dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Mar 3, 2021 23:13:58 GMT -5
I saw something on Twitter earlier today - AOC pointed out that McDonald's in Finland (I think) paid workers $22/hr. Not $15, but $22. A Big Mac was only $.35 more in that country vs in the US. Objections were raised that that country doesn't have a minimum wage. But they do have essentially universal union representation. So not only do they receive a decent wage, they also have 6 weeks of vacation, health insurance, paid family leave... So please explain to me again why the US can't also do this. That same Twitter post also said that that $22/hour worker in Denmark is paying $11 of their $22/hour in taxes. YIKES!
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Mar 3, 2021 23:20:47 GMT -5
That same Twitter post also said that that $22/hour worker in Denmark is paying $11 of their $22/hour in taxes. YIKES! I had a friend who emigrated from Sweden. My friend was a dentist, a periodontist and had his PhD. I asked him why he was uprooting his family to come here. His comment to me was that he could work his ass off educating himself, to make more money....but the more money he earned, the higher the percentage of taxes he paid. He was paying 75% of his income in taxes when he came to the US. Those benefits don’t come free.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,104
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 3, 2021 23:28:59 GMT -5
A quick search led to an article that said that anyone making double the average income was paying over 58% in taxes. Another comment found was that Finland doesn't tax the rich higher than everyone else, but they tax everyone as if they were rich.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,870
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 4, 2021 1:35:19 GMT -5
I had a friend who emigrated from Sweden. My friend was a dentist, a periodontist and had his PhD. I asked him why he was uprooting his family to come here. His comment to me was that he could work his ass off educating himself, to make more money....but the more money he earned, the higher the percentage of taxes he paid. He was paying 75% of his income in taxes when he came to the US. Those benefits don’t come free. there is a lot to unpack here, but you have to enter into a discussion about the fairness of the tax system, and i am really tired of that argument. so tired that i would rather move than have it again.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,870
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 4, 2021 1:44:15 GMT -5
A quick search led to an article that said that anyone making double the average income was paying over 58% in taxes. Another comment found was that Finland doesn't tax the rich higher than everyone else, but they tax everyone as if they were rich. the same could be said of the US, but it is kind of an inverse argument.
because anyone making over about $110k is not subject to SS tax in the US, the net effective rate actually declines in the 100-200k range before rising again to an asymptote at 37%. what is fucked up about the US is that we spend over 10% more on a GDP basis for our healthcare than the global average, for results that are inferior to many that are in the average or below average cost category. but that is not the grotesque part. the grotesque part is that this is part of the tax structure for other countries than ours. so we are comparing our taxes which don't include that amount to those that do. we need to "spot" other countries about 17%, if we want to get a realistic comparison. and when we do that, it puts us right up there with Sweden.
|
|
alabamagal
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 11:30:29 GMT -5
Posts: 8,113
|
Post by alabamagal on Mar 4, 2021 6:11:41 GMT -5
I had a friend who emigrated from Sweden. My friend was a dentist, a periodontist and had his PhD. I asked him why he was uprooting his family to come here. His comment to me was that he could work his ass off educating himself, to make more money....but the more money he earned, the higher the percentage of taxes he paid. He was paying 75% of his income in taxes when he came to the US. Those benefits don’t come free. I have a friend in Norway, which has a similar tax system, who is an engineer. He has similar attitude regarding their tax structure. So for the middle to upper middle class, college educated part of society, there is very little incentive to work hard and get ahead since so much of your extra income goes to taxes. Here in the U, we vilify the rich (Tax them!), yet we all want to be there.
