On 9/9/24 11:48 AM, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "-hh" <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote in message
> news:vbcuf8$ahp0$1@dont-email.me...
>> On 9/4/24 3:05 PM, Scout wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Jayle Byrd" <jbyrd@privacy.net> wrote in message
>>> news:vba9tc$3vq6d$5@news.mixmin.net...
>>>> On 9/4/2024 9:48 AM, Scout wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Governor Swill" <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:fkqedj9og6n3k9tv8gj19daroi26mvd4rp@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Tue, 3 Sep 2024 09:30:08 -0500, "Scout" wrote:
>>>>>>> "Governor Swill" <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/30/24 3:41 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>  -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>>>>> ...and just wait until P2025 abolishes police, fire, & weather
>>>>>>>>>>> services:
>>>>>>>>>>>   better start to calculate how much more its going to cost an
>>>>>>>>>>> individual citizen to replace just these services with
>>>>>>>>>>> privately run (&
>>>>>>>>>>> for-profit) services.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I guarantee you it will cost more than the tax savings.  Then
>>>>>>>>>> there'll
>>>>>>>>>> be the lawsuits filed by the homeowners whose houses caught
>>>>>>>>>>  fire because a neighbor didn't have a fire service contract.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Agreed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is merely YA example of where it becomes painfully clear
>>>>>>>>> just how
>>>>>>>>> bad many people are at actually developing an expenses budget,
>>>>>>>>> and then
>>>>>>>>> go on to make bad decisions that are against their own self
>>>>>>>>> interests.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> FWIW, another common example of this is how they claim that EU
>>>>>>>>> taxes are
>>>>>>>>> frightfully bad (eg, 44%), not realizing that it includes
>>>>>>>>> healthcare and
>>>>>>>>> higher education, so the correct comparison starts their own
>>>>>>>>> 22% Fed
>>>>>>>>> rate, but then adds +32% ($25K/Median Income) for healthcare,
>>>>>>>>> plus let's
>>>>>>>>> say +1% for college/etc, for (22% + 32% + 1%) = 55% >> more
>>>>>>>>> than EU.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Top five national income tax rates.
>>>>>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/H1LJylHMPz0>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So you're trying to prove your point by ignoring many taxes...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My point is that in exchange for their higher taxes, Europeans get
>>>>>> a lot more
>>>>>> than we do.  Free university education.  No/low co-pay healthcare
>>>>>> including
>>>>>> prescriptions.  Vast public transportation networks that make it
>>>>>> unnecessary to
>>>>>> own a car for most people and one of the best quality road
>>>>>> networks on the
>>>>>> planet.  European highways are built to last twice as long as ours.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Caveat:  Their defense budgets have historically been lower than
>>>>>> ours owing to
>>>>>> our investment in our mutual security.  Think about post WW II.
>>>>>> Who in their
>>>>>> right mind would want to see Europe rearm itself?  Nobody.  For
>>>>>> that reason, we
>>>>>> dominated European security to avoid the risks of them rearming.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That danger is now past with the EU and Schweringen so they can
>>>>>> now arm
>>>>>> themselves in earnest.  And they are.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But let's go with income tax.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In California combined state and federal income tax takes over
>>>>>>> 50% of your
>>>>>>> income.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, that's right wing propaganda because California, like
>>>>>> federal, has a
>>>>>> progressive tax rate and their top marginal rate is currently
>>>>>> 14.4%. The
>>>>>> federal is 37%, but those are "top marginal" rates.  For those who
>>>>>> don't know
>>>>>> haw marginal rates work:
>>>>>
>>>>> You're just looking at income tax.. do you think that the ONLY tax
>>>>> that exists?
>>>>>
>>>>> Heck, pretty soon Kamala would be evicting people from their homes
>>>>> because they can't pay the 25% in the unrealized income from any
>>>>> increase in the value of their home.
>>>>>
>>>>> Further, I don't see Europe ignoring their homeless while being
>>>>> able to pay to fly illegal immigrants here and arranging their
>>>>> illegal entry into the country, while then providing them housing,
>>>>> food, jobs, transportation and legal representation while the
