According to Phoenix Marketing International's annual wealth survey, NJ has the highest number of millionaires per capita - 8.95% in the nation. Dem's will be salivating to tax the hell out of them when they see this, of course, Murphy is right up there near the top of the list.
We already raised the tax on 5M+ income about 1%. And we're enjoying every minute of it. You should be too.
Tax them all. They don't pay their fair share. When everyone pays their fair share, everyone's fair share is lower.
Billionaires draw more from society than the normal person, and put less back. One private flight burns more fuel and emits more pollution than all the driving you or I do in a year.
Next time you complain about your salary, remember, it's low because someone else has decided they need $16 M a year with a 80M bonus + stock options and is writing more than you make in a lifetime before they get that cash.
Stupid ass red-states with little and no taxes are outright stealing from your pockets when they take federal money to pay for things because they don't tax their own residents. You should be made at them and demand a low minimum level of taxation (Alternative minimum taxes) for every person and every company - this would be the single most effective way to lower your own taxes.
Oh, and stop giving tax breaks to corporations. That would lower your taxes.
But most of you are too stupid and vote against your own self interests.
Take a look at where the monies from social security have gone...Taken by the Demoncrats , starting with L.B.J. and continued until it was obvious.....now we are told there is no money...….look into that and see where you will cast the next stone.
Sorry for working hard saving and investing well!! I made my money the old fashion way I EARNED IT!! This anti- wealth crap has to stop!! If people want money go the F—- out and earn it!! It’s still America the land of opportunity!!! Not the land of hand outs and government cheese!! As much as liberal jerks like Murphy want it to be!!
Alpha, l tip my hat to you sir. Someone who recognizes that the real problem is the rich continuing to elect their own to rewrite the rules in favor of getting even more for themselves, while simultaneously getting the rest of us to blame our woes on teachers and police.
im not rich but taking someone’s money simply because they have more money than you is immoral. I work hard and save my money. Others ought to do the same.
When you can't balance your budget you go take from the people that have money. That's like me living above my means and robbing other people to keep up with my lifestyle.
"Someone who recognizes that the real problem is the rich continuing to elect their own to rewrite the rules in favor of getting even more for themselves"
LOL... the "rich" don't have the numbers to "elect their own". They let you elect whomever you want and then they buy them off. Everybody has their price and it's usually not as high as you would think...
Steven; the social security money is all there. Its invested for you in you in t-bills. What would you do with the fund?
I have no problem paying more taxes when making more money. I have more places to sheltet ut then too.
Trump tax plan not saving me anything. I made more and paid more too. So far, highest effective rate in years, but still much to enter. More later.
Your typical teacher gets 2.5 million in retiree medical and pension but this is off the radar. What is 1 million dollars in savings for a private-sector retirement in comparison?
Alpha - your thought process is down right scary and your making lots of assumptions. Your post has overtones of brainwashing...But hey it's a free country thankfully...but when your ideas get implemented it will be far from free.
Yes Alpha, you are a little off today. There is one CEO per company, although I agree the compensation is high. Your typical teacher gets 2.5 million in retiree medical and pension, and these are in the hundreds of thousands just in NJ. Does a private sector job today give retiree medical, NO. Does a private sector job today give a pension, NO.
Want to solve the problem? Have a program for ALL, like in Canada for medical and pensions...
I’ve always agreed with your small government solutions ijay. Canada is a great example that we should follow.
Is this righties wanting socialist medical program entitlement? Viva la differance.
The Canandian pension pays less than SS; I think. SS works just fine; just needa tune up for longer lifespans.
Maybe we can cap zillionaires from the entitlement in the tune up though ;-)
iJay, you are partially correct. I'm glad to have a debate with you about this. Yes, there is one CEO per company, but there's usually a board, and a c-suite all making around the same bucks. Plus upper management and other obscenely high earners.
We're also not yet talked about capital gains, but we can come back to that in another thread. We also haven't touched on outrageous golden parachutes and so many other things, like ensuring personal bonuses in bankruptcy while laying off workers with no notice and failing to pay suppliers. There's limits to what we can handle in one thread but I enjoy debating the merits of all of it.
I will add one note of clarification. I'm consider rich to be people who take home more than $5M a year, since that's whose affected by the tax increase NJ passed. $1M a year would probably all hold true too.
