Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Whatever , I've explained it to you 6 ways from sunday but you still don't seem to get that when you borrow money from yourself you're not creating an asset, which seems pretty evident to most people.
Whatever , I've explained it to you 6 ways from sunday but you still don't seem to get that when you borrow money from yourself you're not creating an asset, which seems pretty evident to most people.
My point is that the distinction between "funded liabilities" and "unfunded liabilities" fails with regards to the U.S. Government because of this very reason. All liabilities of the U.S. Government can be considered "funded" for the simple reason that the full faith and credit of the u.s. government is sufficient to "fund" a liability for any purpose by any other party.
Whatever , I've explained it to you 6 ways from sunday but you still don't seem to get that when you borrow money from yourself you're not creating an asset, which seems pretty evident to most people.
My point is that the distinction between "funded liabilities" and "unfunded liabilities" fails with regards to the U.S. Government because of this very reason. All liabilities of the U.S. Government can be considered "funded" for the simple reason that the full faith and credit of the u.s. government is sufficient to "fund" a liability for any purpose by any other party.
Well except for the fact that you cannot fund your own liabilities with your own debt, don't believe me? go spend all your retirement savings , write yourself an IOU and try "funding" your retirement with it.
Here endth the lesson.
“Consequently, an ‘unfunded liability’ by the government to make good on some financial commitment in the future is functionally no different than a ‘funded liability’ that consists of the only dependable asset around - namely U.S. Treasury obligations,” Kaplan said.
The wealthiest Americans, living on their investments, pay a maximum of 15% tax on their earnings.
Whether or not a liability is funded or unfunded should not depend on who the debtor is. If I want to send my kid to college, and I buy treasuries to back that liability at a future date - is my liability funded?
I don't know how to better explain it to other than pointing out that there's a difference in you buying treasuries and the treasury department issuing treasury bills to itself,
If you'd like to read more about the Social Security unfunded liabilities
5. Additional Measures of OASDI Unfunded Obligations
"The first line of table IV.B7 shows that the present value of future cost less future taxes over the next 100 years for all current participants equals $18.7 trillion. For this purpose, current participants are defined as individuals who attain age 15 or older in 2009. Subtracting the current value of the trust fund (the accumulated value of past OASDI taxes less cost) gives a closed group (excluding all future participants) unfunded obligation of $16.3 trillion. This value represents the shortfall of lifetime contributions for all past and current participants relative to the lifetime costs associated with their generations. For a fully‑advance‑funded program this value would be equal to zero."
Except for the fact that functionally they do not have the same effect on each holder, do they? in one case it's asset in the other it's a liability... you do know the difference don't you?But BOTH are backed by the SAME THING - the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government.
Why should I bother anymore, you apparently don't even think they exist but apparently the SS Trustees board does, so read the link or don't , I don't really care anymore because this is like banging my head against a logic proof brick wall.First I'd like you to explain the functional difference between a social security "funded" and "unfunded" liability.
So wait - a "funded liability" is one where FUTURE tax revenues are expected to be able to cover it? You previously explained to me a funded liability would be backed by a super-special secret combination of foreign bonds, gold, stocks, cabbage patch dolls, and valuable coins. Which is it?
Republicans are so funny. They still think shuffling money around in the "stock market" is the way to make money. That's just gambling and playing "Lotto".
The REAL way America has become wealthy is through "invention, development and production". Yea, "making things". Things that actually get sold. Like I said before, Republicans squabble over pennies and ignore dollars. I guess because real dollars are just to hard to make.
When you get an Insurance Company CEO squeezing 73 million from poor saps who just want medical insurance, Republcians applaud the CEO for sticking it to millions of people, because "he got his".
Except for the fact that functionally they do not have the same effect on each holder, do they? in one case it's asset in the other it's a liability
I'm starting to wonder that myself, as you have failed in every way imaginable thus far.Why should I bother anymore,
Nice straw man you got there, all I did was posted an example to your question regarding assets, then you added "super secret, yada-yada", FYI I'm not a portfolio manager and never claimed I was.
I can see that I'm wasting my time here
Who benefits the most from taxing those who work for their money? How will Americans work hard to produce wealth if they are going to loss nearly half their money every April 15th? Moreover, why?
I'm not sure what you mean by "nearly half" My wife and I both work hard, and after all our deductions and credits we are paying less than 7.5% in income tax. (she pays FICA, I don't because I'm a graduate student and research assistant. I have no idea why graduate student income is exempt from FICA)
In fact, a married couple, filing jointing, with no kids, who makes $500,000 a year, and takes the standard deduction and two exemptions, will pay 30.4% of their income in federal income, social security, and medicare taxes.
The same couple making $250,000 year pays 28.2% - that includes income and FICA taxes.
30.4% is not exactly "nearly half". Its actually close to a quarter than a half.
Even a couple making $1,000,000 will pay 33.4% - this is much close to 1/3 than 1/2
check you math buddy
Who benefits the most from taxing those who work for their money? How will Americans work hard to produce wealth if they are going to loss nearly half their money every April 15th? Moreover, why?