|
|
teen persuasion
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:49 GMT -5
Posts: 4,026
|
Post by teen persuasion on Mar 4, 2021 8:06:30 GMT -5
I saw something on Twitter earlier today - AOC pointed out that McDonald's in Finland (I think) paid workers $22/hr. Not $15, but $22. A Big Mac was only $.35 more in that country vs in the US. Objections were raised that that country doesn't have a minimum wage. But they do have essentially universal union representation. So not only do they receive a decent wage, they also have 6 weeks of vacation, health insurance, paid family leave... So please explain to me again why the US can't also do this. That same Twitter post also said that that $22/hour worker in Denmark is paying $11 of their $22/hour in taxes. DENMARK! Thank you for the correction. link This is the tweet I saw yesterday. I couldn't read all the tweets in the thread, it was thousands, and taxes didn't come up in the thread - just lots of back and forth on whether AOC said/implied Denmark had a minimum wage (she didn't - the point was that a multinational megacorp *could* pay more to its employees in the US, they do elsewhere). Going to the thread based on AOC's original tweet, there is reference to the tax issue, but it's all over the place. Some mention as high as 55%, some say average 45%, one reference said starts at 35% for singles. Some Danes piped up and pointed out there's a chunk of income deducted before tax rates are applied, like our standard deduction. There's also a good bit of discussion that direct comparison of after tax income is problematic, because Danes get free healthcare, education, pensions... that Americans do not. There's also a lot of confusing info about the difference in cost of living - all over the place, can't really draw any conclusions there.
|
|
teen persuasion
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:49 GMT -5
Posts: 4,026
|
Post by teen persuasion on Mar 4, 2021 8:22:26 GMT -5
A quick search led to an article that said that anyone making double the average income was paying over 58% in taxes. Another comment found was that Finland doesn't tax the rich higher than everyone else, but they tax everyone as if they were rich. the same could be said of the US, but it is kind of an inverse argument.
because anyone making over about $110k is not subject to SS tax in the US, the net effective rate actually declines in the 100-200k range before rising again to an asymptote at 37%. what is fucked up about the US is that we spend over 10% more on a GDP basis for our healthcare than the global average, for results that are inferior to many that are in the average or below average cost category. but that is not the grotesque part. the grotesque part is that this is part of the tax structure for other countries than ours. so we are comparing our taxes which don't include that amount to those that do. we need to "spot" other countries about 17%, if we want to get a realistic comparison. and when we do that, it puts us right up there with Sweden.
Then throw in education costs, too. Lower income Americans have outrageously high marginal tax rates, due to credit phaseouts. It's a hidden tax that few see. (Mine approaches 50% at places despite being in the 10% bracket.) It's also exacerbated by the paucity of 401ks accounts at employers in the lower income range. Having no workplace retirement option leaves lower income earners no way to control their w2 wages and AGI to increase credits like EITC - IRAs are useless for this, because IRA contributions can only reduce AGI, not w2 wages (EITC tests both).
|
|
teen persuasion
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:49 GMT -5
Posts: 4,026
|
Post by teen persuasion on Mar 4, 2021 8:45:15 GMT -5
Ok, so Denmark has effective unions for essentially everyone, creating the expectation for fair wages broadly spread across industries. Do we need to bring back unions, for everyone? Unions are common, but not universal, for teachers like my DH. Thinking about his past/present employers, his first one was not union, not in a school district, and pay was in the $20ks-$30ks, no state pension eligibility. But a sister agency *was* part of a district, so those employees were eligible for the state pension system + union payscale (unfortunately, was hours away, couldn't transfer to that agency). Now he's working for a similar agency, but they are union (still not in a district). Pay is significantly better. Recently, his new agency and old agency merged under a new umbrella group. We ran into an old coworker, and they were catching up, comparing notes/jobs environments. When pay came up, old coworker admitted they were concerned about that agency's employees looking to transfer for better pay. WHY NOT INCREASE PAY/BENEFITS TO APPROPRIATE LEVELS?
