ONTD Political

WSJ: How Much Will Your Taxes Jump?

4:01 pm - 01/15/2013

In the nick of time, and amid much political drama, Congress passed the American Taxpayer Relief Act on New Year's Day—averting massive tax increases for nearly all earners that were slated to take effect Jan. 1

Read more...Collapse )

More at the   Source   but I had to post this photo... I seriously can't tell if this is supposed to be satire or not. Those example couples are jaw-dropping. 
Page 2 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
effervescent 16th-Jan-2013 04:45 am (UTC)
o_O What's with the pictures? Are we supposed to feel sorry for these people? (Idk if I'm just misinterpreting, they just look..mournful.) The lowest amount is still four times what I make! And the text makes it sound like such a tragedy ('far less').
ebay313 16th-Jan-2013 04:58 am (UTC)
I'd be totally fine with a $2,907/year tax increase if it meant I was making $230,000/year- holy crap. (If you take the 2 off the front, that is still more than my current gross yearly income :-\)
catalana 16th-Jan-2013 05:02 am (UTC)
When I saw the first few lines of this, I was worried...then I saw the numbers. (I'm middle class, so I figured it might affect me.) Umm, yeah. I forgot their definition of middle class compared to mine. Not so worried now...
paksenarrion2 16th-Jan-2013 06:25 am (UTC)
Between my Social Security going up about $16 and my Federal withholding going up about $3, my paycheck is close to $20 a week less. For me, it is doable since I recently decided to get rid of cable. (At $90 a month, there is the $80 a month less per month in my checks). Sadly for some people I think it might be tough because they are so tight with money and every single penny does count. (It's mainly that 2% increase in the SS tax that will affect everyone.)

But for the people represented in the graphics? *boo freaking hoo* So they have to drink tap water instead of perrier. /hyperbole
owl_eyes_4ever 18th-Jan-2013 07:53 am (UTC)
Sorry if this is out of line, and you don't have to answer if it is, but can I ask what income bracket you are in?

It's just that this article does a pretty awful job of explaining how this affects people that aren't very wealthy.
paksenarrion2 20th-Jan-2013 09:55 pm (UTC)
I am in the lowest withholding bracket but basically the biggest thing that this whole thing does is increase the amount of your Social Security withholding from 4.2% to 6.2%.

So if your gross weekly income is $400, your weekly 2012 to SS was $16.80 (your employer contributed the other 6% because the total contribution was actually 10.2%). In 2013 for the same weekly paycheck, your weekly SS contribution will be $24.80. An increase of $8.00 per week. The amount obviously goes up or down, depending on your weekly gross. However, this also goes into what you pay into Social Security so theoretically when you go to retire (if Social Security is still around-haha) the money you are paying in now means more for you at retirement. not that I have any faith it will be there when I get ready to retire when I am 68, and that is only 20 years away.

My Federal Income tax withholding went up very slighly but I went back and checked and it has every year for the past couple of years.

I don't actually have a problem with what I pay in Federal Income tax. Especially since Mittens didn't get elected and want to spend an extra 7 trillion dollars on defense.
hinoema Plus, these numbers aren't real16th-Jan-2013 05:16 am (UTC)
So their minimum tax will increase. That number is never what is actually paid, and these folks can afford very good tax lawyers. This article needs to either realistically report what actually gets paid after deductions or let go the tiny violin.
lovelokest 16th-Jan-2013 05:27 am (UTC)
Boo fucking hoo, they're still paying less than they did under Reagan's tax rate. Life is so hard, they may have to give up that third vacation home. *plays them the world's tiniest violin*
mollywobbles867 16th-Jan-2013 05:35 am (UTC)
Do they really expect me to give a fuck?
one_hoopy_frood 16th-Jan-2013 05:47 am (UTC)
Woooo I make half as much as what the retired couple pays in taxes. Look at the strain on the face of the single mother who makes a quarter of a million dollars a year. Look at those four hungry children of the married couple, how will they make ends meet?
idemandjustice 16th-Jan-2013 06:23 am (UTC)
I really couldn't care less about people with six figure incomes having a tax increase.
nonnycat 16th-Jan-2013 08:46 am (UTC)
... the least rich person on that image makes several times more than we do and compared to what the average folks in this community make, we are surely not hurting. (At least now that we have insurance. We're still trying to get caught up with bills that heavily accrued during a period of time where my partner was a contractor and thus had no health insurance and thus we had to pay several hundred out of pocket for ins through the state while still managing copays and crap and all the stuff they refused to cover and my partner only being able to make half hours because we could not afford the care he needed even with insurance we were paying for.)