I do think CEOs deserve a bit more than fair compensation for their time for a few reasons: 1) their head rolls sometimes when others are actually to blame 2) they deserve to be able to save and live well between jobs which are very limited for them. But $1.2M a year is still more a month than most people earn (About double the national average).
I deleted my bit about healthcare I wanted to add, but you are right, let's be like Canada. Healthcare should be your right as a person and social security is a great program and programs like unemployment can be the different between life and death.
Teachers are a tough subject IMO, but this thread wasn't about them. I do think they get underpaid for what they have to deal with - but not severely. The starting teacher salary is reasonable above the national average salary and enough to live a decent life. If they stick around 7+ years, they're usually making pretty decent money.
The worst problem, IMO, is that often they're locked into salary for a set number of years and raises are given by seniority and union contracts and related to test scores, not by personal merit - they're locked into a profession with little alternatives to the job and a lack of mobility based on their own merit.
But like many government employees, they sacrifice higher wages for working 10 months a year (Some do, some don't) and good retirement benefits. If we taxes the top .01% at 70% above $10M, we could pay teachers more, yes, but we could do better things like make sure every person can afford to go to a doctor.
We would be better off funding more teachers to give kids a better education, better pay the support staff (who really get shafted) or bigger budgets for supplies so teachers don't use their own money, or keeping the cost of school lunch more reasonable.
In short: There's bigger problems to deal with first before we worry about teachers. How about having paid EMTs and Firefighters in every town? How about national healthcare gather than a GoFundMe page everytime someone gets cancer (FYI, GoFundMe takes ~8% off the top - 5% for them and supposedly 2.9% + 30 cents per transaction, but with their collectables, that rate is likely much lower)
CraftBeerBob: You're misguided to say the least. I don't believe we've cross paths before, so I'll assume you genuinely believe what you say, but you provide no shred of evidence - or even a hint to it. Every single thing I've said can be backed up. (With the exception of a handful of things I assume about the members of this forum, but please prove me wrong there too).
If you want to debate, pick apart an argument, post facts from reliable sources. If not, sit down and shut up and let the adults talk.
It's a free country until the billionaires figure out it doesn't have to be. My ideas won't be free - they cost money, but they'll benefit us all. Nothing I have said makes you less free (Free as in freedom, not free as in beer).
In fact, all of this makes you more free (free as in freedom) Free to spend money, free to donate in politics, free to work less and spend more time with your family. Free to vote with your wallet.
I'm guessing you're old enough to remember when you could pay for school by working part time? Buy a house working full time in 2-5 years? When everyone was hiring full time with benefits? Buy a car with the spare change in your bank account and pay less for it than your grocery bill?
You're "free"ness is under threat - but not from me.
Allow me to go down the rabbit hole a little:
In the last 10-20 years alone, there's been great strides to prevent normal citizens from owning anything - phones, cars, houses, software. The people at the top - the hands that control us all with or without us knowing it - are slowly working to take away our freedom by limiting our ability to make money and ensuring what we do make comes right back to them in a nice, recurring fashion. It's limiting our choices, our freedom. It's not some grand conspiracy - they're not working together - but they are working towards the same goal - having all the money and power.
My bet is by the time I'd ready to retire (a LONG time from now), the majority of people will be renting their house, phone, and every other major important thing in your life - not because we want to, or its better for us, but because it's better for /them/. And that which we don't rent, will be a service/usage charge. You're car won't be yours, it'll be self driving car you summon when you need it, swipe your card and get in while the money goes to those lucky enough to have had the money to invest/build a self-driving rental car company. Many people will mistake that for freedom - but just because you have the freedom to choose between a sedan or SUV for your ride to work, doesn't mean you have real freedom of choice.
As for social security: Stranger is right again. It needs a bit of a tune up. One simple tuneup would be to raise or remove the cap on taxable income. But it's not an entitlement. It's an obligation. The government took it from me with the promise to pay it back.
And the only way to cancel that obligation would be to issue a check to every american who's paid into it for the total amount paid in, plus interest at a fair market rate, plus inflation.
Plus, if we didn't have it, we'd be paying a lot more to help homeless and sick old people who failed to save for retirement properly or just got dealt a bad hand in life.
SD...look at "how" LBJ balanced his budget ….( where the monies came from )…..it's all there in the archives .
Alpha - we will agree to disagree. But have some respect for people. No need to tell people to sit down and shut up and let the adults talk. In the mean time good luck with your beliefs.