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,357
|
Post by Tiny on Mar 4, 2021 10:05:52 GMT -5
I saw something on Twitter earlier today - AOC pointed out that McDonald's in Finland (I think) paid workers $22/hr. Not $15, but $22. A Big Mac was only $.35 more in that country vs in the US. Objections were raised that that country doesn't have a minimum wage. But they do have essentially universal union representation. So not only do they receive a decent wage, they also have 6 weeks of vacation, health insurance, paid family leave... So please explain to me again why the US can't also do this. Because we don't pay half or more of our salaries to the taxman? How are you figuring that 1/2 of a salary to the taxman? Are you talking payroll taxes AND State, County, City taxes - not only on payroll but on spending? I'm pretty sure I'm not paying 1/2 my income to the Taxman (and I'm SINGLE NO KIDS - earning nearly 130K... if you are married or with kids - please DO NOT whine to me about how you are being taxed to death... just don't.) Maybe my Spending Plan is wrong and I'm accounting for less money than I actually have I think I'm hitting the 24% tax bracket on about 5K (or less) of my income these days... I would think marrieds and anyone with kids could be earning quite a bit more than me before they hit th 24% bracket. This makes me think that I'd have to be earning 500K or 1mil per year to have some of my income taxed at "50%". But at that point my "existential" self would be thinking it wasn't such a bad thing - what would I do with more money? Use "disposible" golden "flatware" or dishes? Never wear the same peice of clothing twice? Serially remodel my kitchens and baths - because I wanted to change the towel color - so the whole bath/kitchen must be torn out and replaced too?? OK, I'm being a bit facetious but really? And then there's what your taxes are paying for... I like my school system, my parks, my library. I like that police/fire/ambulance is quick to respond and well trained and has appropriate tools. I'm glad my streets are paved (and maintained). I like my new updated street lights (they are even more energy efficient and give better light than the 30 yo old ones they replaced) I like many of the services my City provides. I like the services my County provides. I have friends and relatives that use State Services. I'm OK with sharing some of my money via taxes so that other people can share in the goodness I, too, get to use. It makes MY LIFE better.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,327
|
Post by thyme4change on Mar 4, 2021 10:28:45 GMT -5
A quick search led to an article that said that anyone making double the average income was paying over 58% in taxes. Another comment found was that Finland doesn't tax the rich higher than everyone else, but they tax everyone as if they were rich. 58% effectivw or 58% marginal?
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,327
|
Post by thyme4change on Mar 4, 2021 10:34:07 GMT -5
I have a friend in Norway, which has a similar tax system, who is an engineer. He has similar attitude regarding their tax structure. So for the middle to upper middle class, college educated part of society, there is very little incentive to work hard and get ahead since so much of your extra income goes to taxes. Maybe the lack of "working hard" is why their happiness ranks so high. With a little joy taken out of greed means everyone can live a life that is more than working 12 hours a day. Time to spend with your family, go outdoors, cook a healthy meal, have a hobby. I look back at my 30 years as a desk jockey. I missed so much. But, I have a bunch of money so I can retire and hope to catch up before I die.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 28, 2024 7:55:13 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2021 10:41:12 GMT -5
I think you are properly framing the abysmal FMW as corporate graft. that is precisely what it is. the neocon agenda is internally contradictory. you can't have a civil society, low wages, and low taxes. that combination is pure fantasy. you can have a civil society with any other combination of these things, but not this one. or you can have an uncivil society, which is where we find ourselves. Same for Civil society, high wages, and high taxes. Nothing changes except the number on a fiat currency, pure fantasy.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,327
|
Post by thyme4change on Mar 4, 2021 10:51:02 GMT -5
Maybe we just start taxing capital gains on the same scale as payroll taxes. Nothing says subsidy for the rich like taxing unearned income based on pre-existing wealth less than what we tax for people who toil.
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,357
|
Post by Tiny on Mar 4, 2021 11:03:30 GMT -5
I had a friend who emigrated from Sweden. My friend was a dentist, a periodontist and had his PhD. I asked him why he was uprooting his family to come here. His comment to me was that he could work his ass off educating himself, to make more money....but the more money he earned, the higher the percentage of taxes he paid. He was paying 75% of his income in taxes when he came to the US. Those benefits don’t come free. So, if he was earning $100K he was only bringing home 25K? Or if he was earning $500K he was only bringing home (or only has the spending power of $125K per year)? Maybe he would be better off working 40 hour weeks with 6 weeks vacation flipping burgers for $22 an hour... for 45K salary being in the lower tax bracket he'd probably bring home more than the 25K (of his 100K highly taxed income).
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,357
|
Post by Tiny on Mar 4, 2021 11:19:15 GMT -5
Just an FYI:
working 2080 hours at $7.25 gives a yearly income of: $15080 and there is no "paid time off".
