When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Interesting that you find SS as being sponsored by the lower income classes. Consider that 50% of SS and Medicare contributions come from the employer.
That 50% comes directly out of the salaries paid to employees, it's just obscured behind the veil of "employer contribution."
Spoken by someone who filed forms 1040-C and Schedule SE for four years.
Interesting that you find SS as being sponsored by the lower income classes. Consider that 50% of SS and Medicare contributions come from the employer.
Would you consider most employers to be lower income classes?
I know because I am an employer and while my employees pay 7.62% of their salaries to pay for SS and Medicare, I pay the other 7.62%. Oh and guess what I pay on my salary? That's right, 15.24%. Personally, I don't consider myself lower income.
Interesting that you find SS as being sponsored by the lower income classes. Consider that 50% of SS and Medicare contributions come from the employer.
Would you consider most employers to be lower income classes?
I know because I am an employer and while my employees pay 7.62% of their salaries to pay for SS and Medicare, I pay the other 7.62%. Oh and guess what I pay on my salary? That's right, 15.24%. Personally, I don't consider myself lower income.
To be fair, this is just a hidden part of their compensation. You consider it every time you hire someone and it's just part of market compensation. So while you pay the bill it is actually coming from the employee's total comp.
EDIT: Joe beat me to it but I hadn't gone to the next page yet.
I wasn't around for the start of SS so I don't have any comment as to what the gentleman said. And while I don't disagree with anything he says, I don't have any answers as to how make SS work. However, I didn't get where he said that payments to SS by the working class was paying for the retirements of the upper class. Actually he said if one paid into the system a lot more than someone else then that person would get more in return.
Now I'm not trying to change your opinion on the matter, but why would you come to this conclusion? Unless you have in mind what Joe said about somehow the employer contributions are not so. Which quite frankly, I'm still confused by that statement. I mean, how can I as an employer make my employee pay for the other 7.62%? Am I just stealing it? Paying them 7.62% less wages than what I would actually pay them?
I wouldn't mind if SS and Medicare worked more like they did in Singapore. Every worker must contribute a percentage of their pay to each of 3 savings accounts. One is comparable to a 401k, the second is comparable to an HSA, and the final account has a broader range of uses like down payment for a home. The HSA has a max amount at which no more funds are required until some are depleted so excess contributions can be shifted to the retirement or general account. This model forces savings but gives a lot of individual choice to the employee. Employers also have a required contribution to this account which could just be the current SS and Medicare tax contribution.
To be fair, this is just a hidden part of their compensation. You consider it every time you hire someone and it's just part of market compensation. So while you pay the bill it is actually coming from the employee's total comp.
EDIT: Joe beat me to it but I hadn't gone to the next page yet.
So this is like the 20% tax on avocados?
And no, it's not something I consider. If I need to hire someone I consider what the other guys are paying for someone of a particular skill. If I choose to pay someone 7.62% less (and another 11% less for insurance, and so on) then he will likely go someplace else.
And no, it's not something I consider. If I need to hire someone I consider what the other guys are paying for someone of a particular skill. If I choose to pay someone 7.62% less (and another 11% less for insurance, and so on) then he will likely go someplace else.
You're missing the point. Its alreAdy factored into the market rate. Maybe you aren't thinking about it in particular but any semi large company uses a total comp equation. Since these companies make up a large part of the workforce in any field they are a large part of setting market. So you are taking numbers from other people who have already made this calculation. This amount is already part of their compensation but both you and the employee probably don't see it that way even if it is the reality.
Just so you know, I'm in the construction industry. Large companies pay more than I do (I'm an extremely small company) and most have benefits. Their per contract totals are more than my total annual gross for several years, maybe decades. When these guys hire, they suck up the workforce and drive labor costs up. And all too often they sub work out by piece work/unit work. Maybe this is only in my neck of the woods and maybe this has nothing to do with what you are talking about.
If I choose to pay someone 7.62% less (and another 11% less for insurance, and so on)
You (and all other employers) already do. It's just that your employees don't realize it.
Originally Posted by hector
Got it. The 20% tax on avocados.
Serious response: Mexican avocados are ****. I don't know why (I'm not a farmer or a botanist) but they just can't compare to California-grown Haas.
Originally Posted by hector
Just so you know, I'm in the construction industry. Large companies pay more than I do (I'm an extremely small company) and most have benefits. Their per contract totals are more than my total annual gross for several years, maybe decades. When these guys hire, they suck up the workforce and drive labor costs up. And all too often they sub work out by piece work/unit work. Maybe this is only in my neck of the woods and maybe this has nothing to do with what you are talking about.
Sorry, the best fruit comes from your backyard. My parents had an amazing avocado tree. Huge fruit and the skin was a purple color when ripe. And best of all, tasty. And no 20% tax either.
Damn tree hasn't given fruit for a while now though. It serves as shade and a play thing for my son. They do have mamey, though. That more than makes up for it. Nothing like peeling and freezing it for making milkshake later. Ño, que rico acere!
Alina Kabaeva, former deputy of the Russian State Duma (legislature) from 2007-2014, presently Chairwoman of the Board of Directors of the National Media Group, one of Russia's largest television conglomerates.
02-26-2017, 05:21 PM
0