Great post, Alpha! The wealthy get tax breaks, under republicans. Once something is given away, it’s very hard to get it back....so the ultra wealthy think that a reversal of their tax break is stealing their money. The money has to come from somewhere! So...the wealthy bitch because “they earned it or invested correctly”. Great! Just pay the appropriate taxes, for said income. No one is stealing from the rich, to give to the poor. It’s actually the opposite! Now we have to somehow get the money, earmarked for programs, back...or the rich will bitch that some 90 year old lady needs food stamps. Again...the money has to come from somewhere. Three rounds of huge tax breaks, over the last 35 years, is too much $ that the rest of society to make up.
In the 50’s, how was it possible for, say a barber, auto mechanic, or factory worker to support a spouse, home, two college educated kids, and two cars...on one salary. That’s because the wealthy owner of a company would pay their fair share of taxes. It used to be set up with “the more you earn, the higher your taxes”. Period! And they still lived a high lifestyle, deservedly so. Luxurious should go to wealthier people. They earned it. Healthcare, IMHO, is not a luxury item. It’s scary and painful. Who LIKES that? NO ONE, it’s a necessity! Gonna be very difficult to get the ultra wealthy to “give back” what they should’ve NEVER received, in the first place.
Why are investments (passive income) taxed at a LOWER rate, than earned income ( an actual job-job...you know, one that actually requires very hard work) ? Because, generally speaking, investments are mostly geared towards the wealthy. Even jewelry used to be a %20 tax. There was a luxury tax. $$ gone has to come from another source. All the “chip a ways” add up, over time. So do the needs of our citizens. How can we sustain as a society, if things are slanted too far in favor of one class of people over another?
Tax rates for the wealthy have been much higher with less loopholes throughout our history. If you look at who owns America’s assets you can see the effect as wealth moves away from the middle class and a smaller number of the upper class own the highest percentage of America’s assets than ever before. Yes, the rich are getting richer and you are getting poorer. MAGA. Although it’s not Trumps fault; he is just accelerating the process at warp speeds.
Steven, that’s a nice conspiracy theory with no basis in fact. It is a pervasive urban myth for the gullible. SS has made every payment, has 30 years or so of funds left and has only run a deficit for a handful of years. It has not been pilfered; it is solvent; it just needs re-engineering for longer lifespans.
A conspiracy theory? It’s math pal. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/johngoodman/2015/08/13/why-was-social-security-designed-like-a-ponzi-scheme/amp/
What percent of all US taxes are paid by the top 20% of Americans? Answer that question and the idea of the socialist term "fair share" will make itself clear.
The OMB has indicated that the top 20% pays 95% of ALL taxes. This "fair share" statement is in the same vain as "sensible gun regulations". To the socialists here (and there appear to be many), if the top 20% is paying 95% of the taxes what would the "fair share" be. 98%, 99%, 100%? What is it? How much of other peoples money do you want to stop your whining?
This idea of stealing peoples wealth must stop, do you want more money EARN it. Start a business, get educated in something that has earning potential, take risk.
What is the earning potential of what you do?
Who is anyone to say what any individual should earn? Who do you think you are to dictate that.? This country is made great by people risking it all, being innovative, doing things that 99% of other people would NEVER do. Socialism is theft..nothing more. It is the rhetoric used with low IQ sheep to stir up the masses into believing that they are entitled to everything that other guy has. Instead of being taught to excel in everything they do, they are taught how to stick their hand out and complain.
I have had it with the lunatics constant complaining, whining, wishing, political correctness, the idea that everyone is entitled and that life is fair. Life is NOT fair the universe does not work that way and never will.
This has to end.
"Life is NOT fair the universe does not work that way and never will."
That is correct. Some people were born with more brainpower. More gumption. Taught work ethics. Given great educations. Supported. Others were much less fortunate.
Triple or quadruple the minimum wage.
Alpha, we don't need to pay teachers a dime more unless we cut the retirement benefits.
We need to level the playing field. In Canada, teachers, police, fire, etc. are all on the same pension sliding scale.
BTW, Canada pensions are less but they have an equivalent of Social Security too, so combined it is adequate. Think of the 20 year old working as a Barista at Starbucks. Wouldn't it be better to have a Canadian system where 9.5% of their salary is deducted for a pension that they take with them (and the company pays another 9.5%) plus about 8% salary deducted for a national healthcare program???
Who would do worse in America?