At $10.00 an hour: $20,800 a year (again probably no healthcare, no paid time off) At $12.00 an hour: $24,960 a year At $15.00 an hour: $31,200 a year.
That's assuming the worker is getting 40 hour work weeks and works all 52 weeks in the year (no time off at Christmas/New Years, no 'vacation' no sickdays.)
I stopped at McDonald's (first time in a year) and purchased a Crispy Chicken meal (medium fries and drink with it) cost me $9.29. I had 4 Cheese Sliders and a medium fry and it cost me $7.80. I guess I should be eating off the "deal menu" - those tend to be in the $6.00 range.
Gas is $3.00 a gallon again. A basic running used car that doesn't need work every few months and that will last you 3 or 4 years of "moderate mileage driving" might cost you 10K, Shelter might cost you 8K per year (unless you have a roommate - which might mean "with benefits" - and you need to KEEP the roommate no matter what..) Low income workers have to make a lot of decisions about how they spend their money.
I think another issue is that what were once "minimum wage" jobs are now jobs that need to support the worker. Minimum wage jobs aren't temporary work or for "HS/College Students or Housewives looking for "pin money". Minimum wage jobs aren't "stepping stones" to the next income level.
I'm pretty sure most people worked a minimum wage job -in HS or College - but they went on to their actual salaried job after college.
There are people who's career will always be a low paying or 'minimum wage' type job. I think there needs to be some sort of a change that recognizes these jobs as such.
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,357
|
Post by Tiny on Mar 4, 2021 11:28:33 GMT -5
I think the 'anger' about raising the minimum wage to $15 is this: At $15.00 an hour: $31,200 a year.
That 31K per year is often a SALARIED job with benefits. I can see how someone with a 35K or 40K salaried income (with benefits) might feel threatened by a $15 an hour minimum wage (with no benefits). It might feel like the salaried worker is "working for minimum wage themselves".
I think employers need to be more transparent about the benefits (and the costs of those benefits) to their salaried employees.
I think every worker needs get a little more savvy about the tax codes and the costs that employers pay. Not making the paying employer the "hero" - but in order to actually KNOW if one's employer is generous or stingy. If you can't compare or you have no idea you don't know....
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Mar 4, 2021 11:55:52 GMT -5
Because we don't pay half or more of our salaries to the taxman? How are you figuring that 1/2 of a salary to the taxman? Are you talking payroll taxes AND State, County, City taxes - not only on payroll but on spending? I'm pretty sure I'm not paying 1/2 my income to the Taxman (and I'm SINGLE NO KIDS - earning nearly 130K... if you are married or with kids - please DO NOT whine to me about how you are being taxed to death... just don't.) Maybe my Spending Plan is wrong and I'm accounting for less money than I actually have I think I'm hitting the 24% tax bracket on about 5K (or less) of my income these days... I would think marrieds and anyone with kids could be earning quite a bit more than me before they hit th 24% bracket. This makes me think that I'd have to be earning 500K or 1mil per year to have some of my income taxed at "50%". But at that point my "existential" self would be thinking it wasn't such a bad thing - what would I do with more money? Use "disposible" golden "flatware" or dishes? Never wear the same peice of clothing twice? Serially remodel my kitchens and baths - because I wanted to change the towel color - so the whole bath/kitchen must be torn out and replaced too?? OK, I'm being a bit facetious but really? And then there's what your taxes are paying for... I like my school system, my parks, my library. I like that police/fire/ambulance is quick to respond and well trained and has appropriate tools. I'm glad my streets are paved (and maintained). I like my new updated street lights (they are even more energy efficient and give better light than the 30 yo old ones they replaced) I like many of the services my City provides. I like the services my County provides. I have friends and relatives that use State Services. I'm OK with sharing some of my money via taxes so that other people can share in the goodness I, too, get to use. It makes MY LIFE better. Don’t forget those countries also have additional excessive taxes where we pay taxes too. At gas at $6+/gallon and a VAT on goods of 24-28% (I got hammered on this in Norway, paying an extra $100+ on a couple sweaters...which luckily got reimbursed when I left the country). My Swedish friend (and just about every other European friend I have) used to take back suitcases filled with goods to their family. LOL! I remember going shopping for sheets and towels with Lars. When he packed to go home for a visit, he had enough towels to outfit a local gym. He started to buy them at Filene’s, until I introduced him to some of the discount stores....then he was in hog heaven. Imagine thinking you are getting an incredible deal on towels at a department store (and NOT on sale). I think he became my friend partially because I knew where to find the best for less.