[Ask the Gulch] If the labor participation rate is at a 38 year low (94.5 million) giving the government fewer tax payers - how to do we juxtapose that simultaneously the government has reported to have collected record revenues in 2015 (3.25 trillion)?
Posted by rush5162 10 years, 6 months ago to Ask the Gulch
41 percent who are idled. . 30 percent of the entire nation
is sidelined by this economy. . and we call it recovery. . bullsh!t. -- j
.
.
To consider a different scenario you can have the lowest rate of murders in 50 years but the highest amount of murders. If 10% of 1000 people commit murder in a given year there will be 10 murders. But if, decades later, there are a million people but the rate is 1% you will have both a lower rate and a higher incidence.
In addition the that the labor participation rate is not the number of taxpayers. We have corporations, tariffs, etc. which flummox further any such apples <-> oranges comparison. If we turn to the murder example, the rate among citizens has shrunk, but there are non-citizens visiting the population and committing murder. Thus the population goes down but the incidence goes up.
To confound such an attempt yet again, the rate doesn't take into account the value of each taxpayer. Let us go back to the murder example. In the base period 10% of the population commits a single murder. In our comparison period 5% of the population commits murder, but they do it thrice instead of once. Your rate has gone down but the incidence has gone up - even if the total population doesn't change.
Clear as mud?
Basically the comparison is part of a pattern of intellectualism in that broad statistics, often incomparable, are taken as having more value than the people the statistics purport to represent.
If torture is illegal and statistics were declared people our incarceration rate AND incidence would go up. And it would be "disproportionately" the intellectuals being incarcerated.
Rates and slates and all the rest come later.
How many in the labor force before the automatic ten percent is deducted.
How many of those in the labor force after the automatic ten percent is deducted are working.
Define working....full time, part time, seasonal.
Per capita, per state per union come later..
KISS
the value of each taxpayer vs. each moocher is one citizen UNLESS you want murder rate per live body counting total in US at a specific point in time.
Illegals aren't citizens even if they are working. Their employers are un convicted felons even if they are working and are citizens.
KISS Live human bodies with murdered human bodies as percentage
Same for death from accidents and disease if no criminal activity is involved.
KISS.
The more refined statistics one gets from google when asking a simple question are to the question BS.
Number of citizens eligible to vote. Number who registered to vote. Number who voted. Number who voted for other than the two major candidates.
Case in point. Judges often run unopposed. A landslide is one if only one votes.
Non-Partisan is another type of election race I despise. I won't vote for someone who fails to advertise their political affiliation.
FInally the most flagrant violation tantamount to vote theft....Winner Take All. They aren't true. I didn't vote for the amazing a--hole who won.How did he or she get my vote?
Statistics are like numbers. Figures can lie and liars can figure.
Statists, however, lie like they are overstocked on lie and they are going out of style.
I can say that I do not think that additional income labeled as Obamacare allows for a profit. What I have seen of that program indicates that this is a 'loss' center for the gov, not a 'profit'.
Jan
Jan
http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/fe...
Income Taxes 1.7 Trillion
SS Taxes 1.0 trillion
Ad valoreum Taxes .2 trillion
Business Taxes .1 trillion.
Looks like you can play with their charts and they say you can download the data, seems legit. But note SS is now part of general fund, not seperate. So SS taxes are just undocumented income taxes that escape the loop holes. No one escapes the SS monster because it is "not a tax" and is of course "for the children and elderly". BULL$%%$ as I said in antother thread, SS was hijacked, and the money is not used for it, it is general fund, and they put useless treasury notes in the SS files and hope you don't notice. That is why it will go bust in a few years. No money goes to it, just paper lies.
When Social Security's sources of income exceed its expenses, the resultant surpluses must be loaned to the general fund of the U.S. Treasury. By law, the Treasury must pay this money back to the Social Security program with interest.[92] [93] [94]
The money owed by the Treasury to the Social Security program is referred to as the "Social Security Trust Fund," and at the close of 2013, it had a balance of $2.8 trillion.[95]
This $2.8 trillion debt that the Treasury owes to Social Security amounts to $8,885 for every person living in the U.S. or $22,574 for every household in the U.S.[96] (Facts about the ability of the Treasury to service this debt are detailed below in the section entitled Impact on National Debt.)
