Good post
Public Believes "Facts" that Don't Happen to Be True
- Thread starter Pack66Dad
- Start date
Good post
Daddubo
New Member
I just found out from my tax lady that Municipal employees can not collect from SS even if they have paid into it because they get a Municipal pension the only ones that can are the Politicians in Washington gee how did that happen?:huh:
Pseudomind
Active Member
- Jul 1, 2008
- 2,122
- Boat Info
- 2011 Hurricane with Magic Tilt Trailer
- Engines
- 115 HP Yamaha Four Stroke
This is just some generalities which come to my mind, and is not aimed at any one individual or group.
Are the folks currently on welfare, Social security, SSI etc. counted as the unemployed?
If not counted as unemployed is it better to pay them and not have them counted towards the unemployed? Is this what congress has been doing all along? I however believe it is nothing more then vote buying
Currently folks on welfare, Social Security, SSI etc. payments were stopped where would they go into the work force at? As we now have anywhere from 12-20 million ILLEGAL ALIENS, they are not UN-Documented immigrants.
The one answer I see is to put theses folks to work doing the jobs the illegal aliens are doing. I mean how do we keep the illegal aliens, and find enough jobs for those on the dole and the current unemployed?
There appears to be a goodly amount of gray money passing through and no taxation on it. I can readily see why the push for a flat tax, but how are you going to stop all states, cities, etc from imposing fees/ registration costs instead of taxes, does property tax now become owners fee?
If Social Security were phased out, what happens to the current withholding does this now blend into income tax?
Why do I have to pay $4-5,000.00 more into taxes so someone can obtain this amount back in unearned income credit? Do not give me the "Stimulate the economy crapola," I can spend the same money and stimulate quite well
Racism issues? I am willing to bet 500 years after I am gone, this dead horse issue will still be floundering, providing this nation lasts that long. Just when did the white race come into existence? Long before the USA was around. According to the scholars the entire human race started in what is known as Africa. So how is it only those in the USA are responsible for all of humankind's ilk's? If one wants to stop racism, then statistical counts need to be stopped and we start with just people rights. Was a wrong committed against a person, yes or no?:huh:
This litany could go on and on, but I think you may get my point.
How does that old adage go about seeing the enemy and the enemy is us:thumbsup:
Are the folks currently on welfare, Social security, SSI etc. counted as the unemployed?
If not counted as unemployed is it better to pay them and not have them counted towards the unemployed? Is this what congress has been doing all along? I however believe it is nothing more then vote buying
Currently folks on welfare, Social Security, SSI etc. payments were stopped where would they go into the work force at? As we now have anywhere from 12-20 million ILLEGAL ALIENS, they are not UN-Documented immigrants.
The one answer I see is to put theses folks to work doing the jobs the illegal aliens are doing. I mean how do we keep the illegal aliens, and find enough jobs for those on the dole and the current unemployed?
There appears to be a goodly amount of gray money passing through and no taxation on it. I can readily see why the push for a flat tax, but how are you going to stop all states, cities, etc from imposing fees/ registration costs instead of taxes, does property tax now become owners fee?
If Social Security were phased out, what happens to the current withholding does this now blend into income tax?
Why do I have to pay $4-5,000.00 more into taxes so someone can obtain this amount back in unearned income credit? Do not give me the "Stimulate the economy crapola," I can spend the same money and stimulate quite well
Racism issues? I am willing to bet 500 years after I am gone, this dead horse issue will still be floundering, providing this nation lasts that long. Just when did the white race come into existence? Long before the USA was around. According to the scholars the entire human race started in what is known as Africa. So how is it only those in the USA are responsible for all of humankind's ilk's? If one wants to stop racism, then statistical counts need to be stopped and we start with just people rights. Was a wrong committed against a person, yes or no?:huh:
This litany could go on and on, but I think you may get my point.
How does that old adage go about seeing the enemy and the enemy is us:thumbsup:
Last edited:
floriduramax1
Active Member
- Sep 19, 2010
- 1,727
- Boat Info
- 280DA, Magic Tilt triple axle, 2006 GMC 2500 D/A
- Engines
- T4.3/ Alpha
Now were talking! If I have to take a drug test to get a job...to pay taxes..to pay welfare and UN-earned income credit for dead beats that have more children to receive more cash, then why should they not have to take a drug test to receive said money:huh: Why can't we round up all the folks on unemployment, welfare, and any other hand out program (those that are healthy enough) and have them cleaning public facilities and such:smt013 My daughter is included in this:smt013:smt013 I see first hand how the gubment is "bribing" people to not work...basically! It pisses me off to no end to watch her (with her dead beat loser lazy azz white wanna-b-black hubby) collect between 9-11k each year and not pay in a dime, while I am working 7 days a week bustin my azz trying to operate a new business!! This system is totally effed up! Make these dead beats pick tomatos and do road work, and boot the illegals...IMHO!!!
