A poll.. what percent does your employer contribute to SS/Medicare?

[Skull Pilot]

You've been spending pages whining about me... yes, i occupy space in your head.

You have yet to grow up enough to realize that just because you say something it is not necessarily true

 

[JoeB131]

See, right on schedule, he can't help himself.

 

[320 Years of History]

I am curious as to what amount people think employers pay into SS/Medicare

Judging by your thread title and OP statement, I think you may believe amounts and rates are the same things.

??? What is there to think? One either knows what the rates are or one doesn't. It's not as though the contribution rates are discretionary. What someone thinks be the employee and employer contribution rates isn't pertinent to a damn thing.

BTW, your poll doesn't offer the correct answer to the question asked. One might be moved to choose 7.6, which may be construed to be a rounding down of 7.65; however, there's no corresponding rounded-down choice to account for the 1.45% Medicare only portion of what an employer might pay (see below). I suppose the closest answers would yet be 7.6% and 2% given what you offer, but neither is accurate.

The combined rate is 7.65% up to the maximum wage base that qualifies for the SSI portion of the tax. Once an employee reaches the SSI wage base maximum, the employer's contribution rate becomes 1.45%, which pertains only to Medicare.

As for the amount one's employer pays, well, that depends on one's wages. Even there, looking at one's pay stub, one'll know (or be able to calculate) what sum one's employer pays.

For some limited partners who have some wages considered as employee wages and other wages that are considered self-employment income,their employer may not any longer be contributing anything to SSI or Medicare. I realize, of course, most people are probably not limited partners in a partnership, but there are many people who are. Unlike limited partners, general partners are never employees; they are only ever owners.

Your first comment... No "amounts" and "rates" are not the same nouns. The "rates" and wages paid determine the amounts paid.
your second comment... The point that went way over your head is how many people EVEN know their employer pays into Medicare/SS?
Third comment... you might be moved but the purpose was to find out if people KNEW their employer even paid Medicare/SS.
All the rest of your comments are picayunish! Again.. primary purpose was for those of you that hate capitalism, hate your employer... and never knew
your employer matched your deductions surprise! Employers match your deductions.

So as I expected the premise of the question went over your head! I simply wanted to find out how many people didn't know their employer matched.

Judge a man by his questions rather than by his answers.
― Voltaire​

Red:
Okay....Why didn't you just directly ask what you wanted to discover? What worth is there to asking the title question and then asserting in your OP that ....

I am curious as to what amount people think employers pay into SS/Medicare

....when what you want to know is whether people know their employer pays any amount into SSI/Medicare on their behalf, and your primary purpose is not to learn "what amount people think employers pay" on their behalf?

The scientist is not a person who gives the right answers, he's one who asks the right questions.
― Claude Lévi-Strauss​

Given what you stated above as the aim of your inquiry, a direct question such as any one of following would directly get to that answer without making people choose among several answers, none of which are wholly accurate, would produce very "on point" answers.

• "Are you aware that employers pays into Medicare/SS?"
• "Are you aware that your employer matches your Medicare/SS deductions?"

If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.
― Thomas Pynchon, Gravity's Rainbow​

 

[healthmyths]

I am curious as to what amount people think employers pay into SS/Medicare

Judging by your thread title and OP statement, I think you may believe amounts and rates are the same things.

??? What is there to think? One either knows what the rates are or one doesn't. It's not as though the contribution rates are discretionary. What someone thinks be the employee and employer contribution rates isn't pertinent to a damn thing.

BTW, your poll doesn't offer the correct answer to the question asked. One might be moved to choose 7.6, which may be construed to be a rounding down of 7.65; however, there's no corresponding rounded-down choice to account for the 1.45% Medicare only portion of what an employer might pay (see below). I suppose the closest answers would yet be 7.6% and 2% given what you offer, but neither is accurate.

The combined rate is 7.65% up to the maximum wage base that qualifies for the SSI portion of the tax. Once an employee reaches the SSI wage base maximum, the employer's contribution rate becomes 1.45%, which pertains only to Medicare.