I'm not sure what you mean by "nearly half" My wife and I both work hard, and after all our deductions and credits we are paying less than 7.5% in income tax. (she pays FICA, I don't because I'm a graduate student and research assistant. I have no idea why graduate student income is exempt from FICA)
In fact, a married couple, filing jointing, with no kids, who makes $500,000 a year, and takes the standard deduction and two exemptions, will pay 30.4% of their income in federal income, social security, and medicare taxes.
The same couple making $250,000 year pays 28.2% - that includes income and FICA taxes.
30.4% is not exactly "nearly half". Its actually close to a quarter than a half.
Even a couple making $1,000,000 will pay 33.4% - this is much close to 1/3 than 1/2
check you math buddy
From my joint tax return:
$104,080 joint income, $33,604 (S.E.Tax/FED/St.Ind.) = 32.29%
Also paid 7% state sales taxes on say 66% of Gross income = $4,800
Also paid property taxes = $2,500.
And finally about $1,500 in federal and state gas taxes
Total taxes paid $42,404/104,080 = real amount paid in taxes = 40.74%
The problem is, that the marginal tax rates apply to the next dollar earned. Which means that at a point just above subsistence level, if you add all the taxes you are about to pay on that next dollar it well exceeds 50%.I'm not sure what you mean by "nearly half" My wife and I both work hard, and after all our deductions and credits we are paying less than 7.5% in income tax. (she pays FICA, I don't because I'm a graduate student and research assistant. I have no idea why graduate student income is exempt from FICA)
In fact, a married couple, filing jointing, with no kids, who makes $500,000 a year, and takes the standard deduction and two exemptions, will pay 30.4% of their income in federal income, social security, and medicare taxes.
The same couple making $250,000 year pays 28.2% - that includes income and FICA taxes.
30.4% is not exactly "nearly half". Its actually close to a quarter than a half.
Even a couple making $1,000,000 will pay 33.4% - this is much close to 1/3 than 1/2
check you math buddy
From my joint tax return:
$104,080 joint income, $33,604 (S.E.Tax/FED/St.Ind.) = 32.29%
Also paid 7% state sales taxes on say 66% of Gross income = $4,800
Also paid property taxes = $2,500.
And finally about $1,500 in federal and state gas taxes
Total taxes paid $42,404/104,080 = real amount paid in taxes = 40.74%
Still closer to 1/3 than 1/2
Who benefits the most from taxing those who work for their money? How will Americans work hard to produce wealth if they are going to loss nearly half their money every April 15th? Moreover, why?
The problem is, that the marginal tax rates apply to the next dollar earned. Which means that at a point just above subsistence level, if you add all the taxes you are about to pay on that next dollar it well exceeds 50%.From my joint tax return:
$104,080 joint income, $33,604 (S.E.Tax/FED/St.Ind.) = 32.29%
Also paid 7% state sales taxes on say 66% of Gross income = $4,800
Also paid property taxes = $2,500.
And finally about $1,500 in federal and state gas taxes
Total taxes paid $42,404/104,080 = real amount paid in taxes = 40.74%
Still closer to 1/3 than 1/2
Take a self employed person in Indiana earning jointly with spouse 100k with AGI of 85k:
Fed SE tax 15.3%
Fed tax rate 28%
Ind tax rate 3.4%
Ind SalesTx 5.25% (7% applied to about 3/4of purchases = 5.25%)
PropTx......... 3.0% ($2500/85k)
F&SGasTx.....1.7% (1,500/85k)
Total......... 56.65%
And here is where the incentive is applied; to earn or not to earn the next $1.00 or the next $10,000 etc.
Who benefits the most from taxing those who work for their money? How will Americans work hard to produce wealth if they are going to loss nearly half their money every April 15th? Moreover, why?
Those two Republican failures in Iraq and Afghanistan cost a lot of money. How else are you going to pay for it. Oh, that's right. By shifting the burden to the middle class. I forgot, sorry.
Who benefits the most from taxing those who work for their money? How will Americans work hard to produce wealth if they are going to loss nearly half their money every April 15th? Moreover, why?
Those two Republican failures in Iraq and Afghanistan cost a lot of money. How else are you going to pay for it. Oh, that's right. By shifting the burden to the middle class. I forgot, sorry.
Each citizen should have equal % burden... except in the mind of those, like yourself, who prefer selective equality.... equality when it benefits you, inequality for others when it benefits you
Why can't you just tell me?
If I want to send my son to harvard, and I want the liability to be "funded" - I can buy treasury bills which mature just before and around the time his schooling starts.
If I want to make social security a "funded liability" - I need an asset. Which asset do I buy? I have a feeling that since you can't answer this very simple question, neither will your links.
Okay, I thought you were interested in the details of the problem, however we could easily invest in foreign bonds, equities, gold, land, or a basket of assets that balance risk with acceptable returns.....however under the current methodology we're not "investing" it in anything except the debasement of our currency, since essentially we're just printing money to put into a mythical trust fund because we are SPENDING the SS revenues and replacing it with self issued debt instruments and we still have over $14 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities in SS over and above said debt instruments in the "trust fund".
I'm finding it very hard to get through to you. You're telling me how NOT to make SS a funded liability, but that's not what I asked. Please read the question again:
If I want to make social security a "funded liability" - I need an asset. Which asset do I buy?