From 1985 through 2009, Social Security's dedicated taxes exceeded its expenses. In 2010, this situation reversed, and expenses exceeded dedicated taxes.[97] This state of affairs continued through 2013 and is projected to continue every year into the foreseeable future.[98]
Despite the interest payments that Social Security receives on the Trust Fund, the Trust Fund began declining in value in 2011, which is eight years earlier than the Social Security Administration projected in 2011, and 10 years earlier than what it projected in 2010.[99] [100] [101] (As explained in the Introductory Notes, all future dollar figures are indexed for inflation. If inflation is not considered, the Trust Fund is projected to begin declining in 2020.[102])
The Social Security Trust Fund continued declining in 2012 and 2013, and this state of affairs is projected to continue until the Trust Fund is exhausted in 2033.[103]
After 2033, Social Security is projected to run deficits every year into the foreseeable future.[107] To cover these deficits, it is projected that payroll taxes would need to be increased by 31% starting in 2033, rising to a 40% increase by 2088.[108] These shortfalls could also be covered by reducing benefits by 23% starting in 2033, rising to a 27% reduction by 2088.[109]
There are several other ways to quantify Social Security's projected deficits. The measure commonly cited by the Social Administration[110] and the press[111] involves calculating how much money must be immediately added to the Trust Fund so that the principle and interest would cover projected shortfalls for the next 75 years. This is referred to as the "75-year open group unfunded obligation," and it currently amounts to $10.6 trillion.[112] [113] This is equivalent to 12 times the total income for Social Security in 2013 or an additional $64,943 from every person who paid Social Security payroll taxes in 2013.[114] [115]
They took (that's the "loan" part) the excess from the fund, and did not put it back. Now all they talk about is how much they will have to steal to keep the morass going. Note the tax rate will have to go to 40%!!!!
Of interest, somehow, when the program collects more that it spends, by law it is loaned to the govt, and replaced with bonds. I do not consider that good management, in that it concludes such bonds will be paid. However, they seem to think that is ok, but it just becomes part of the debt. In fact, the correct thing would be to lower the rate if that is so, so income equals out go. Now we just make additional tax payments to the govt to waste at will:
The Social Security program has an independent budget that is separate from the rest of the federal government.[216]
When the Social Security program collects more in taxes than it spends, it generates surplus money. By law, the only thing that the Social Security program can do with surplus money is loan it to the U.S. government.[217] [218]
The money that the federal government owes to the Social Security program is held in the form of securities issued by the United States Treasury. These securities are analogous to U.S. savings bonds, except that they can be redeemed before maturity without suffering a loss or enjoying a gain due to market forces. These securities cannot be purchased by the general public.[219]
Bonds that represent the debt that the U.S. government owes to Social Security are located in a file cabinet at the Bureau of Public Debt in Parkersburg, West Virginia. Below is a photo of President George W. Bush inspecting the documents along with Susan Chapman of the Office of Public Debt Accounting.[220] [221]
When the Social Security program loans money to the U.S. government, the government is obligated by law to pay this money back to the Social Security program with interest. This money becomes a part of the national debt.[222] [223]
The U.S. Treasury Department publishes a "Monthly Statement of the Public Debt" that details the components of the national debt, which includes the amounts owed to the Social Security program.[224]
In 2013, the U.S. government paid an effective annual interest rate of 3.8% on the debt that it owed to the Social Security Trust Fund.[225]
The U.S. government divides the national debt into two categories:
Money that it owes to federal entities such as the Social Security program and federal employee retirement funds.
Money that it owes to non-federal entities such as individuals who have purchased U.S. savings bonds.[226] [227]
The federal law that governs the repayment of the national debt draws no distinction between the debt owed to federal and non-federal entities. Both must be repaid with interest.[228]
Here is some more SS fun:
Popular Perceptions:
Perception about Social Security benefits:
I am entitled to the money. It's my money. I've saved it.[190] [191]
All taxes that have been paid into the Social Security system since its inception have already been (1) spent to pay for benefits, (2) spent to fund the administrative overhead of the program, or (3) loaned to the federal government.[192] [193] [194] [195]
The website of United States Social Security Administration states:
There has been a temptation throughout the program's history for some people to suppose that their FICA payroll taxes entitle them to a benefit in a legal, contractual sense. … Congress clearly had no such limitation in mind when crafting the law. … Benefits which are granted at one time can be withdrawn….[196]
In 1960, the Supreme Court ruled that entitlement to Social Security benefits is not a contractual right.[197]
http://www.justfacts.com/socialsecuri...