Woody
Well-Known Member
Daddubo
New Member
Nope I went down to the office she works for coffee and we were BSing this morning and we were talking about SS and she told me because her husband is a Chicago Cop and going to get a pension paid by the City and that he can not collect SS. I told her when I was a kid (1963) that one of the car sales man was a City Employee he could work 5 years in the public sector and pay in to SS and then he could get SS and her boss the owner of the company said that was true but not any more. I will go down and get the section of the Tax Law on this if you would like.
Woody
Well-Known Member
You said Municipal employees can't collect from SS, as an across the board statement that is simply not true.
Quote: Originally Posted by Daddubo
I just found out from my tax lady that Municipal employees can not collect from SS even if they have paid into it because they get a Municipal pension the only ones that can are the Politicians in Washington gee how did that happen?
Your comment included all municipal employees, all locations...not just Chicago, not just IL but everywhere. Here's a link to the Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund covering approx 270,000 current member and benefit recipients. It appear Chicago is doing something different. http://www.imrf.org/info/faq.htm
From the frequently asked questions:
IMRF and Social Security
Question: I am getting ready to retire and collect my IMRF pension. I was told that my Social Security benefits would be reduced because of my IMRF pension. Is this true?
Answer: No. When you participate in IMRF, you, like most members, also contribute to Social Security. Therefore, you are entitled to the benefits of both IMRF and Social Security. Your IMRF retirement benefits do not affect your Social Security benefits, or vice versa, in any way.
At retirement, you are entitled to full benefits from both. Your IMRF benefits are never reduced because you receive Social Security benefits, and your Social Security benefits generally are not reduced because you receive IMRF benefits. The only exception to this rule is if you earned service credit with IMRF during years that you did not also contribute to Social Security.
You should be aware that even though Social Security and IMRF do not affect each other, your pension benefits from other pension funds may be subject to a Social Security offset. If you are participating in a Reciprocal system, you should contact that system or the Social Security Administration to find out the rules that apply to that plan and Social Security.
In an earlier post you suggest Congress should be dropped from full pay when they retire.
Quote: Originally Posted by Daddubo
Why is it that they always want to cut retirement? How about cutting departments that would save Billions like the Energy Dept. and the Dept. of Education. Stop all subsidies to the Oil Companies and they would start paying fair market value to drilling on Federal land. Then any one with wealth over 1mil they are dropped from SS rolls they would still pay but not receive. Congress and the Senate would be dropped from full pay when they retire and they would go to ½ pay after 20 and then put on the same structure an the military where they would get 2% year increase after 20, that should save a few buck$
They don’t get full pay when they retire.:smt101 Just another myth that has a good following. I’ll also remind you that the House of Representatives and the Senate are what’s called Congress.
My point is that we have enough real reasons to be dissatisfied. Enough real problems to be corrected. You have touched on some of them with your numerous posts. Why add fuel to the fire with misleading, inaccurate statements and myths. We have far to many people that don’t understand what’s going on, they believe anything they hear and the scary part is they vote too. Why put stuff out there that adds to the confusion.
- Mar 25, 2008
- 5,522
- Boat Info
- 2006 Sea Ray 58 DB
- Engines
- MAN CRM V8-900s, Twin Disc Drives; Onan 21.5 Generator
[FONT="]>> THE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED IN BEER
>>
>> Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100...
>>
>> If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...
>>
>> The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
>> The fifth would pay $1.
>> The sixth would pay $3.
>> The seventh would pay $7..
>> The eighth would pay $12.
>> The ninth would pay $18.
>> The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
>>
>> So, that's what they decided to do..
>>
>> The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.
>>
>> The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men ? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?
>>
>> They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
>>
>> So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
>>
>> And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
>> The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
>> The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
>> The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
>> The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
>> The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
>>
>> Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.
>>
>> "I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,"but he got $10!"
>>
>> "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"
>>
>> "That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
>>
>> "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
>>
>> The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
>>
>> The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
>>
>> And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat
>> friendlier.
>>
>> David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
>> Professor of Economics.
>>
>> For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
>> For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible .
>>
[/FONT]
>>
>> Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100...
>>
>> If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...
>>
>> The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
>> The fifth would pay $1.
>> The sixth would pay $3.
>> The seventh would pay $7..
>> The eighth would pay $12.
>> The ninth would pay $18.
>> The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
>>
>> So, that's what they decided to do..
>>
>> The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.