#1 Very rich who would have to pay the 8% on large earnings
#2 Corporations would have to pay 9.5% versus nothing to 5% now
#3 Teachers, Police, Fire ("Public" workers) who would get less in pension/retirement and arguably health since they have Cadillac plans
The other aspect is what tax do people pay in America. The very rich like Trump abuse the system through depreciation deducations and pay little to nothing like his son in law too. The current administration cuts home ownership deductions for the average Joe but they continue to benefit???
Open your eyes, speak up, and most importantly get into positions of power in our government so you can change things for the better. Canada is part of the Commonwealth, but we are not. Commonwealth AKA "Common Well-Being", this pretty much sums up what a society, or collection of individuals on a given piece of land should be...
Rebecka States - "Triple or quadruple the minimum wage." - Of course the results of this action would be to destroy business and cause massive job losses.
This is perfect example of a statement made without knowledge, background, understanding of cause and effect. It is the epitome of the socialist/sheep thinking This statement is EXACTLY what is wrong. People believing that things like this are possible.
I believe NJ minimum wage is $8.85, so for someone who puts french frys in boxes all day you are proposing a $35.40/hour wage? This is the thinking of Americas new socialists. No consideration at all to the value of putting french frys in boxes, none at all. Has America become this idiotic, this out of touch with economics and common sense? If so we will be Venezuela far more quickly then anyone has imagine.
"Who is anyone to say what any individual should earn? Who do you think you are to dictate that.? "
Those who hire lobbyists in order to tilt the playing field in their favor do exactly that every single day.
They are not smarter, or more worthy. They are just narcissistic and have the power to do that.
If now the people, who do not have the ability to hire lobbyists, choose to do something about it, well, America is just going to have to suck it up. It's just the way it is. And when the American Enterprise Institute, a highly conservative Republican institution publishes an article like this, even they now realize that smell means there is something in the diaper.
“for someone who puts french frys in boxes all day you are proposing a $35.40/hour wage?”
McDonalds will just find a robot that costs less than $35/hour to do it, and now that kid making $8/hour is making $0.
I know I know... the kid will get a job repairing the robot. But, there are a lot less robot repair jobs needed than fry boxers at a typical McDonalds.
The robots are coming anyway. That is a moot point. You are already being conditioned to use kiosks, scan and bag your own groceries, etc.
Right now robots are not so good at picking vegetables. I wonder what a tomato will cost without an illegal or a robot, but a picker making 35.00 per hour, or the clerk at motor vehicles/local town hall. Hey it would be a pay cut for me but $35 an hour with bennies I'll go over your permits for ya.
Thanks for the advice Rebecka but I will pass. If that is your definition of broadened thinking it just supports my thoughts further.
Teachers, firemen, cops, CEO's, ditchdiggers and whomever else you want to lump into the discussion, pretty sure signed up for the jobs.
Different jobs have different pay scales. There is a value to every employer in what they pay their employees, regardless of what position said employee holds. When the pay outweighs the value, no more employee.
Very rarely is anyone paid relative to how hard they work. I do well, and work less hard than when I was 20. Ditchdiggers work very hard and get paid less than their foreman. Most people are paid based on the responsibility that they take on.
Stop worrying what others make. Improve yourself. Do better. If we buy into the sick argument about CEO's, it will be only a matter of time until someone else decide that Alpha's salary is too high. The government is inefficient and will always need more. First the billionaires, then the millionaires and on and on until they need Alpha's treasures.
Some people make more, some people make less and some were born with it. Who cares. Keep your eyes on your own and figure out how to get ahead. ANd if the teacher cant make ends meet, go find another job. Guess you made a poor career choice. You knew the pay before agreeing on taking the job.
“A conspiracy theory? It’s math pal.” Gee, ElectricBear, thanks. Steven and I were talking about LBJ, and apparently every other Democratic President, raiding the account for who knows what and now there is no money left. That is totally untrue.
You are talking Social Security as Ponzi scheme, a different topic altogether, and no conspiracy there unless you see one. It is also totally untrue. Your mouthpiece is a brilliant economist, father of HSA accounts, and seasoned Libertarian. He is being incendiary talking Ponzi, perhaps to expand his areas of expertise in fiscal policy.
Let me ask a very simple question: what Ponzi scheme can you think of that has survived for 83 years successfully, and still has another 16-freaking years of cash on hand (sorry, said 30 before, my bad)? That’s either the world’s best Ponzi scheme or someone trying to sell newspapers with a hot headline.
