Obama '08?

My source is the social security administration.
Yours is "ehow"?

Which do you think has a better understanding of what and how the social security taxes collected and in what percentages?


I suppose when you need tax advice, you think IRS publications are wrong and you consider Bob down at the bowling alley as being more informed.

Barack Obama is continuing his process of step by step replacement of capitalism with socialism. He anticipates few people will persist in attempting to stop this step by step process. He learned this technique from people who learned this technique from among others, Saul Alinsky.

Parados and Cyclotichorn and cicerone imposter, if you can, show how this is a valid rebuttal of what I posted. Based on your comments, you appear to believe that an easy task.


If you can show how this is a valid rebuttal of what I posted, then you and I would then validly conclude that the money collected from all wages for the Social Security Trust Fund's personal income payback is even less than I claimed and would be exhausted after fewer years than I claimed, OR would require even more savings fund interest to allow the number of years to be what I computed.

Dude, do you not understand what the words Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Fund mean? You don't GET THAT MONEY back unless you are disabled in some fashion. It is collected by SS but isn't the same thing as the OA part of it.

You can't count that towards your potential investment income.

Cycloptichorn

Not only are you an idiot ican, you are an extremely stupid idiot. (Your run on sentence makes almost no sense.)

It refutes what you posted because it shows that at no time did SS take 12.6% of anyone's pay for retirement.
If you claim 12.6% of $50,000 for 35 years and it is NEVER that high then of course your conclusion is unrealistically high. Even a grade schooler should be able to figure that one out..

This is the employer and employee contribution for OASI
It is the ONLY part that is contributed for Old Age and Survivors.

5.3% X2 is NOT 12.6%.

That is the exact fundamental change he was talking about five days before he took office.

Transcribed from the Wall Street Journal, Thursday, March 10, 2011, page A17.

“Why I’m Fighting in Wisconsin”
“We can avoid mass teacher layoffs and reward our best performers. But we have to act now.”
By Scott Walker, Republican Governor of Wisconsin

In 2010, Megan Sampson was named an Outstanding First Year Teacher in Wisconsin. A week later, she got a layoff notice from the Milwaukee Public Schools. Why would one of the best new teachers in the state be one of the first let go? Because her collective-bargaining contract requires staffing decisions to be made on seniority.

Ms. Sampson got a layoff notice because the union leadership would not accept reasonable changes to their contract. Instead they hid behind a collective-bargaining agreement that cost taxpayers $101,091 per year for each teacher, protects a 0% contribution for health-insurance premiums, and forces schools to hire and fire based on seniority and union rules.

My state’s budget repair bill which passed the Assembly on Feb. 25 and awaits a vote in the Senate [passed in the Senate the night of March 9 after this article was written but not yet published], reforms this union-controlled hiring and firing process by allowing school districts to assign staff based on merit and performance. That keeps great teachers like Ms. Sampson in the classroom.

Most states in the country are facing a major budget deficit. Many are cutting billions of dollars of aid to schools and local governments. These cuts lead to massive layoffs or increases in property taxes—or both.

In Wisconsin, we have a better approach to tackling our $3.6 billion deficit. We are reforming the way government works, as well as balancing our budget. Our reform plan gives state and local governments the tools to balance the budget through reasonable benefit contributions. In total, our budget-repair bill saves local governments almost $1.5 billion, out weighing the reductions in state aid in our budget.

While it might be a bold political move, the changes are modest. We ask government workers to make a 5.8% contribution to their pensions and a 12.6% contribution to their health-insurance premium, both of which are well below what other workers pay for benefits. Our plan calls for Wisconsin state workers to contribute half of what federal employees pay for their health-insurance premiums. (it’s also worth noting that most federal workers don’t have collective bargaining for wages and benefits.)

For example, my brother works as a banquet manager at a hotel and occasionally works as a bartender. My sister-in—law works at a department store. They have two beautiful kids. They are a typical middle-class Wisconsin family. At the start of this debate, David reminded me that he pays nearly $800 per month for his family’s health insurance premium and a modest 401(k) contribution. He said most workers in Wisconsin would love a deal like the one we are proposing.

The unions say they are ready to accept concessions, yet their actions speak louder than words. Over the past three weeks, local unions across the state have pursued contracts without new pension or health-insurance contributions. Their rhetoric does not match their record on this issue.
Local governments can’t pass budgets on a hope and a prayer. Beyond balancing budgets, our reforms give schools—as well as state and local governments—the tools to reward productive workers and improve their operations. Most crucially, our reforms confront the barriers of collective bargaining that currently block innovation and reform.

When Gov. Mitch Daniels repealed collective bargaining in Indiana six years ago, It helped government become more efficient and responsive. The average pay for Indiana state employees has actually increased, and high-performing employees are rewarded with pay increases or bonuses when they do something exceptional.