As for the amount one's employer pays, well, that depends on one's wages. Even there, looking at one's pay stub, one'll know (or be able to calculate) what sum one's employer pays.

For some limited partners who have some wages considered as employee wages and other wages that are considered self-employment income,their employer may not any longer be contributing anything to SSI or Medicare. I realize, of course, most people are probably not limited partners in a partnership, but there are many people who are. Unlike limited partners, general partners are never employees; they are only ever owners.

Your first comment... No "amounts" and "rates" are not the same nouns. The "rates" and wages paid determine the amounts paid.
your second comment... The point that went way over your head is how many people EVEN know their employer pays into Medicare/SS?
Third comment... you might be moved but the purpose was to find out if people KNEW their employer even paid Medicare/SS.
All the rest of your comments are picayunish! Again.. primary purpose was for those of you that hate capitalism, hate your employer... and never knew
your employer matched your deductions surprise! Employers match your deductions.

So as I expected the premise of the question went over your head! I simply wanted to find out how many people didn't know their employer matched.

Judge a man by his questions rather than by his answers.
― Voltaire​

Red:
Okay....Why didn't you just directly ask what you wanted to discover? What worth is there to asking the title question and then asserting in your OP that ....

I am curious as to what amount people think employers pay into SS/Medicare

....when what you want to know is whether people know their employer pays any amount into SSI/Medicare on their behalf, and your primary purpose is not to learn "what amount people think employers pay" on their behalf?

The scientist is not a person who gives the right answers, he's one who asks the right questions.
― Claude Lévi-Strauss​

Given what you stated above as the aim of your inquiry, a direct question such as any one of following would directly get to that answer without making people choose among several answers, none of which are wholly accurate, would produce very "on point" answers.

• "Are you aware that employers pays into Medicare/SS?"
• "Are you aware that your employer matches your Medicare/SS deductions?"

If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.
― Thomas Pynchon, Gravity's Rainbow​

And obviously you've NEVER created survey questions!
If I would have asked "are you aware that employers pays into Medicare/SS or your other dumb question "Are you aware that your employer matches your Medicare/SS deductions?" NOT one person would have answered "NO..I'm not aware"!
That's how we got Obama elected... "Do you think you are a racist if if you don't vote for Obama?"...Same principle... you are LEADING the person to answer HOW you want it to be answered. By giving simple percentage choices there is no leading on my part!
that you want. Hence I gave choices.

 

[rdean]

FICA rates in 2016 are 7.6% for both worker and employer. 6.2 for SS and 1.45 for Medicare. What's the point here?

You would be correct - absolutely.

Doesn't seem like much.

 

[Conservative65]

I am curious as to what amount people think employers pay into SS/Medicare

7 5/8%

 

[Conservative65]

FICA rates in 2016 are 7.6% for both worker and employer. 6.2 for SS and 1.45 for Medicare. What's the point here?

You would be correct - absolutely.

Doesn't seem like much.

It's 7 5/8% too much by the employer and 7 5.8% too much by the employee.

 

[Granny]

FICA rates in 2016 are 7.6% for both worker and employer. 6.2 for SS and 1.45 for Medicare. What's the point here?

You would be correct - absolutely.

Doesn't seem like much.

It's 7 5/8% too much by the employer and 7 5.8% too much by the employee.

At the time it was created, Social Security was intended to be sort of a "fall back" to ensure elders/retirees could maintain - it wasn't intended to become the monster it's become. It has not helped that over the decades, Congress pilfered the funds for other uses including, but not limited to, funding their pork barrel projects. Not one dime of all this pilfering for other purposes has been repaid into the system. It is funded by employees and employers for future benefits...which, in my mind does not make it an "entitlement" as so many other programs have been used and abused. It's a partial repayment to those who have paid in for decades. For 2016 there were no COLA increases, nor will there be COLA benefits for 2017. The Congressional "crystal ball" has told them gas prices will tank for those years. Right.

 

[320 Years of History]

If I would have asked "are you aware that employers pays into Medicare/SS or your other dumb question "Are you aware that your employer matches your Medicare/SS deductions?" NOT one person would have answered "NO..I'm not aware"!