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,104
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 4, 2021 12:02:21 GMT -5
Because we don't pay half or more of our salaries to the taxman? How are you figuring that 1/2 of a salary to the taxman? Are you talking payroll taxes AND State, County, City taxes - not only on payroll but on spending? I'm pretty sure I'm not paying 1/2 my income to the Taxman (and I'm SINGLE NO KIDS - earning nearly 130K... if you are married or with kids - please DO NOT whine to me about how you are being taxed to death... just don't.) Maybe my Spending Plan is wrong and I'm accounting for less money than I actually have I think I'm hitting the 24% tax bracket on about 5K (or less) of my income these days... I would think marrieds and anyone with kids could be earning quite a bit more than me before they hit th 24% bracket. This makes me think that I'd have to be earning 500K or 1mil per year to have some of my income taxed at "50%". But at that point my "existential" self would be thinking it wasn't such a bad thing - what would I do with more money? Use "disposible" golden "flatware" or dishes? Never wear the same peice of clothing twice? Serially remodel my kitchens and baths - because I wanted to change the towel color - so the whole bath/kitchen must be torn out and replaced too?? OK, I'm being a bit facetious but really? And then there's what your taxes are paying for... I like my school system, my parks, my library. I like that police/fire/ambulance is quick to respond and well trained and has appropriate tools. I'm glad my streets are paved (and maintained). I like my new updated street lights (they are even more energy efficient and give better light than the 30 yo old ones they replaced) I like many of the services my City provides. I like the services my County provides. I have friends and relatives that use State Services. I'm OK with sharing some of my money via taxes so that other people can share in the goodness I, too, get to use. It makes MY LIFE better. I think your rant may be misdirected. The question was why the U.S. can't provide the same type of worker benefits that other countries do, and my answer was that the U.S. DOESN'T tax its workers the same way. Other countries that provide such generous benefits are able to do so because a large number of people are taxed highly to raise that revenue. The U.S. does not do that. I am certainly not whining about my tax burden. I retired early, am limiting my income for tax purposes, still have more than I need, and paid zero federal income tax last year. Nor do I pay state income tax because my state doesn't have one. I should also be income-tax free for at least the next decade, unless I decide to do a large Roth conversion again. Please believe, there is NO whining here.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Mar 4, 2021 12:08:15 GMT -5
I had a friend who emigrated from Sweden. My friend was a dentist, a periodontist and had his PhD. I asked him why he was uprooting his family to come here. His comment to me was that he could work his ass off educating himself, to make more money....but the more money he earned, the higher the percentage of taxes he paid. He was paying 75% of his income in taxes when he came to the US. Those benefits don’t come free. So, if he was earning $100K he was only bringing home 25K? Or if he was earning $500K he was only bringing home (or only has the spending power of $125K per year)? Maybe he would be better off working 40 hour weeks with 6 weeks vacation flipping burgers for $22 an hour... for 45K salary being in the lower tax bracket he'd probably bring home more than the 25K (of his 100K highly taxed income). So what happens to a country when you have everyone working a lessor stress and educated job of a burger flipper? If a dentist or doctor can only take home a fraction of their income, why would they work more hours than the bare minimum? Why would they work to improve themselves and their skills?