Passing our budget-repair bill will help put similar reforms into place in Wisconsin. This will be good for the Badger State’s hardworking taxpayers. It will be good for state and local government employees who overwhelmingly want to do their jobs well.

In Wisconsin, we can avoid the massive teacher layoffs that schools are facing across America. Our budget repair bill is a commitment to the future so our children won’t face even more dire consequences than we face today, and teachers like Ms. Sampson are rewarded—not laid off.

Taking on the status quo is no easy task. Each day, there are protesters in and around our state Capitol. They have every right to be heard. But their voices cannot drown out the voices of the countless taxpayers who want us to balance our budgets and, more importantly, to make government work for each of them.

One anecdotal story is worthless; there are always exceptions in all professional fields.

When you learn this lesson, come back and tell us how it affects "all" teachers.

BRIEF SUMMARY

0 years annual salary $ 4,000.00 $ 424.00 44 $ 2,728.99 $ 2,894.70
1 $ 4,260.16 $ 451.58 43 $ 2,786.06 $ 2,951.27
...
$ 6,508.93 $ 6,526.39
43 $ 60,091.58 $ 6,369.71 1 $ 6,645.04 $ 6,653.95
44 years annual salary $ 64,000.00 $ 6,784.00 0 $ 6,784.00 $ 6,784.00
TOTALS $ 91,414.63 35 $ 195,178.08 $ 421,321.40
If 0.106 is annual SS deduct factor 1.00000000 0.10046209 0.04653929
SS yearly pays $ 19,608.00 $ 19,608.00 $ 19,608.00
Years SS pays 4.66 12 35
interest factor/yr 0.0000 1.04322526 1.04462385
year Annual salary SS deduction yrs held at compound interest at compound interest
annual raise factor = 1.06504109

Could you try to write that so it makes even a little sense? I can only guess at what your numbers mean.

Don't forget, you also have to take into account the maximum SS per year, and not just the percent of income. You can not pretend to invest a larger amount than what SS would have taken in any given year.

You can't take 10.6% of salary for 44 years since the 10.6% was not what was taken out for 44 years.
44 years ago the rate was 7%.

A $4000 salary in 1966 would have only had $280 taken out for SS retirement and disability. Your $424. is well over the actual amount. Again, you don't seem to have a clue about reality.

When an anecdotal story is in fact representative of many such anecdotal stories, it is worth a great deal.

Ms. Sampson's anecdotal story is in fact representative of many such anecdotal stories, and consequently it is worth a great deal.


Retaining teachers solely on the basis of seniority is not only stupid, it is destructive to the education of our children.