His preamble is: “But as we moved into the 20th century, families became dispersed and increasingly unreliable.” Oh bunk. While that is true, what precipitated SS was called The Great Depression. The idea has kicked around, tried with different formulas, for a hundred years across the globe. But no Great Depression, no SS.
He leads off with: “What rational person would choose a system that makes promises to pay workers benefits 45 years in the future without making any provision to save and invest the funds needed to pay those benefits?” Oh bunk again. SS is fully saved and invested in T-bills. Special ones, special rates and terms to boot. A better deal than China gets: MAGA. What else would you invest in: Trump Company? Exxon? Maybe a CD at Bank America? Seems investing in US is a safer and honest bet. So, I heartily disagree with his opening statement based on the math :>)
His next statement about forecasting 45 years in the future, I agree, but that’s the rub. Ask ObamaCare insurers how hard it is to forecast accurately. They only needed one year in, and they blew it. People were actually sick, sicker than estimated, rates had to go up. And the did. My point is that’s the job and when you blow it, you re-engineer to the new facts (like living longer, who could have accurately picked those numbers 83 years ago).
I can not find his own support for it being a Ponzi scheme. He talks about a lot of things, but never once mentions the word Ponzi in the piece except in that headline.
A Ponzi scheme is defined as “a form of fraud in which belief in the success of a nonexistent enterprise is fostered by the payment of quick returns to the first investors from money invested by later investors.
First, there is an existent enterprise; it’s called The United States of America
There are no quick returns, matter of fact, you have to live to age 62 to see a penny.
Yes, you pay the insurance which is returned to your predecessors and, someday, God Willing, you might be repaid. For the next 16 years, that will be true…..at least.
There is a bankroll for the next 16 years, everyone gets paid.
It's an insurance scheme paid for through taxation on earnings, not a Ponzi scheme. Same as anyone's insurance, you get paid with somebody else's dollars.
The only issue is we are living longer than our insurance payments will cover in the future. We have time to fix, but either we live shorter lives, SS goes under, or we fix so it can live another 83 years. Some Ponzi scheme, 83 years old.
Live long and profit, you can make more money than you put in (why shouldn’t you, it’s been making the same profits as China invests in the US for and for, what, like over 50 years of your life)
Don’t live long and the rest of us all thank you very much for your support. Not everyone takes out more than they put in, where's the Ponzi in that?
It’s not a Ponzi scheme except to sell news; It’s an insurance fund almost like any other EXCEPT we invest in ourselves, that’s a little weird. But where else would you put it and still be called fair?
I think your guy is trying to sell his new expertise in SS, the article does not support the headline. But he is a very smart fellow for sure.
In other news-
Republicans are grateful to Murphy for keeping NJ a sanctuary state.
Due to the impending minimum wage increase for workers, Republicans have stated they are so relieved that Murphy is keeping a high amount of illegals that can work in the state. The ability to hire them for less than what the current minimum wage, along with the ability to discard them as necessary, makes them valuable to businesses, both Democratic and Republican as well. The extra supply will also help to allow for some to be arrested for things like jaywalking, or stealing a grape. This will allow for the appeasement of the enforcement types, while allowing commerce to move ahead full steam.
The only thing you need to know is the lockbox is a myth. Ida May Fuller was the first recipient. She paid $24.75 into the program over four years and collected over $22,000 in benefits. Sound sustainable to you without a large general fund of stolen money? Nope. There’s no lockbox. Your money is spent before it even hits the general fund.
If you have a problem with CEO pay then we should also agree to reduce the pay for all professional athletes and celebrities as their pay is way disproportionate to everyone else.
Why don’t we let the free market determine wages instead? That seems infinitely more fair and balanced no?
ijay moved to Canada? That took guts.
are 47% of all Families still paying $0 in Federal tax or did that change since it cost Romney the election?
“It’s not a Ponzi scheme ...”
“A Ponzi scheme is able to maintain the illusion of a sustainable business as long as there continue to be new investors willing to contribute new funds, and as long as most of the investors do not demand full repayment and are willing to believe in the non-existent assets that they are purported to own.”
A: new investors. Nope, the population paying into SS vs thosecdrawing on it has been declining. But backed by the taxpayer, so Check
B: do not demand full payment...Check
C: willing to believe in the non-existent assets...Nope, the SS fund is empty, or rather filled with IOU’s. But backed by the tax payer, so Check.
SS is backed by the govt (aka the folks with the legal guns!) so of course it’s not a true Ponzi scheme, but it is the legalized version of it since it operates on the same principle.