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,357
|
Post by Tiny on Mar 4, 2021 12:08:39 GMT -5
How are you figuring that 1/2 of a salary to the taxman? Are you talking payroll taxes AND State, County, City taxes - not only on payroll but on spending? I'm pretty sure I'm not paying 1/2 my income to the Taxman (and I'm SINGLE NO KIDS - earning nearly 130K... if you are married or with kids - please DO NOT whine to me about how you are being taxed to death... just don't.) Maybe my Spending Plan is wrong and I'm accounting for less money than I actually have I think I'm hitting the 24% tax bracket on about 5K (or less) of my income these days... I would think marrieds and anyone with kids could be earning quite a bit more than me before they hit th 24% bracket. This makes me think that I'd have to be earning 500K or 1mil per year to have some of my income taxed at "50%". But at that point my "existential" self would be thinking it wasn't such a bad thing - what would I do with more money? Use "disposible" golden "flatware" or dishes? Never wear the same peice of clothing twice? Serially remodel my kitchens and baths - because I wanted to change the towel color - so the whole bath/kitchen must be torn out and replaced too?? OK, I'm being a bit facetious but really? And then there's what your taxes are paying for... I like my school system, my parks, my library. I like that police/fire/ambulance is quick to respond and well trained and has appropriate tools. I'm glad my streets are paved (and maintained). I like my new updated street lights (they are even more energy efficient and give better light than the 30 yo old ones they replaced) I like many of the services my City provides. I like the services my County provides. I have friends and relatives that use State Services. I'm OK with sharing some of my money via taxes so that other people can share in the goodness I, too, get to use. It makes MY LIFE better. I think your rant may be misdirected. The question was why the U.S. can't provide the same type of worker benefits that other countries do, and my answer was that the U.S. DOESN'T tax its workers the same way. Other countries that provide such generous benefits are able to do so because a large number of people are taxed highly to raise that revenue. The U.S. does not do that. I am certainly not whining about my tax burden. I retired early, am limiting my income for tax purposes, still have more than I need, and paid zero federal income tax last year. Nor do I pay state income tax because my state doesn't have one. I should also be income-tax free for at least the next decade, unless I decide to do a large Roth conversion again. Please believe, there is NO whining here. Sorry, your original text was worded the same as things a sibling says - and he believes he is paying 50% of his income in taxes. I realized I have a "button" and your post pressed it - without meaning to. I have made a note and will add it to my list of "knee jerk" reaction triggers so I can work on having a different better more appropriate "knee jerk" reaction when this happens. I mean this is a good way! I've got lots of baggage that I'm working thru (and most of it is baggage I no longer want.) Change is hard.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,104
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 4, 2021 12:19:59 GMT -5
I think your rant may be misdirected. The question was why the U.S. can't provide the same type of worker benefits that other countries do, and my answer was that the U.S. DOESN'T tax its workers the same way. Other countries that provide such generous benefits are able to do so because a large number of people are taxed highly to raise that revenue. The U.S. does not do that. I am certainly not whining about my tax burden. I retired early, am limiting my income for tax purposes, still have more than I need, and paid zero federal income tax last year. Nor do I pay state income tax because my state doesn't have one. I should also be income-tax free for at least the next decade, unless I decide to do a large Roth conversion again. Please believe, there is NO whining here. Sorry, your original text was worded the same as things a sibling says - and he believes he is paying 50% of his income in taxes. I realized I have a "button" and your post pressed it - without meaning to. I have made a note and will add it to my list of "knee jerk" reaction triggers so I can work on having a different better more appropriate "knee jerk" reaction when this happens. I mean this is a good way! I've got lots of baggage that I'm working thru (and most of it is baggage I no longer want.) Change is hard. All good, really. (I almost finished that previous post with, "Apology accepted", assuming one would be forthcoming, but figured that sometimes that little joke doesn't go over well!)