Wow. What great faith you have in the integrity and honesty of your fellow members. Why would you think in this venue they would not answer honestly?

There's no fault in simply and innocently not knowing something, no matter that something, even something as simple as whether employers make SS/Medicare contributions on one's behalf. It becomes disturbing when folks think something to be so and they fail to confirm whether it is so. Not knowing/understanding something well, yet have opinions, opinions upon which one acts, constitutes affrontery. Knowing something is true and either not representing it as such and not incorporating that truth literally and contextually into one's analysis/remarks, or misrepresenting it, rises to the level of manipulative mendacity.

P.S.
I have designed and implemented quite a few surveys in my time. That poll does not even remotely rise to the level of being a legit survey that can be taken as validly indicative as would a survey that aims to discover something other than expressly what is asked. That poll is just that, a poll, not a survey, and I think you know that as well as I do. Unless you know a lot more about the potential respondents than I do, its responses can only be considered anecdotal.

"Do you think you are a racist if if you don't vote for Obama?"...Same principle... you are LEADING the person to answer HOW you want it to be answered. By giving simple percentage choices there is no leading on my part!

Frankly, I think in a community such as this one, there's enough of a "connection" among the members of the group that asking a direct question to get a direct answer should be effective. We're all here by choice and we're all strangers. What rational motive have rational people for not simply answering the question honestly? None, IMO, because we're nonetheless strangers....who would give a damn whether they answer "yes" or "no" to a yes/no question about an objective fact?

That's the big difference between your sample question and the ones I suggested. Unlike the sample query you posed about racism and voting for Obama, a question that carries a qualitative aspect within the question itself, the one's I suggested ask one to state their awareness of a simple and objective fact. There's nothing of note you, I or others can say about whether the person knows or doesn't know the simple fact. It's not as though one goes to school and is taught that employers make SSI/Medicare payments on behalf of workers. A person either knows or does not. The reasons they know or don't are many:

• Never thought or cared about it.
• Never checked into it or has an event in their life that led them to be informed.
• Read/heard about it somewhere and remembered.
• Asked someone about it.
• Forgot that employers do so.

The above are just a few perfectly good reasons for one to be ignorant of the fact that employers do make the payments about which you asked. What is one to do? Castigate a person for not knowing when they openly admit they just don't? Make them explain why they don't know? That behavior/post-answer challenge or inquiry would make a person feel foolish, but that sort of behavior need never be displayed. After all, they just answered a question in a poll that doesn't make public one's response(s). It's not as though one has cause to be embarrassed, so why not just answer honestly.

Also, by offering a collection of empirical answers, the responder will innately feel challenged to choose the right answer. What's most likely is that folks who don't know, but who also want to answer the question the poll asks, will just look up the answer and then choose the few/one that seem(s) best. With a question that asks one to binarily attest to what they know or don't about an objective fact, there's no inspiration to see the correct answer. One either does or does not know. That's it. Nobody need be consulted to find the correct answer; everyone who opts to answer the poll question knows the answer the instant they read the question.

 

[baileyn45]

Oh the poor companies ! When an employee gets hurt on the job , thy pay out a little work comp, then let the taxpayers take care of the employee forever thru SS disability payments . What a raw deal !

Pay out a little in Work Comp? I spit my iced tea onto my keyboard when I read that. You've obviously never dealt with workers comp.

 

[Timmy]

Oh the poor companies ! When an employee gets hurt on the job , thy pay out a little work comp, then let the taxpayers take care of the employee forever thru SS disability payments . What a raw deal !

Pay out a little in Work Comp? I spit my iced tea onto my keyboard when I read that. You've obviously never dealt with workers comp.

I have . Work comp doesn't pay out enough for the disabled worker . SS disability comes in to save the day !

 

[rdean]

FICA rates in 2016 are 7.6% for both worker and employer. 6.2 for SS and 1.45 for Medicare. What's the point here?

You would be correct - absolutely.

Doesn't seem like much.

It's 7 5/8% too much by the employer and 7 5.8% too much by the employee.

I plan on retiring at the end of the year. I couldn't do it without Social Security. That makes you a moron.

