Michael Eisner only pays 2.2% of SS Taxes. They take from the poor . . .

[frankly_fedup2]

to give to the rich.

Eisner only pays 2.2% at the very most in Social Security taxes. Also, state employees pay no Social Security taxes. Also, anyone making over $84,000 a year pays less Social Security taxes than say, oh, someone making $40,000 a year. F**** up, huh??? How did this happen?

The Social Security outlay for folks like me and Michael Eisner, the chairman of the Walt Disney Co., is capped at $5,449.80 this year. (He makes a wee bit more than I do, so we’ll use him as an example.) This maximum contribution is about half of one percent of Eisner’s $1 million base salary. Eisner’s Medicare taxes would be $14,500 -- the same 1.45% of salary as every other worker pays. All told, his bill would be about 2% of that base paycheck.

Meanwhile, the average working stiff must give up 6.2% of each dollar earned to Social Security and 1.45% to Medicare, for that 7.65% total.

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/RetirementandWills/P73718.asp?Printer

How did this happen? I'm bumfuzzled?????

[bookman]

1. State workers..

..I think that varies from state to state.

[dsc]

3. it certainly does

Only states which had retirement systems which predated SS are exempt from SS. In Ohio I paid no SS taxes as a teacher, in NC I do pay SS taxes as a teacher.

[SCDem]

7. In SC state workers pay SS

[harpo]

2. There is a limit on SS they can take per year

Once you hit that limit they take no more money out. Its not based on a percentage, its based on a hard number. So Bill Gates pays the same as someone who makes about $100,000 a year as far as social security goes. Now as a percentage I'm sure the numbers would be different since the limit isn't based on a percentage.

Hope this helps!

[Sgent]

4. If you want unlimited taxes

Then have unlimited benefits.

The benefits are capped at the maximal ss contribution.

One thing that has possibly managed to stand the test of time is that SS is a universal plan which equally applies to all americans. If you want to make it welfare, be prepared for "welfare" reform.

[frankly_fedup2]

8. The Republicans do refer to it as a type of "Welfare"; however,

how is it welfare when we pay into it all our lives, just like a savings account; however, we cannot touch it.

Now it would be great if everyone was responsible with their money and did invest a part of their income into an IRA, 401k, or did invest in the stock market (even thought that is what we pay people to do for us with our 401ks).

However, not everyone is responsible. So what do we do when those that do not do what they should do with the additional money they get to keep to save and/or invest? If they are on the streets, do we leave them there? Are we going to have soup lines again, just like we did before Roosevelt set up the SSA (which has lasted almost 100 years without anyone touching it).

I wish Dubya would just work his usual 6-8 hour 2-1/2 days to 3 days a week 4 months out of the year and just leave Social Security to those that may know what they are actually doing.

Everything he has done has failed. His whole stay in the White House has been a failure.

Also, Where is our 9 BILLION DOLLARS????? You don't lose THAT much money due to faulty accounting. I worked in accounting for over 14 years and you cannot tell me that no one kept up with what money went were and why. Hell, Halliburton could claim to have received billions or millions less than they have already so they will not have to pay taxes on it.

I didn't think they could spend much money anyway for rebuilding of the Country, because no matter what the American companies or soldiers try to do, the terrorist tear it apart. So that is why no new water facilities, electrical facilities (just to name a few) have not been built. The money is supposedly just sitting there.

[frankly_fedup2]

6. Yes, that pretty much explained it for me. I did not know that and

could not figure why there is a cap. So even though Gates might pay 2%, and those of us that make between 60-90 thousand dollars have to pay 7.8% (with our employers matching 7.8%), this is suppose to be fair?

They laughed at Clinton when he wanted to take 60% of the surplus and invest it (not taking any percentage from anyone; however, using the Surplus (which we do not have any NOW)the Republicans laughed at back in 1999. Now they are so pro-privatization of SS when it involves the PEOPLES' money. Using the Surplus of this country did not affect any citizens' income. However, Clinton was going to use OUR FRIGGIN MONEY that was left over, and invest it for the American People to put into Social Security.

That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard in my life. Well, I have to take that back. The stupidest thing is Bush. ROFLMAO.

Anyway (still chuckling or I would, otherwise, be crying)), it's the same way regarding the taxes. The people that are working 40-60 hours a week to try to feed their 2.6 kids, pay their mortgages, car payments, save toward retirement i.e., IRA and/or 401K, clothe everyone, maybe see a movie every now and again, and hopefully take a couple day's vacation, are paying the largest percentage in the tax codes as well.

Kind of like the death tax. The Republicans talk about that all the time; however, don't your assets have to be over $400 thousand or $600 thousand dollars? Not many of us have that much in assets.

For Rural VA my husband makes excellent wages, plus we pay nothing for excellent health care (health, eye, dental, and Rx card that the company pays for the insurance coverage in full). But we are caught in that income range that ends up paying for just about everything. We always end up having to pay taxes (after itemizing too). This year we owe an additional $1100.00. I'll let them know that on April 15th. No need for them to draw interest on our money that we can use all year.

I'm so frustrated, aggravated, and mentally spent with all this BS. And then Bush brought up Iran last night. What is wrong with this fool?

[elsiesummers]

9. Estate tax even less onerous - was on 1.5mill if single, 3mill if married

but I think (IIRC) it is being gradually phased out completely by the first Bush tax cut - so that in year ten or eleven (2011 or 2012 I suppose) there is zero estate tax then the law expires and the whole thing goes back to the 1.5million or 3million if married unless they extend the law.

There is a theory that some of the richest (with the greediest families) will be kept on life support until the magic no estate tax year in which they will sadly expire.

1.5 million estate would at least be a very nice house even in the North East or in CA. Even if they raised it to 10million to avoid the divestiture of small businesses it still doesn't make sense to cancel it entirely.

For more info check out www.ombwatch.org/estatetax

[Red State Blues]

5. Please say you're joking.

Otherwise this may be the most depressing post I've seen in a long time.

I don't understand how Bush can possibly be getting away with this Social Security bullshit and then I see that someone HERE, of all places, with over a 1000 posts, no less, really has absolutely no clue as to how the system works.

"Also, anyone making over $84,000 a year pays less Social Security taxes than say, oh, someone making $40,000 a year."

No, even this is wrong. For 2005 anyone making over 90K/year pays less SS taxes AS A PERCENT OF INCOME than anyone making less than 90K/year, In terms of absolute dollars someone making 90K/year pays more SS taxes than someone making 40K (or even 89K for that matter); however, whether you make 90K, 10 Million or 10 Billion you pay exactly the same amount.

[TexasLawyer]

10. Kick n/t