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,357
|
Post by Tiny on Mar 4, 2021 12:21:47 GMT -5
So, if he was earning $100K he was only bringing home 25K? Or if he was earning $500K he was only bringing home (or only has the spending power of $125K per year)? Maybe he would be better off working 40 hour weeks with 6 weeks vacation flipping burgers for $22 an hour... for 45K salary being in the lower tax bracket he'd probably bring home more than the 25K (of his 100K highly taxed income). So what happens to a country when you have everyone working a lessor stress and educated job of a burger flipper? If a dentist or doctor can only take home a fraction of their income, why would they work more hours than the bare minimum? Why would they work to improve themselves and their skills? I agree with you. Not everyone is altruistic or has a firm sense of purpose/meaning that is derived from who they are or what they can do. Self image often comes from the stuff you own and the experiences you can afford. I don't think humans will ever achieve the idealism of a "Star Trek" culture/society. I think it's a good thing to reach for though. First, I suspect that the 75% in taxes doesn't mean what it sounds like. I don't think any society is so eglatarian that the high income earners house maid's children are in the same preschool, gradeschool, highschool or has access to the same tutors and extra curicular activities as high income earner's kids. That quirk of human nature (Orwell's observation that "all pigs are equal but some pigs are more equal) leads me to believe that yes the dentist/doctor might be paying 75% in taxes on some portion of their income. But odds are it's not keeping them from living in a nicer community or having nicer things or keeping their kids from the best education. Perhaps the question for the dentist/doctor is why they feel threatened by people who aren't as skilled or highly paid as they are having some of the same 'nicer societal or cultural or intangible" things that they have when they have an even higher level/access to even nicer stuff?
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,357
|
Post by Tiny on Mar 4, 2021 12:30:51 GMT -5
Sorry, your original text was worded the same as things a sibling says - and he believes he is paying 50% of his income in taxes. I realized I have a "button" and your post pressed it - without meaning to. I have made a note and will add it to my list of "knee jerk" reaction triggers so I can work on having a different better more appropriate "knee jerk" reaction when this happens. I mean this is a good way! I've got lots of baggage that I'm working thru (and most of it is baggage I no longer want.) Change is hard. All good, really. (I almost finished that previous post with, "Apology accepted", assuming one would be forthcoming, but figured that sometimes that little joke doesn't go over well!) I would have laughed if you had done that and still apologized. You worded your rebuttal in a reasonable way (with actual reason and not a knee jerk attack). My journey towards being a better person means I take some lumps and I can acknowledge it. I have to admit - the family "buttons" are the hardest ones to change a response to.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,104
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 4, 2021 12:52:30 GMT -5
I would point out that merely raising everyone's pay does not mean that folks on the bottom will be ahead for long. They will merely be broke at a higher level. Sure, there may be a short-term advantage, but everything will reset and equilibrium will again be reached. All the while, the overall pie in such a highly trade-dependent world will inevitably shrink due to then being priced out of world markets. We already run large trade deficits. If all of our goods are suddenly more expensive to cover higher wages, those deficits will never go down. They'll get worse. The problems only begin there. Higher wages will attract more illegal immigration. It will create more tax fraud. Existing benefits for the poor will have to be increased to account for the higher cost of living. It goes on and on. It may be basic economics, but it is not simple.
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,357
|
Post by Tiny on Mar 4, 2021 12:54:21 GMT -5
Do high income earners know what their taxes pay for AND how that benefits them (as well as others)? Do high income earners not know about the various ways to 'shelter' their income from taxes or to plan and do things in a way that is tax advantaged? Aren't high income earners generally exposed to people who are more tax savvy (other high income earners) so yeah, maybe for a few years they pay a premium but then they 'learn' about better ways to use their "money" and make adjustments accordingly?
When my siblings complain about taxes - it has the general feeling that they are footing the bill for people who don't deserve what they are getting or that people are experiencing a better life/lifestyle than they themselves are - without working or paying a penny. I guess that means they feel like being 'taxed' is the same as "being taken advantage of".
I know when I finally had some income taxed at the 24% level I was cranky, because I had been using my 401K and other tax advantaged ways to stay below it. I started complaining to myself about the big income bump my employer gave me that pushed into a new level. And then I realized I had more income! whoo hoo! I had been maxing my retirement accounts, I have a primary home, I have 2 rental 'hovels' I will reach financial independence at 59.5. before the big income bump. Heck yeah, I'll take that bump in income and not complain about paying 24% on some of it and happily figure out what I'll do with 76% I get to keep. woo hoo! more income!!