 

[Conservative65]

FICA rates in 2016 are 7.6% for both worker and employer. 6.2 for SS and 1.45 for Medicare. What's the point here?

You would be correct - absolutely.

Doesn't seem like much.

It's 7 5/8% too much by the employer and 7 5.8% too much by the employee.

I plan on retiring at the end of the year. I couldn't do it without Social Security. That makes you a moron.

Because you can't retire without it isn't a reason the rest of us should be forced to be part of a system to benefit you. When I reach the age to get SS, I won't need it as I have done plenty to make sure I take care of myself. I will take it despite not needing it for one reason and one reason only and that's because I was required to put into it. I'll take it even if someone like you needs it more than me.

I noticed your avatar and the heading on it. Seems you voting Democrat didn't do you well because you NEED SS to be able to retire. My having voted Republican doesn't seem to have done what your avatar implies that it does.

 

[Skull Pilot]

FICA rates in 2016 are 7.6% for both worker and employer. 6.2 for SS and 1.45 for Medicare. What's the point here?

You would be correct - absolutely.

Doesn't seem like much.

It's 7 5/8% too much by the employer and 7 5.8% too much by the employee.

I plan on retiring at the end of the year. I couldn't do it without Social Security. That makes you a moron.

No that makes you an idiot for not saving enough

 

[Skull Pilot]

Oh the poor companies ! When an employee gets hurt on the job , thy pay out a little work comp, then let the taxpayers take care of the employee forever thru SS disability payments . What a raw deal !

Pay out a little in Work Comp? I spit my iced tea onto my keyboard when I read that. You've obviously never dealt with workers comp.

I have . Work comp doesn't pay out enough for the disabled worker . SS disability comes in to save the day !

Why don't you get your own disability insurance? It is not expensive

 

[Conservative65]

FICA rates in 2016 are 7.6% for both worker and employer. 6.2 for SS and 1.45 for Medicare. What's the point here?

You would be correct - absolutely.

Doesn't seem like much.

It's 7 5/8% too much by the employer and 7 5.8% too much by the employee.

I plan on retiring at the end of the year. I couldn't do it without Social Security. That makes you a moron.

No that makes you an idiot for not saving enough

He'll blame Republicans for it. It's ironic that his avatar shows people living in a car with the heading of They Still Vote Republican yet he's the one that voted Democrat and can't retire unless he gets SS.

 

[Skull Pilot]

FICA rates in 2016 are 7.6% for both worker and employer. 6.2 for SS and 1.45 for Medicare. What's the point here?

You would be correct - absolutely.

Doesn't seem like much.

Not until you add it to the FICA withholding from your pay and then realize that 15+% of your income over your working lifetime saved in a balanced portfolio would allow you to retire a millionaire and you could live on way more than 1300 a month

 

[JoeB131]

Not until you add it to the FICA withholding from your pay and then realize that 15+% of your income over your working lifetime saved in a balanced portfolio would allow you to retire a millionaire and you could live on way more than 1300 a month

Or you can have an event like 2008 happen and be completely wiped out.

I'll take the social security, thanks.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Not until you add it to the FICA withholding from your pay and then realize that 15+% of your income over your working lifetime saved in a balanced portfolio would allow you to retire a millionaire and you could live on way more than 1300 a month

Or you can have an event like 2008 happen and be completely wiped out.

I'll take the social security, thanks.

Of course you will because it is impossible for you to think for yourself
and no one who didn't sell everything in 08 got wiped out

But of course you are way too fucking stupid to know that the 5 years before retirement you should shift away from over exposure in equities so as to protect your gains

 

[JoeB131]

Of course you will because it is impossible for you to think for yourself
and no one who didn't sell everything in 08 got wiped out

But of course you are way too fucking stupid to know that the 5 years before retirement you should shift away from over exposure in equities so as to protect your gains

Again, trying to outsmart the market is like trying to outsmart the casino.... it never works.

Now, I do have a 401K and ESOP, but I'm not counting on them. My retirement planning is based on can I live on that $1300 a month. anything else is extra. My plan is to get rid of all of my debt, including mortgage. Once reduced to just food and utilities, I should be just fine.