annual raise factor = 1.06504109 SS deduct factor = 0.106
The annual interest factor per year per year 1.0432253 1.0446239
year Annual salary SS deduction yrs held at compound interest at compound interest
0 $ 4,000.00 $ 424.00 44 $ 2,728.99 $ 2,894.70
1 $ 4,260.16 $ 451.58 43 $ 2,786.06 $ 2,951.27
2 $ 4,537.25 $ 480.95 42 $ 2,844.32 $ 3,008.96
3 $ 4,832.36 $ 512.23 41 $ 2,903.80 $ 3,067.77
4 $ 5,146.66 $ 545.55 40 $ 2,964.52 $ 3,127.73
5 $ 5,481.40 $ 581.03 39 $ 3,026.52 $ 3,188.86
6 $ 5,837.92 $ 618.82 38 $ 3,089.81 $ 3,251.18
7 $ 6,217.63 $ 659.07 37 $ 3,154.42 $ 3,314.73
8 $ 6,622.03 $ 701.93 36 $ 3,220.39 $ 3,379.52
9 $ 7,052.73 $ 747.59 35 $ 3,287.73 $ 3,445.57
10 $ 7,511.45 $ 796.21 34 $ 3,356.48 $ 3,512.91
11 $ 8,000.00 $ 848.00 33 $ 3,426.68 $ 3,581.57
12 $ 8,520.33 $ 903.15 32 $ 3,498.33 $ 3,651.57
13 $ 9,074.50 $ 961.90 31 $ 3,571.49 $ 3,722.95
14 $ 9,664.72 $ 1,024.46 30 $ 3,646.18 $ 3,795.71
15 $ 10,293.32 $ 1,091.09 29 $ 3,722.43 $ 3,869.90
16 $ 10,962.81 $ 1,162.06 28 $ 3,800.27 $ 3,945.54
17 $ 11,675.84 $ 1,237.64 27 $ 3,879.74 $ 4,022.65
18 $ 12,435.25 $ 1,318.14 26 $ 3,960.87 $ 4,101.27
19 $ 13,244.05 $ 1,403.87 25 $ 4,043.70 $ 4,181.43
20 $ 14,105.46 $ 1,495.18 24 $ 4,128.26 $ 4,263.16
21 $ 15,022.89 $ 1,592.43 23 $ 4,214.59 $ 4,346.48
22 $ 16,000.00 $ 1,696.00 22 $ 4,302.73 $ 4,431.44
23 $ 17,040.66 $ 1,806.31 21 $ 4,392.71 $ 4,518.05
24 $ 18,149.00 $ 1,923.79 20 $ 4,484.57 $ 4,606.35
25 $ 19,329.43 $ 2,048.92 19 $ 4,578.35 $ 4,696.39
26 $ 20,586.64 $ 2,182.18 18 $ 4,674.09 $ 4,788.18
27 $ 21,925.62 $ 2,324.12 17 $ 4,771.83 $ 4,881.76
28 $ 23,351.68 $ 2,475.28 16 $ 4,871.62 $ 4,977.18
29 $ 24,870.50 $ 2,636.27 15 $ 4,973.50 $ 5,074.46
30 $ 26,488.11 $ 2,807.74 14 $ 5,077.50 $ 5,173.64
31 $ 28,210.92 $ 2,990.36 13 $ 5,183.68 $ 5,274.76
32 $ 30,045.79 $ 3,184.85 12 $ 5,292.08 $ 5,377.85
33 $ 32,000.00 $ 3,392.00 11 $ 5,402.75 $ 5,482.96
34 $ 34,081.32 $ 3,612.62 10 $ 5,515.73 $ 5,590.13
35 $ 36,298.00 $ 3,847.59 9 $ 5,631.08 $ 5,699.39
36 $ 38,658.86 $ 4,097.84 8 $ 5,748.83 $ 5,810.78
37 $ 41,173.28 $ 4,364.37 7 $ 5,869.05 $ 5,924.35
38 $ 43,851.23 $ 4,648.23 6 $ 5,991.79 $ 6,040.14
39 $ 46,703.36 $ 4,950.56 5 $ 6,117.08 $ 6,158.20
40 $ 49,741.00 $ 5,272.55 4 $ 6,245.00 $ 6,278.56
41 $ 52,976.21 $ 5,615.48 3 $ 6,375.60 $ 6,401.28
42 $ 56,421.84 $ 5,980.72 2 $ 6,508.93 $ 6,526.39
43 $ 60,091.58 $ 6,369.71 1 $ 6,645.04 $ 6,653.95
44 $ 64,000.00 $ 6,784.00 0 $ 6,784.00 $ 6,784.00
TOTALS $ 91,414.63 35 $ 195,178.08 $ 421,321.40
0.106 SS deduct factor 1.00000000 0.10046209 0.04653929
SS yearly pays $ 19,608.00 $ 19,608.00 $ 19,608.00
Years SS pays 4.66 12 35
interest factor/yr 0.0000 1.04322526 1.04462385
year Annual salary SS deduction yrs held at compound interest at compound interest
annual raise factor = 1.06504109

It depends on "how" relative the anecdotal story is to the whole. You just can't make any claim that one story is representative of anything when there are tens of thousands who practice in the same profession. Simple logic.

How about the "rubber room" that exists in NY city.
It is for suspended teachers, because the union contract says they cant be fired, even though they cant teach or be around children.

Now while not evefry teacher in the "rubber rooms" is a threat to kids, how do you justify keeping them on the payroll when they cant do their jobs.
Its the union that wont allow them to be fired.

Its this kind of "collective bargaining" that draws the ire of many people.

Your first mistake.. You assume a factor that is NOT accurate for every year.
Second mistake. You use a figure higher than the max deduction allowed for that year.
If your numbers in read are supposed to be the totals after 44 years, then they are wrong for the following reasons -
1. You start with a number that is wrong.
2. You are no longer using the 3% interest you were claiming before.


Your totals make no sense as well.
You can't total annual salary. And your total is less than the previous 2 years salary.
What does the 35 years even mean?
Your two numbers if totals should be a heck of a lot closer than you have them.


You still are not making much sense ican. You are using false numbers and trying to massage the numbers to support your argument.

Rubber rooms don't exist in NY City MM..

Last day of rubber rooms for NY City

mm, It's not my place to justify anything that has to do with legal issues against any profession. You are one stupid dude!

You missed my point.
I was trying to point out that teachers, being municipal employees, have seemed to hold the city of NY hostage.
Their union has said that the teachers cant be fired, so they are costing the city of NY thousands of dollars every month.

While I admitted that not all of them were problem teachers, the ones that are cant be fired.
They are holding NYC hostage.

Unions should not have that kind of power, under any circumstance.

Parados,
I didnt know they had been eliminated.
Thanx for the update.

I don't really know the situation in NY regarding teachers and if they can be fired. However, from what I read from the article Parados left, it said they were sent to the room awaiting a hearing officer or the Dept. of education to determine their fate.