So yeah, you’re correct. SS is no Ponzi scheme at all ;-)
Yes, Electric, 83 years of abject failure and total fiscal mismanagement. How many bankruptcies with how many billions served? Terrible program. Bet you’re first in line.
Your President should have such a record for solvency.
No, its not a ponzi scheme or a legalized version. It is what it says; an insurance plan. Not much different than health insurance (if you get sick, you might get more), or car insurance (if you have accident, you might get more than you paid).
I have yet to see a denigrator turn it down or suggest a better program.
“A Ponzi scheme is able to maintain the illusion of a sustainable business as long as there continue to be new investors willing to contribute new funds, and as long as most of the investors do not demand full repayment and are willing to believe in the non-existent assets that they are purported to own.”
The "new investors" are not necessarily "willing to contribute", nor are they necessarily "willing to believe" in the non-existent assets- They have no choice as to their contributions, and many don't believe they will ever receive a dime.
Therefore, that statement is false.;-)
“I have yet to see a denigrator turn it down or suggest a better program.”
That’s a ridiculous statement. Who would turn it down.
“No, its not a ponzi scheme or a legalized version. It is what it says; an insurance plan.”
Insurance plan? Choose not to participate and you’ll need the insurance you did choose - health insurance - because the plan you just called “insurance” is nothing of the sort. You pay into it or you get arrested!
It’s 83 years of theft and lies. The program is subsidized by the working people. The money the recipients paid in, long gone. Spent before it was even held in hand. They rob the treasury to bribe I mean pay voters I mean recipients. You’re a fool if you think SS is in any way solvent prudent or effective. We’d all be better off with a personal IRA than this false altruism. At least then our money would be our money. And nope. Not first in line by a long shot. I won’t be eligible for about 35 years depending on means testing. And I do not foresee any politicians steppping up to fix it anytime in the future. I don’t count on SS being there. Much less do I plan to count on it as income to survive on.
Man, this thread has gone off the rails. Can we do a separate one for Social Security - that's very different type of tax.
Just one stray thought here: In the libertarian type world, how much would you pay for all the services you use every day without even thinking about it?
How much would it cost to drive to work paying potentially multiple times for different road as they're owned and maintained by different companies?
What are your chances of getting to work alive in your car, that because there's no general government to oversee vehicle safety - and your cheap / spending more money on what you consider basic services now. Any of you take public transit? You're paying no more than 10% the real cost of that service through your ticket - so if you wanted government gone, you may have a 1000% increase in public transit cost.
How much would you spend to go to a nice park for a day $50? $100?
How much to eat if the government didn't subsize so much of our food costs?
How much would safe drinking water cost you if every drop had a 20% profit margin (In some places you might, but from my understanding HMUA runs the wells providing Hackettstown with water and they even have data on some of the costs on their site)
How many of us would be screwed because of a natural disaster, or fire? I'm sure some of you're houses flooded back in Irene in 2011 back when I first moved up here?
How much would you pay for amazon packages if the USPS didn't have to come around every day anyway?
Guys, we're in Warren County. You know how many services just outright ignore us, or barely serve the area because we're so sparsely populated? How many of you outside of Hackettstown proper have cable internet, or are stuck with DSL? Most broadband development is heavily subsidized.
A lot of these won't apply to everyone.
We ALL get more into the system than we pay out. But when you have money, you find ways to take more and pay less.
And billionaires and millionaires take more our of the system than immigrant, welfare, unemployment, etc. Just one recent example: Gov Christ let Exonn settle lawsuits over spills for $225M. The cost of cleanup was $8.9B.
You and I paid that $8.9B in taxes, both personal and businesses taxes.
NJ has 9 million residents - every old person, woman, child, student etc, give or take.
In effect, each person paid $1000 to let Exxon off the hook (Yes, I'm rounding here a bit, and yes, some paid more, others paid less, the fed probably paid some, etc)
I would one would rather deal with a robot at McDonalds. There's a better chance of getting an order right! Maybe if their parents made more as a robot repair technician, the kids wouldn't need to work and could afford to go to school full time and focus on their education or skills training and make more and contribute more to society - beyond making more money.
The https://www.bls.gov/data/ has some really good info on prices and cost of goods and services over time.
A1B in the world you just described the list of things that each of us wants is nearly unlimited, is it not?
So I’ll flip your question ‘round and ask what *wouldn’t* you spend money on?
