Bankrupt cities cry pension foul

[Smart Liberal]

40for60 wrote:

<quoted text>
When the general public becomes educated on what exactly is in those contracts, then you can make the call, not before.
The city leaders who signed those contracts are long gone, and signed those contracts during much different times.
Remember slewage, times are a changing........

Last week, I heard a DFL representative talking about all of the good that can be done now that Gov GoogleyEyes has a DFL Senate and House.

Not once did he say anything about cutting spending to achieve a balanced budget.

- He spoke of implementing another bonding bill in the coming legislative session to kick start jobs.
- He spoke of higher taxes.
- He spoke of universal healthcare.
- He spoke of "investing" in people.
- He spoke of adding government jobs.

He spoke of everything except being fiscally responsible. In two years, we will be the new California.

[cantmakeitup]

Blern wrote:

<quoted text>
Union pensions are drowning the Postal Service as well. Pensions are unsustainable and should have never been allowed.

What!! All the union dues paid in by the workforce don't go to funding pensions and benefits? Then where does it all go?

[Amused Skew]

Smart Liberal wrote:

<quoted text>
Last week, I heard a DFL representative talking about all of the good that can be done now that Gov GoogleyEyes has a DFL Senate and House.
Not once did he say anything about cutting spending to achieve a balanced budget.
- He spoke of implementing another bonding bill in the coming legislative session to kick start jobs.
- He spoke of higher taxes.
- He spoke of universal healthcare.
- He spoke of "investing" in people.
- He spoke of adding government jobs.
He spoke of everything except being fiscally responsible. In two years, we will be the new California.

Don't forget LGA.

You can bet the LGA teat will be loaded with fresh cash.

Minnesota the state to leave ASAP.

All of you in a county afflicted by the Met Council can notice a $200 charge to support RAIL. Even thou there isn't a RAIL line within 10 miles of your house.

I wonder what the REAL net cost of rail is?

This sheet must stop!!!!

[DSM Local]

goose wrote:

<quoted text>
Like most private sector companies have done

the public sector has no intelligence

All you need in the public sector is some expirence in public service, like community organizer

[DSM Local]

cantmakeitup wrote:

<quoted text>
What!! All the union dues paid in by the workforce don't go to funding pensions and benefits? Then where does it all go?

High union employee pay doesn't go to the worker, it goes to the union

Kinda like a mini communist nation

[Bridgework]

Smart Liberal wrote:

<quoted text>
Last week, I heard a DFL representative talking about all of the good that can be done now that Gov GoogleyEyes has a DFL Senate and House.
Not once did he say anything about cutting spending to achieve a balanced budget.
- He spoke of implementing another bonding bill in the coming legislative session to kick start jobs.
- He spoke of higher taxes.
- He spoke of universal healthcare.
- He spoke of "investing" in people.
- He spoke of adding government jobs.
He spoke of everything except being fiscally responsible. In two years, we will be the new California.

When does a state need a 22% increase to their budget? How can a state justify an average of 17% increase every biennium for the last 40 years?

[Smart Liberal]

Amused Skew wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't forget LGA.
You can bet the LGA teat will be loaded with fresh cash.
Minnesota the state to leave ASAP.
All of you in a county afflicted by the Met Council can notice a $200 charge to support RAIL. Even thou there isn't a RAIL line within 10 miles of your house.
I wonder what the REAL net cost of rail is?
This sheet must stop!!!!

Thanks for reminding me. The bonding bill will be used to provide more money for the SW Corridor Light Rail Line, along with "other desperately needed" light rail projects, bridges, bike paths, and "street cars".

The Met Council, that unelected body that spends over $750,000,000 of your tax money each year is going to be working overtime for the next two years.

[Amused Slew]

Yep, cutting down dependence on foreign oil and putting American ingenuity to work...Too bad, you're a broke cheapo skate.... LMNAOROTFU~! What a whiny loser !

[cantmakeitup]

Bridgework wrote:

<quoted text>
When does a state need a 22% increase to their budget? How can a state justify an average of 17% increase every biennium for the last 40 years?

When it's not their money.

[Amused Slew]

cantmakeitup wrote:

<quoted text>
When it's not their money.

When it pays for good and services for the populous... Gee, how do you suppose development for increased population works ??? Yeah, you got yours, right losers ?

[cantmakeitup]

DSM Local wrote:

<quoted text>
High union employee pay doesn't go to the worker, it goes to the union
Kinda like a mini communist nation

Ohhhh! You mean like China, Best Korea and Cuba? Oh, and also New York, Chicago, etc?