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,104
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 4, 2021 13:20:42 GMT -5
Exactly. I would love to be paying a billion dollars each year in taxes, because that would mean I was keeping at least two billion. It would still be a game of course, although the game would change to then trying to cut it to half a billion in taxes.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Mar 4, 2021 13:25:13 GMT -5
So what happens to a country when you have everyone working a lessor stress and educated job of a burger flipper? If a dentist or doctor can only take home a fraction of their income, why would they work more hours than the bare minimum? Why would they work to improve themselves and their skills? I agree with you. Not everyone is altruistic or has a firm sense of purpose/meaning that is derived from who they are or what they can do. Self image often comes from the stuff you own and the experiences you can afford. I don't think humans will ever achieve the idealism of a "Star Trek" culture/society. I think it's a good thing to reach for though. First, I suspect that the 75% in taxes doesn't mean what it sounds like. I don't think any society is so eglatarian that the high income earners house maid's children are in the same preschool, gradeschool, highschool or has access to the same tutors and extra curicular activities as high income earner's kids. That quirk of human nature (Orwell's observation that "all pigs are equal but some pigs are more equal) leads me to believe that yes the dentist/doctor might be paying 75% in taxes on some portion of their income. But odds are it's not keeping them from living in a nicer community or having nicer things or keeping their kids from the best education. Perhaps the question for the dentist/doctor is why they feel threatened by people who aren't as skilled or highly paid as they are having some of the same 'nicer societal or cultural or intangible" things that they have when they have an even higher level/access to even nicer stuff? I would not assume that. My friend told me that there is no incentive to advance his career, as he would wind up paying even more in taxes. I have no cause to not believe him, especially since he emigrated. When my friend left Sweden, he was living in a small 1 BR apartment with his wife and daughter. He was utterly amazed as to what he was able to get when he came over initially. A 2 BR apartment in Boston (Brookline....not a cheap area) cost him less than his apartment in Sweden that was 1/3 the size. Thinking back, over the 30 years of working with largely international coworkers, I would estimate that 80% ultimately emigrated to the US. Every single one of these people are faculty in various universities across the US. My friend didn’t feel threatened. He felt like he was working and taking on a lot of stress, and despite his education, work ethics, responsibilities and experience was not ahead of a burger flipper. I don’t think that’s unreasonable.
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,357
|
Post by Tiny on Mar 4, 2021 13:31:10 GMT -5
I would point out that merely raising everyone's pay does not mean that folks on the bottom will be ahead for long. Are we really only talking about people at the bottom? What kinds of jobs that provide health care or other perks (paid time off, guaranteed 40/35 hour work week) are in the $15 to $20 per hour range? $15 at 2080 hours is $31,200.00 $20 at 2080 is $41,600.00 Things like paid time off and healthcare are generally an employer's expense (which they may pass down to their employees). Would providing some sort of "government" payout to employers to give their hourly (or salaried at some level of pay) employees paid time off or to provide some sort of standard healthcare benefit change the financial lives of people who will hold such jobs for years on end? The hourly employees pay per hour wouldn't necessarily change. Is that "welfare"? Would something like that benefit higher income workers in some intangible way?
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Mar 4, 2021 13:38:30 GMT -5
Do high income earners know what their taxes pay for AND how that benefits them (as well as others)? Do high income earners not know about the various ways to 'shelter' their income from taxes or to plan and do things in a way that is tax advantaged? Aren't high income earners generally exposed to people who are more tax savvy (other high income earners) so yeah, maybe for a few years they pay a premium but then they 'learn' about better ways to use their "money" and make adjustments accordingly? When my siblings complain about taxes - it has the general feeling that they are footing the bill for people who don't deserve what they are getting or that people are experiencing a better life/lifestyle than they themselves are - without working or paying a penny. I guess that means they feel like being 'taxed' is the same as "being taken advantage of". I know when I finally had some income taxed at the 24% level I was cranky, because I had been using my 401K and other tax advantaged ways to stay below it. I started complaining to myself about the big income bump my employer gave me that pushed into a new level. And then I realized I had more income! whoo hoo! I had been maxing my retirement accounts, I have a primary home, I have 2 rental 'hovels' I will reach financial independence at 59.5. before the big income bump. Heck yeah, I'll take that bump in income and not complain about paying 24% on some of it and happily figure out what I'll do with 76% I get to keep. woo hoo! more income!! How would you feel if this was reversed....that you were living on 25% of your income, and losing 75% of it to taxes?
|
|