Btw, you do realize that what you’ve just described us financial slavery, right? If that’s ok for you, fine, but as others have wisely pointed out every one of us is different and I n a different life situation. How could you even reason what you just did knowing that????
Alpha. I’d simply much rather have the government only charged with the duties set out in the constitution and the 10th Amendment respected. Each government line item can easily be cut in half today and we wouldn’t miss a beat. The government simply does way too much and takes way too much $ off the top from the people who earn it. We have subsidies for tobacco farmers yet in the same city we have organizations dedicated to putting the tobacco farmer out of business. Ludicrous. It’s time to reduce the total % of GDP that we hand over to the ‘masterminds’.
"We ALL get more into the system than we pay out."
" I’d simply much rather have the government only charged with the duties set out in the constitution and the 10th Amendment respected. Each government line item can easily be cut in half today and we wouldn’t miss a beat."
Correct. I'd go beyond just federal and even say local has long since overstepped and overspent.
From above: "Just one recent example: Gov Christ let Exonn settle lawsuits over spills for $225M. The cost of cleanup was $8.9B.
You and I paid that $8.9B in taxes, both personal and businesses taxes."
Note that in reality the $225M is in excess of cleanup costs, which Exxon is still on the hook for, and which are ongoing.
The $8.9B is a very rough estimate of harm occurring to date, which the state wanted Exxon to give to the state to build new wetlands elsewhere, etc, to undo the harm. No $8.9B has been spent except maybe a portion of the $225M. Anyway, it's complicated.
Here is where the money really went:
Exxon did contribute $500,000 to the Republican Governors Association in May 2014, when Mr. Christie was serving a one-year term as its chairman; the company has contributed annually to the group since at least 2008, records show.
If the settlement is completed, it is possible that some or even none of the money would go toward environmental costs in the Exxon case: An appropriations law in New Jersey allows money beyond the first $50 million collected in such cases in the current fiscal year to go toward balancing the state budget, a state fiscal analyst said.
Folks say “you can do anything, if you put your mind to it.” I want to design video games.
The Richest Video Game Moguls
Gabe Newell, Valve - $1.3 billion. ...
Markus Persson, Mojang - $1.3 billion. ...
Mark Pincus, Zynga - $990 million. ...
Melvyn Morris, King Digital - $627 million. ...
Riccardo Zacconi, King Digital - $548 million. ...
Palmer Luckey, Oculus VR - $500 million. ...
Ilkka Paananen, Supercell - $400 million.
There’s a demand, at price people are willing to pay.
Just paint everyone with broad strokes. Works every time on the internet.
re: 'Every single thing I've said can be backed up.' ......'The rich are not hard working. Many of them inherit their wealth. They don't work hard to get into a good college - daddy buys their way in and names a hall after them. The rich don't sweat - they make money off your labor.'
AB1, only about 10% of all millionaires inherit their wealth. 90% are first generation millionaires. This has been cited in more than one study. here's one: https://www.daveramsey.com/blog/habits-of-millionaires-and-billionaires.. A millionaire is much more likely to be your frugal next door neighbor who has lived below their means, worked and saved over their career and has most of their wealth in a retirement account than a trust fund baby, celebrity, or athlete. They drive an average car and have a modest home. btw, this is among ALL millionaires, whether they have 1 million or a 1000 million.
As for the rich not contributing to society, how about the Bill Gates and Warren Buffets out there? Not only did they provide jobs to thousands for decades, they are giving away their wealth: improving society, the planet, and humankind.
So in short, you're against the American Dream. And if someone happens to reach that dream, they are now evil, don't pay their fair share, and should be taxed even more. Right.
Is there excessive CEO pay, golden parachutes, people stepping on heads to get ahead, greedy banks, and general shenanigans among the wealthy? Yes. Does it apply to ALL of them? Not by a longshot. Not even a majority. Less than 10%.
maja, just because your neighbors drive fancy vehicles doesn't mean they are millionaires. There are plenty of people who make a lot of money that spend more than they have and it only looks like they're rich, meanwhile they're leveraged to the hilt and are one layoff from bankruptcy.
When millionaires are mentioned it seems the talk focuses on people (families) that have extraordinarily high incomes. Fact is that you can have a high income and not be all that rich. Or, you can have a modest income and be a multi-millionaire. Being a millionaire is not about income - it is about net worth - assets minus liabilities. Lot's of people do that by making good financial decisions, living within their means, and saving/investing prudently.
