Ouch!!! The tax increase sucks

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

child of wonder

Diamond Member
Aug 31, 2006
8,307
175
106
$85 per check is what I went down. Sucks but I just paid off my student loan which almost negates that. Should be getting a raise in 2 months as well.
 

Keeper

Senior member
Mar 9, 2005
932
0
71
This. Never understood people who allow the government to hold their money interest free. My mom told me this when I was 11 and she showed me how to fill out taxes, it was the first thing she taught me actually.


So.... For the first ten years of your life she was in prison?
 

Golgatha

Lifer
Jul 18, 2003
12,640
1,482
126
This, so this. Most of the higher percentage GDP countries provide more government services. It's all about value per dollar taxed. I get the joy of seeing how much less I'm making in take home pay tomorrow. Should be fun!

Yeah, that tax hike and lowered health benefits (while paying more for them) really gets me in a mood to vote out every last incumbent politician in Washington that I have the ability to.
 

Wreckem

Diamond Member
Sep 23, 2006
9,458
987
126
I'm making an assumption on your age but I guarantee you won't see a single penny you put into SS when your turn comes.

Social "security" my ass.

Thats the republican fear mongering. SS will only be reduced/extinct if the republicans get their way and they get to gut SS.

SS is easy to fix and will eventually be fixed to where it can be kicked out indefinately.
 

Jeffg010

Diamond Member
Feb 22, 2008
3,438
1
0
Thats the republican fear mongering. SS will only be reduced/extinct if the republicans get their way and they get to gut SS.

SS is easy to fix and will eventually be fixed to where it can be kicked out indefinately.

What fix is that?
 

Keeper

Senior member
Mar 9, 2005
932
0
71
Ill be curious to see my check. My company has suspended pay hikes for the last 4 years & has even implemented unpaid furloughs.


YIKES. That is rough. We get one (Raise) "Stopped" every three years or so.
I used to keep a spreadsheet on my income. Pretty detailed.
I stopped (About 5 years ago) when for YEARS in a row I had LESS "disposable income" than the year prior.
My company is in that 2.5 to 3.5 percent raise mentality.
Just watching heat, light and taxes and gas and other expenses eat up what I was getting... YES Some of the expenses are discretionary.
And we have CUT way back.
We lost a negotiation between Verizon and cable and no one gave us a deal... So my cable net and phone went up 60 bucks....
Here is to SUMMER 2013 for a new push on that LOL.
Still. Its kinda depressing. Cant WAIT to see this check.
 

sze5003

Lifer
Aug 18, 2012
14,177
622
126
I would rather take that 2% and put it in my 401k than not have it at all. I'm pretty sure it won't be available when we get to that point the way the country is going.
 

TwiceOver

Lifer
Dec 20, 2002
13,544
44
91
I took another hit. We were investigating why my check seemed "off" and our controller discovered that she hadn't been taking out Dental/Vision coverage all last year even though I was on the plans and had used the benefits. So that is another small chunk that is now taken out, even though it should have been for me.

Ohh well, I can't complain. Still wish my tax dollars would go to the actual debt instead of back-door deals to make politicians "look good".
 

Regs

Lifer
Aug 9, 2002
16,665
21
81
I took another hit. We were investigating why my check seemed "off" and our controller discovered that she hadn't been taking out Dental/Vision coverage all last year even though I was on the plans and had used the benefits. So that is another small chunk that is now taken out, even though it should have been for me.

Ohh well, I can't complain. Still wish my tax dollars would go to the actual debt instead of back-door deals to make politicians "look good".

And people who do not re-purpose their fortunes to better the economy.
 

skimple

Golden Member
Feb 4, 2005
1,295
3
81
Thats the republican fear mongering. SS will only be reduced/extinct if the republicans get their way and they get to gut SS.

SS is easy to fix and will eventually be fixed to where it can be kicked out indefinately.

Yes, please enlighten us on your grand fix that has eluded every elected representative for the past 40 years.
 

TechBoyJK

Lifer
Oct 17, 2002
16,701
60
91
I get about a grand back. Interest on that is like nothing.

Why do that though? Just make your check setup so you break even at the end of the year.

You're not gaining anything by giving the gov your money and asking for it back.

I set it up each year so I OWE a little at the end, not the other way around.
 

sze5003

Lifer
Aug 18, 2012
14,177
622
126
Why do that though? Just make your check setup so you break even at the end of the year.