>>
>> The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men ? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?
>>
>> They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
>>
>> So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
>>
>> And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
>> The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
>> The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
>> The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
>> The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
>> The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
>>
>> Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.
>>
>> "I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,"but he got $10!"
>>
>> "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"
>>
>> "That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
>>
>> "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
>>
>> The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
>>
>> The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
>>
>> And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat
>> friendlier.
>>
>> David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
>> Professor of Economics.
>>
>> For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
>> For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible .
>>
[/FONT]
Daddubo
New Member
Do Members of Congress Pay Social Security Taxes?
Lawmakers do pay 8 percent of their salaries into their pension system, although this only compensates for about 1/5 of the typical lifetime benefit. We cover the rest as taxpayers.
Member of Congress began to pay into Social Security in 1983, as part of a government-wide pension overhaul.
In addition, Members of Congress DO NOT draw the “same pension” as their pay in the last year of office as suggested in a rumor circulating on the Internet; only federal judges do that under the term “retirement pay.” Still, the formula is quite generous, and, with 20-25 years, a Member of Congress could retire with up to 80 percent of his or her salary replaced. Of course, the only cap on how fast their benefits rise is the rate of increase in CPI. For this reason, Congressional pensions can and frequently do exceed a Member’s final salary, but only after a few years in retirement, when COLAS begin to kick in.
In the final analysis, Congressional pension benefits are 2-3 times more generous than what a similarly-salaried executive could expect to receive upon retiring from the private sector. That ought to be enough to concern any taxpayer.
Additional information concerning pay and perks is available in NTUF Policy Paper 131.
Click Here for Additional FAQs on Congressional Pay, Pensions, and Perks
Lawmakers do pay 8 percent of their salaries into their pension system, although this only compensates for about 1/5 of the typical lifetime benefit. We cover the rest as taxpayers.
Member of Congress began to pay into Social Security in 1983, as part of a government-wide pension overhaul.
In addition, Members of Congress DO NOT draw the “same pension” as their pay in the last year of office as suggested in a rumor circulating on the Internet; only federal judges do that under the term “retirement pay.” Still, the formula is quite generous, and, with 20-25 years, a Member of Congress could retire with up to 80 percent of his or her salary replaced. Of course, the only cap on how fast their benefits rise is the rate of increase in CPI. For this reason, Congressional pensions can and frequently do exceed a Member’s final salary, but only after a few years in retirement, when COLAS begin to kick in.
In the final analysis, Congressional pension benefits are 2-3 times more generous than what a similarly-salaried executive could expect to receive upon retiring from the private sector. That ought to be enough to concern any taxpayer.
Additional information concerning pay and perks is available in NTUF Policy Paper 131.
Click Here for Additional FAQs on Congressional Pay, Pensions, and Perks
Daddubo
New Member
Woody
Well-Known Member
Daddubo
New Member
It is confusing when you read this:
. What is the Government Pension Offset (GPO)?
A. The GPO is a federal law that applies to nearly everyone receiving a public pension from work not covered by Social Security.* If the public pensioner is also eligible for a Social Security spouse or widow's benefit, the law requires that the benefit be offset by an amount equal to 2/3 of the public pension
AND THIS
Q. How does the GPO work?
A. Here's an example. Let's say Ann Jones was employed by the city parks department for 20 years. She retires with an average-size pension of $900 a month. Her husband Ben, a trucker, retires with a Social Security benefit of $1,200 a month. Normally, Ann would be entitled to a Social Security spouse benefit of her own, equivalent to an extra 50% of Ben's: $600. But due to the GPO, Ann is forced to subtract $600 (2/3 of her $900 public pension check), completely eliminating her Social Security benefit. If Ann becomes widowed in the future, the same offset will apply to her Social Security widow's benefit.
. What is the Government Pension Offset (GPO)?
A. The GPO is a federal law that applies to nearly everyone receiving a public pension from work not covered by Social Security.* If the public pensioner is also eligible for a Social Security spouse or widow's benefit, the law requires that the benefit be offset by an amount equal to 2/3 of the public pension
AND THIS
Q. How does the GPO work?
A. Here's an example. Let's say Ann Jones was employed by the city parks department for 20 years. She retires with an average-size pension of $900 a month. Her husband Ben, a trucker, retires with a Social Security benefit of $1,200 a month. Normally, Ann would be entitled to a Social Security spouse benefit of her own, equivalent to an extra 50% of Ben's: $600. But due to the GPO, Ann is forced to subtract $600 (2/3 of her $900 public pension check), completely eliminating her Social Security benefit. If Ann becomes widowed in the future, the same offset will apply to her Social Security widow's benefit.
