest is filled with lots of "victim mentality" talk that makes excuses for people to continue living in their "garbage" .

BTW, a couple of other notes for you.  There's nothing wrong with public schools.... and when you do attend college..  What degree you choose is far more important than what college you attend.  

I can tell from your writing style you are intelligent.  Very well organized thoughts, they are just factually incorrect/very biased.

I will go in order of sentences I bolded. 

1) I am not his accountant, so I can only go with information I can find online, but accordingly to sites I've seen, Warren Buffett paid $6.9 million in income taxes in 2011. If he has other individuals working for him that paid more in taxes than he did, I would love that job.  I believe the point you were trying to make was his effective tax rate may have been lower than individuals working for him.  Don't feel bad, for whatever reason, alot of people in this country can't wrap their head around this concept.  How much did you pay in taxes last year?  I can tell you, I lead a very comfortable lifestyle, and Buffett still paid over 200 times the amount of income taxes I paid.  Your average American, he probably paid well over 1,000 times the tax.  Can you make the argument he receives a benefit close to 1,000 times the average American?  This argument is complete uninformed rhetoric.

2) Who is "they?" And how do you define "wealth?" I can tell you that in my career, I have worked with many individuals who came from working class families where neither parent went to college, and have become extremely successful, the type of career path I would kill for.  I'm talking executives with Fortune 500 companies, pulling down a couple of million a year including options.  To me, that is pretty wealthy.  No one "restricted membership" for them.  They were intelligent, hard working, charismatic individuals, and they became successful.

3) Nothing in this paragraph makes any sense.  Anyone can be homeschooled, regardless of wealth.  I'm also not sure I've ever heard of a correlation between wealthy people/home schooling/and increased success.  I've always equated home schooling with more of a belief system, if there is some correlation between that and wealthy individuals, it is not one I've been aware of.  In terms of "public schools" plenty of very successful individuals come from public schools.  Im my area, alot of individuals send their kids to Catholic schools, but public schools actually have as good of, if not a better reputation.

4) Outside of going to medical school/law school, the prestige of your college is significantly overrated.  I went to a pretty good school (you can figure it out from my screename), I have the same exact career path as individuals who went to schools which cost 1/3 the amount of mine.  Temple, Penn State, Widener, etc. are local schools that produced a large number of my peers (along with more expensive schools like Villanova and St. Joe's).  But the point is, we all start in the same place, and it takes inner-personal skills and intelligence to advance, and that is not something that a Wake Forest (or even Harvard/Yale, etc) education gives you more of an advantage.

5) This is not true as evidenced above.  If your definition of "premier job" is solely inclusive of lawyer/doctor, maybe there'd be some volitity to your point (I'm not as familiar with those industries, so I cannot 100% refute).  In regards to the business world, this could not be farther from the truth.

6) Now we are moving away from "wealthy" and trying to make a statement about hard working students who graduate towards the top of their class?

7) I'm not sure I understand the correlation between socio-economic status and mortgage rates?  Live within your means, and you can easily maintain a high credit score and get low rates.  If you are riddled with debt and are a credit risk, maybe it is not the right time to buy a house.  Homeownership is a privilege, not a right

 

I'm glad this thread upgraded itself into most common human debate between those who already have it and want to protect what they have by all means (naturally) using Ivy rhetoric and those who have been standing in line too long before realizing the line is never going to move unless you do something about it. 

Seems I'm alone here. While every company announces more layoffs the market still continues to go up???

I'm not buying the BS. Consumers spend more in December?, no garbage it's Christmas. Consumer debt is also rising again but no one reports that?

Question for the bulls, How safe is your job? Couldn't a company hire some new college grad for less than half your salary to do the same thing?

Earnings Reports? Don't they have to be up with the layoffs and telling those who are left that they are lucky to have a job? No garbage, people have families and need food & shelter.

ALL this market stuff is 100% fabricated BS and spun in a way to make the masses think it's getting when it IS NOT.