I am just fucking astounded that this is being touted as some kind of average because WHAT THE FUCK. I don't even know ANYONE my age or younger with investments, JFC.
bleakwinters 16th-Jan-2013 12:48 pm (UTC)
lol, yeah single person on a quarter million, i'll cry fucking rivers for you. i can barely find work for a tenth of that (and i'm still unemployed), so boo fucking hoo.
mutive 16th-Jan-2013 01:50 pm (UTC)
Okay, so doesn't surprise me at all that this is the WSJ. That may be the only publication out there that would consider a couple making "only" $180K "poor". (Also, why aren't they getting a tax increase? Sorry, but a couple making $180K can well afford it, esp. since they have no kids to provide for any more.)

I love the sad faces too. Like, "OMG, I make $230K/year, but the government is going to take nearly $3K more away from me! What ever shall I do?" Or the married couple with four, dragging in >a half million a year who have these looks on their faces as though they and their brood might *gasp* be forced out of their mansion and into...IDK, maybe a smaller mansion?

It reminds me of Poor Prof. Henderson's post on how hard it is to get by on a mere $250K a year. (Although it seems like he earns more like $400K/year, according to most analysts. Well, with his wife's income thrown in. The poor man! What shall he do next? Fire the gardener? Eat less steak and lobster?)
cinnamontoast 16th-Jan-2013 03:38 pm (UTC)
It's probably because they are retired.

This whole thing ticks me off because all of these people can afford health insurance and probably get it as part of an employment package that's not included in these totals. Meanwhile, my husband and I are trying to make a go of owning a small business (you know, that every single politician ever says they support?) are making next to nothing and pay out most of the little we make in health insurance premiums.

There is seriously something wrong here. Me? Bitter? You betcha.
mutive 16th-Jan-2013 03:40 pm (UTC)
Yeah. One of the major pros I see for having a single payer system *is* that it's great for small businesses. I get health care as part of my work. I have a hard time imagining leaving my own job and starting something up as...what will I do if I get sick? Buying insurance on the market sucks badly. (Even if, like me, you're in really good health and fairly young. It's virtually impossible if you're not in that category.)

It's so utterly anti-business.
cinnamontoast 16th-Jan-2013 04:36 pm (UTC)
It's not impossible when you are old and have health issues, but it leaves you absolutely no money to live on. It's what my husband and I are doing. We have ten years until Medicare kicks in. We just couldn't stand working under the thumbs of other people anymore.

It's pro-big corporation because it leaves people tied to them for life and discourages small competitors from emerging.

I can't understand why small businesses didn't push for a single payer solution. I know that the money has to come from somewhere, but it would force drug companies and medical corporations to accept reasonable payments in the end. We can do so much better than this.
mutive 16th-Jan-2013 07:08 pm (UTC)
Yeah, I'm puzzled by the lack of small businesses pushing for it soon. While it's great that you and your husband *can* get health care, even you admit that it leaves you pretty much nothing else and...that's hardly an incentive for most of us to put in the incredible hours and tremendous hard work that starting a small business takes.

Like you say, it's basically a big help to large corporations because they can spread out insurance payments over a larger chunk of workers and bargain for better rates.
cinnamontoast 16th-Jan-2013 03:32 pm (UTC)


(Edit borked the HTML)

Edited at 2013-01-16 03:33 pm (UTC)
moonshaz 17th-Jan-2013 12:53 am (UTC)


And the soundtrack for the above is provided by:





Edited at 2013-01-17 01:07 am (UTC)
Page 2 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
This page was loaded Dec 20th 2014, 1:37 am GMT.