Ron, but people want to tax that Million, but teacher retirees with pensions and retiree medical have, on average, 2.5 Million which nobody will see in individual accounts but is real in its costs to the taxpayer...
iJay, sorry but I don't quite understand what point you're trying to make. What million are we talking about? And I don't understand the reference to teacher retirees having accounts with $2.5 million. Admittedly I don't know very much about NJ public employee pensions, but I do see published information that says the average pension is $31,600 /year. Are you saying they have lump sums in the millions? Maybe you could clarify?
he's talking about a pension and health care benefits that retired public service employees get that are in the 7 figure (million dollar) range over their lifetimes, don't pay dumb, you know the numbers and what they mean
I'd guess he is saying that if you add up the cost of the benefits- pension and medical, over the amount of time they claim it- averages 2.5 mil each.
I have no idea, just that I think that is what he means...
And if true, I don't mind him being a little salty about it.
We are taxed too much, for waaay too many reasons.
Your average person gets very little if anything from an employer- and if they do, it is out of the employers wallet- not the blatant armed theft of the common man that we have in every aspect of our lives now- especially in NJ.
Isn't it funny that the people who decide what to take from us also decide to hire, train and pay men to take up arms against people that don't play along and say no to the pizzo.
Those same armed men also get the publicly paid pension and medical, literally from the people they will pull a gun on and cuff. Jail if they don't 'comply'.
We may be one of the better countries- but boy we are sliding fast and hard, mankind is messed up and destined to fail eventually.
The 2.5 million was quoted by a task force years ago; is it higher or lower today I do not know. It is the average value or retiree medical and pension payments for retired educators for all of the years they collect. Such generous benefits are not affordable.
In any case add virtually all of the educators in this state to the "Millionaire" category. You won't see it in any personal account, the value is there...
go to zillow.com, search for sale in Alpine NJ, you can tell that the millionaires, billionaires are leaving the state, ATM there are 60 mansions from 1.5-19 million for sale
When the state ignores the taxpayer, especially the property tax payer, what do you expect? And as said many times before, those with money can move easier than those without...
Fixation and obsession are red flags.
Also the mansions of alpine u pay 1-20 mill but u pay 100- 150k+ extra per year just on taxes. That's just throwing away money
Oh man, read some Zillow at the anecdotal's are off to the races. Toss in the teachers and it's millionaires flee leaving teachers to rule the roost.
Do you not see my points? A private sector person with 1 Million in savings is "Rich" but how far will that Million go in retirement. The Zillow point is real, keep being oblivious to the facts and watch "Millionaires" move South...
Pennsylvania’s pension overhaul law goes into effect today for most new state government employees and on July 1 for all new school employees.
Under the law, known as Act 5, the affected new public workers no longer will receive full guaranteed pensions backed by taxpayers and immune to the ups and downs of national and world economies.
The law creates two new retirement plans that carry less risk for taxpayers and therefore lower retirement benefits for workers who enroll in them.
One plan is a hybrid. It puts about half the retirement savings in a traditional, taxpayer-backed fund. The other half goes into a private sector 401(k) that rides the stock market’s ups and downs.
The other option lets workers put all their retirement money into a 401(k) account.
Josh, now here is the kicker:
Not every new public servant is affected by the law.
Lawmakers, who are sworn into office today for the 2019-20 legislative session, excluded themselves from mandatory participation in the reduced plans when they passed the pension bill in June 2017. Lawmakers also excluded state law enforcement and corrections officers.
"Do you not see my points? A private sector person with 1 Million in savings is "Rich" but how far will that Million go in retirement. The Zillow point is real, keep being oblivious to the facts and watch "Millionaires" move South..."
I am sorry… I see many people leaving NJ; less people are coming. I see NJ population still growing, albeit slowly, but slowly is good. NJ GDP is growing; think 2017 is banner year.
It appears that people see weird surveys like the Zillow, the Van Lines, and Uhaul and say, aha --- millionaires are moving. Ask yourself this, if the odds are overwhelming millionaires moving out, what are the prices on Zillow --- buyer's market, right? Doubt it...…
Try this for a more measured view of what we know and what we don't know: https://www.philly.com/news/columnists/new-jersey-leaving-state-migration-study-20190114.html
Leave a Reply
To comment on this topic, fill out the form below. If you would like to comment directly to one person, you may click on the envelope next to the posters name if they provided their email.