Increasing employment would be great. But based on demographics, the SS deficit is going to worsen unless there are reductions in benefits or the country sees a surge of immigration of young people to help pay the elderly. Keeping the payroll tax holiday in effect would worsen that deficit.
When gov't at all levels raids dedicated funds for spending outside of their claimed purpose, we all lose.
Monday was still 2012
Tuesday was a holiday for most
Wednesday was a work day as was Thursday and you got paid on Friday. So at most it was what two days? Or is something different in your situation? If your SS went up $38 for at best two days work and possibly just one consider your next check. Join us then and give us an update. Not that I am accusing you of anything but I have seen similar post and dollar amounts elsewhere in other forums. Man you got a big increase in SS contributions coming next pay but you must make a chunk of change if this small picture reflects your full salary but wait SS is capped at 110k so did your employer increase it in anticipation of your working earnings moving forward?
So unless we know Ken and or he has shared previously we don't know if collects and pays into SS or not. However since the switchover was 28 years ago you might guess what the odds are.Prior to 1984, federal employees paid into the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) rather than Social Security. Beginning in 1984, new employees entered the Federal Employees Retirement System. Current employees could either switch completely to FERS or stay in the Civil Service system. Federal employees who did not switch still paid into Medicare, beginning in 1984. Their CSRS pensions may affect any Social Security benefits under the Government Pension Offset (GPO) and Windfall Elimination Provisions (WEPs) of Social Security. FERS annuitants are not subject to GPO or WEP. FERS employees who are eligible to retire before age 62 receive a special FERS supplement equal to their age 62 Social Security benefit until they start collecting Social Security at age 62.
In addition, deductions are applied to the rates current on your date of pay - not on the period in which you actually earned that pay. For example, my first paycheck of 2013 was on wednesday 1-2-13 for the two week period from 12-12-12 thru 12-26-12. Despite the work period being in 2012, the pay occurred in 2013, so deductions/rates are credited to 2013. Just as payroll taxes were taken out for a full two-week period at a rate effective for 2013, my 401K deduction applied completely to 2013, not 2012. And the income will not show on the W-2 for 2012 income, but will for 2013 income. It does not seem logical, but that's the way it is done.
Some people work for employers who are agreeable to delaying their last pay of the year into the next year, to reduce their W-2 earnings. In previous years, that strategy reduced taxes. If that was done this year, it had the opposite result.
But what's the alternative? A "lock box," similar to what Al Gore advocated, isn't practical in reality. The government can't just keep that money in a non-interest bearing account--inflation will erode it. Investing it in stocks or corporate bonds creates significant conflicts of interest, similar to what occurs in communist governments where the state controls corporations. And I don't think it's smart to turn SS into 401k type accounts, as it's supposed to be a supplemental insurance program, and most people aren't astute enough to know how to allocate their investments properly.
and yes taxes were taken over that 2 week period from Dec. 21st - Jan. 4th and applied to 2013
as for the insurance....it's turned to complete garbage. Received a letter yesterday stating we now have to purchase so called maintenance meds thru the mail.... WHAT ????
My SS payment went up 50% per my most recent paycheck issued 1/4/13.
Look, like I've said many times before I hope Obama succeeds - his first term was not too shabby. My concern is that the widening gap between rich and poor will further cause people to vote for candidates that want bigger government. Then, you will have basically what's happened in every city (more dependence, more angst, more voting for democrats to chase the fictitious "bad guys" hoarding all the money). We should tax the 1% more which is the % that skews all the numbers we should not the tax the top 35% more as they are what drive the economy.
|Terms of Service | Search/Archive | Feedback | Contact Information | DC50tv |
Baltimore Sun | Chicago Tribune | Daily Press | Hartford Courant | LA Times | Orlando Sentinel | Sun Sentinel
The Morning Call | The Virginia Gazette
Baltimore Sun, 501 N. Calvert Street, P.O. Box 1377, Baltimore, MD 21278