You're not gaining anything by giving the gov your money and asking for it back.

I set it up each year so I OWE a little at the end, not the other way around.

How do you know what to set it to say for example to owe just 10 bucks back ?
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
No guarantee that either of you will be able to understand this, but here goes:

Why SS cannot go bankrupt

Obviously you don't quite understand what that piece is saying, the limitations inherent in the example the author provides, and what it actually means. Going bankrupt for SS is a mere technicality. SS can certainly reach a point where the number of people receiving benefits grows quickly while the number of people paying into the fund grows slowly, and productivity increases won't be sufficient to cover the increasing outflows unless those paying into the system have to pay an ever-increasing share of their production into the system.

I know you'd like to live in a fairytale world where everything works wonderfully and everyone has everything they want and need. Here in the real world however, we realize that SS as it currently operates is not sustainable.

From NPR (that bastion of right wing conservatism ;) ):
It's now projected that the trust will no longer be able to fully fund benefits starting in 2033. That's more than two decades from now, but the new depletion date, as it's called, is three years earlier than last year's projections.

More money is paid out to SS recipients than is coming in. Without changes to SS, the SS trust fund will eventually run out ... ie ... "go bankrupt". At that point, money from the general budget will be used to pay for it, but the point remains.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,204
28,223
136
Obviously you don't quite understand what that piece is saying, the limitations inherent in the example the author provides, and what it actually means. Going bankrupt for SS is a mere technicality. SS can certainly reach a point where the number of people receiving benefits grows quickly while the number of people paying into the fund grows slowly, and productivity increases won't be sufficient to cover the increasing outflows unless those paying into the system have to pay an ever-increasing share of their production into the system.

I know you'd like to live in a fairytale world where everything works wonderfully and everyone has everything they want and need. Here in the real world however, we realize that SS as it currently operates is not sustainable.

From NPR (that bastion of right wing conservatism ;) ):


More money is paid out to SS recipients than is coming in. Without changes to SS, the SS trust fund will eventually run out ... ie ... "go bankrupt". At that point, money from the general budget will be used to pay for it, but the point remains.
Then you missed the point completely, because all that is needed are adjustments, which is all that was claimed in here, and you even agree.
 

Jeffg010

Diamond Member
Feb 22, 2008
3,438
1
0
Then you missed the point completely, because all that is needed are adjustments, which is all that was claimed in here, and you even agree.

The adjustments was to raise taxes is that what you want?
 

rh71

No Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
52,853
1,048
126
can someone tell us if we're getting social security money in about 30 years when our generation retires?
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
Then you missed the point completely, because all that is needed are adjustments, which is all that was claimed in here, and you even agree.

Wreckum said "SS is easy to fix". Apparently he's got some genius solution that nobody else has thought of yet, because SS is most certainly NOT "easy" to fix. Fixing the problem is going to potentially involve changes in eligibility requirements, increase contribution requirements, changes in indexation and so forth..... none of which is 'easy'. Complete Fail. As usual.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,204
28,223
136
The adjustments was to raise taxes is that what you want?
You are arguing semantics. What you call "raising taxes" I call "letting temporary tax cuts expire."

And yeah, I'd love to not have to pay taxes but in reality we do have to. Considering the size of our deficit I don't see any solution that doesn't raise taxes. It's easy to say cut spending until you try to get specific on what to cut. It's easy to say something like cut welfare until you realize that won't make much of a dent in the deficit and will result in much more crime. Or cut military spending until you realize that the result we be even less jobs when unemployment is already too high.

There are no simple fixes and all of the realistic fixes include higher taxes.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,204
28,223
136
Wreckum said "SS is easy to fix". Apparently he's got some genius solution that nobody else has thought of yet, because SS is most certainly NOT "easy" to fix. Fixing the problem is going to potentially involve changes in eligibility requirements, increase contribution requirements, changes in indexation and so forth..... none of which is 'easy'. Complete Fail. As usual.
SS is an easy fix. Raise retirement age. Doesn't get any easier than that.
 

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
The rates just went back to what they were before the temporary cut.

The temporary cut could have been made permanant if the prez backed off his raising taxes for the top 2% and instead focused on cutting spending/entitlements

now because he had punish a few we all feel the pain.