>>>>> government pretends that deportation would ever occur for them.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder how much the money spend on opening the border and all the
>>>>> care given to those who ignored are laws would have done to help
>>>>> our own homeless and poor????
>>>>>
>>>>> I heard somewhere this has cost $451 Billion/year so far, and let's
>>>>> say half of that/
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.nationalreview.com/news/border-crisis-costs-american-
>>>>> taxpayers-451-billion-annually-house-gop-report-claims/
>>>>>
>>>>> We currently have (according to HUD, 653,104 homeless Americans)
>>>>> that's $345,274 per person.
>>>>>
>>>>> In ONE year we could virtually eliminate our homeless problem and
>>>>> certainly within 2.
>>>>>
>>>>> Instead, we allow a lot of homeless illegal immigrants who then
>>>>> compete with poor americans for housing, jobs, food, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> So tell me, give our TOTAL level of taxation is higher than in
>>>>> Europe.. why don't we have such things here????
>>>>>
>>>>> I mean Democrats are seriously talking about taxing money that
>>>>> people don't even have.
>>>>>
>>>>> How long until grandma is evicted from her home because she can't
>>>>> pay the 25% tax on the unrealized income made from the increase in
>>>>> property values?
>>>>
>>>> "Fight to stop 96-year-old Pacific Grove woman's eviction continues"
>>>>
>>>> https://www.ksbw.com/article/california-96-year-old-pacific-grove-
>>>> womans-eviction/62046753
>>>>
>>>>> Who will buy these homes? Corporations will who will then make you
>>>>> pay to live in them because you can't afford to buy a home.
>>>>
>>>> That is exactly what they are doing and why homes have become
>>>> unaffordable.
>>>>
>>>>> How about the 25% you will have to pay on the income your 401K, and
>>>>> what will you do for retirement with the government sucking all
>>>>> that income from your retirement account?
>>>>
>>>> Biden stole 30% from 401k savings in 2023.
>>>>
>>>>> And in the end will it really change how the rich do things? No, it
>>>>> wont'.
>>>>
>>>> Putting Nancy Pelosi in jail for inside trading and graft would
>>>> would be a good start.
>>>
>>> That's one I could NEVER understand.. how did Congress EVER get to
>>> the point that the laws they create for everyone else does NOT apply
>>> to them.
>>
>>
>> Because too many politicians today are selfish money grubbing
>> assholes, with zero interest in Public Service.  Its also why there's
>> sections of the tax code which have so many qualification requirements
>> that they literally only apply to one (nicely donating) taxpayer.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Frankly I would love to throw those those into jail.
>>>
>>> Our leadership was NEVER suppose to be 'above the law' yet that's
>>> exactly what we have. Further, due to insider trading, their
>>> decisions can now become decided not what is best for the nation, but
>>> rather which stocks will move the most and how much can they profit
>>> personally choosing B over A.
>>
>> Then stop voting those jerks into office & support ethics reforms for
>> them .. and for SCOTUS too.
>>
>>
>>> You will also note that THEIR retirement funds don't go into SSA, but
>>> rather their own PRIVATE fund. Why is that? If SSA is good enough for
>>> the rest of us it should be good enough for them.
>>
>> Incorrect; Feds do pay into SSA.
>
> I wasn't talking feds, I'm talking Congress which runs it's own little
> independent fund for themselves.

No, its still FERS, and everyone first elected since 1/1/1984 is paying
into Social Security. See:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_pension>

Now you may be referring to a segment of Congress who back when FERS was
originally established had originally written for themselves to have a
special (yes, better) accrual formula:

[quote]
The accrual rate for congressional service between 1984 and December 31,
2012, is covered by a FERS "special" computation that is similar to that
for Federal employees such as First Responders, FBI Special Agents, and
Air Traffic Control Officers. The accrual rate is 1.7% for the first 20
years and 1.0% for each year beyond the 20th.
[/quote]

Which expired after 2012; its now identical to the standard FERS:

[quote]
For Members of Congress covered by FERS after December 31, 2012, the
accrual rate for congressional service covered by FERS is 1.0% per year
of service, or, if the Member has at least 20 years of service and
serves until at least the age of 62, the benefit accrual rate is 1.1%
per year of service. This is the same accrual rate that applies to
regular FERS employees and applies to members of Congress first elected
in 1984 or later.[5]
[/quote]

-hh