In Helvering v Davis, SCOTUS upheld the lower court's decision that SS was a tax and as long as it was spent for the general benefit rather than a local purpose, it was constitutional.
All of the rest - how it can be spent, loaned, how much you've "earned", etc - is all smoke and mirrors and so much BS but it obviously does its intended job of tricking people like you and the whole "but we paid into it" crowd. It's merely another income tax. The government can and does spend it however it wants and, with a waive of a pen can "owe" you nothing.
China finally figured out Socialism has no ability to fund itself and must depend on some form of capitalism just as Sweden, New Zealand etc have known all along. Capitalist countries with varying degrees of socialist pretensions.
That's not to excuse FDR, only to point out that the SS we deal with now is not a product of the 1930's, but rather the "Great Society" programs of the 70's.
Jan
2) Death Tax came back
3) IRS removed [held up] non-profit status for 1000's of Conservative organizations
4) ObamaCare penalties started
5) IRS stats as w/ any stat can lie
The government lies.
I myself have been paying more taxes now than when I made twice as much prior to 2009.
A family member and her husband were told someone else filed their 2014 return...and received it. There have been no new charge cards opened in either of their names without their knowledge. Their bank accounts haven't been touched. No big ticket items have been purchased in their names. It's been a year. They've monitored their identities during this time.
This year it's our turn. So far the same results. Only the tax return has been affected, but it's also only been few months.
An acquaintance, and her husband, also had the same thing occur.
6 people. Tax returns only.
I know this isn't a large pool from which to draw any conclusions...but these rather intelligent thieves (hackers have to have some knowledge of code and how to use very specific software) appear to be very bold and not very greedy as exemplified by not using all that identity info for other things. The only agency they targeted happens to be the most feared and powerful agency in the nation.
Why open a new charge card in someone else's name...when you can illegally file a tax return?
Just seems odd to me.
In the meantime, we all have had to file ID theft forms with the IRS, go to the local office to follow the progress of the "investigation" (due to the nature of the crime, the IRS will not do anything over the phone. I get it but it's a pain in the butt) and so far none of us have received our returns.The longest unresolved investigation has been going on for eighteen months.
Maybe someone knows about how identity theft works and can enlighten me as to why it would just be tax returns. Maybe we're just 6 of the luckiest people going because nothing else has happened as a result of having our SS #s stolen along with our tax filing info. That's a lot of valuable info.
It would be nice if the IRS provided evidence that our tax returns were filed - if they are ours, why can't we have a copy?
So far it's just been "You can't file, that was done already. Here, fill out these papers. You have to follow up by coming to the office."
I never would have had a thought such as this 6.5 years ago. I don't mean specifically a thought about the IRS, I mean any kind of suspicious thought about a government agency or a business or a person. The Obama Administration would be proud to know they are succeeding in fundamentally transforming the nation...one personal headache at a time.
41 percent who are idled. -- j
.
With that every one of them pay approximately $4,800.00 per year minimum in taxes; this is the Soc Security TAX, couples pay $9,600.00 per year. That all counts in tax income for the gov't. Many in the Upper Class and several middle class as well as the majority of Teachers, Fire and Police understand the difference between 'earned & unearned income' and they do not pay taxes on their 'earned income' or at least for the middle class, Teacher, Fire & Police no Soc Security TAXES.
One of the few true turistas looked puzzled and asked how we thought it so funny and why?
Because all taxes, embedded or VST or enhanced no matter what level are part of overhead and are passed on to the consumer. The easy way is COB Cost of Business followed by COG Cost of Government equals profit. One reason so much is deferred or deducted in business improvements or employee benefits depending on the corporation. Small business no different...it's not cutting taxes on individuals and putting it on business at best it's taking threatened taxes from individuals and passing them to business. Businesses in turn passes to consumer. You are screwed again. Think of it as the taxing portion of cutting the budget. They don't they just cut a portion of the increase in the budget That's two strikes your screwed twice.
Third strike is government inflation, devaluation and debt repudiation which means... tough cookies you are out!
Now go vote for them again. Doesn't matter which one.....Evil is Evil. Both just voted to stick it to you. BOHICA
Load more comments...