[Amused Slew]

Neither of you want to pay for representation... fine, stay low paid losers... LMAOROTFU~!

[40for60]

Smart Liberal wrote:

<quoted text>
Last week, I heard a DFL representative talking about all of the good that can be done now that Gov GoogleyEyes has a DFL Senate and House.
Not once did he say anything about cutting spending to achieve a balanced budget.
- He spoke of implementing another bonding bill in the coming legislative session to kick start jobs.
- He spoke of higher taxes.
- He spoke of universal healthcare.
- He spoke of "investing" in people.
- He spoke of adding government jobs.
He spoke of everything except being fiscally responsible. In two years, we will be the new California.

Nothing like the cart 'riders' telling the cart 'pushers' how fast they want to go. When the cart comes to a screeching halt, they'll have a hard time getting their fat assses off the ground.

I'll bet they start hanging Bush' picture back up in the White House, just as a reminder to blame everything on him.

[Smart Liberal]

40for60 wrote:

<quoted text>
Nothing like the cart 'riders' telling the cart 'pushers' how fast they want to go. When the cart comes to a screeching halt, they'll have a hard time getting their fat assses off the ground.
I'll bet they start hanging Bush' picture back up in the White House, just as a reminder to blame everything on him.

It is a fact that 51% of all US households pay nothing in Federal Income Taxes. That is a very real problem because - as you say - that cart is going to come to a screeching halt one of these days.

[The Truth]

Misconceptions and Realities About Who Pays Taxes

By Chuck Marr and Chye-Ching Huang

Updated September 17, 2012

Executive Summary

Close to half of U.S. households currently do not owe federal income tax. The Urban Institute-Brookings Tax Policy Center estimates that 46 percent of households will owe no federal income tax for 2011.[1] A widely cited figure is a Joint Committee on Taxation estimate that 51 percent of households paid no federal income tax in 2009.[2](The TPC figure for 2009 also is 51 percent.)[3]

These figures are sometimes cited as evidence that low- and moderate-income families do not pay sufficient taxes. Yet these figures, their significance, and their policy implications are widely misunderstood.
&#9632;The 51 percent and 46 percent figures are anomalies that reflect the unique circumstances of the past few years, when the economic downturn greatly swelled the number of Americans with low incomes. The figures for 2009 are particularly anomalous; in that year, temporary tax cuts that the 2009 Recovery Act created — including the “Making Work Pay” tax credit and an exclusion from tax of the first $2,400 in unemployment benefits — were in effect and removed millions of Americans from the federal income tax rolls. Both of these temporary tax measures have since expired.

In 2007, before the economy turned down, 40 percent of households did not owe federal income tax. This figure more closely reflects the percentage that do not owe income tax in normal economic times.[4]
&#9632;These figures cover only the federal income tax and ignore the substantial amounts of other federal taxes — especially the payroll tax — that many of these households pay. As a result, these figures greatly overstate the share of households that do not pay federal taxes. Tax Policy Center data show that only about 17 percent of households did not pay any federal income tax or payroll tax in 2009, despite the high unemployment and temporary tax cuts that marked that year.[5] In 2007, a more typical year, the figure was 14 percent. This percentage would be even lower if it reflected other federal taxes that households pay, including excise taxes on gasoline and other items.
&#9632;Most of the people who pay neither federal income tax nor payroll taxes are low-income people who are elderly, unable to work due to a serious disability, or students, most of whom subsequently become taxpayers.(In years like the last few, this group also includes a significant number of people who have been unemployed the entire year and cannot find work.)
&#9632;Moreover, low-income households as a group do, in fact, pay federal taxes. Congressional Budget Office data show that the poorest fifth of households paid an average of 4.0 percent of their incomes in federal taxes in 2007, the latest year for which these data are available — not an insignificant amount given how modest these households’ incomes are; the poorest fifth of households had average income of $18,400 in 2007.[6] The next-to-the bottom fifth — those with incomes between $20,500 and $34,300 in 2007 — paid an average of 10.6 percent of their incomes in federal taxes.
&#9632;Moreover, even these figures greatly understatelow-income households’ totaltax burden because these households also pay substantial state and local taxes. Data from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy show that the poorest fifth of households paid a stunning 12.3 percent of their incomes in state and local taxes in 2011.[7]
&#9632;When all federal, state, and local taxes are taken into account, the bottom fifth of households pays about 16 percent of their incomes in taxes, on average. The second-poorest fifth pays about 21 percent.[8]

[Smart Liberal]

Bob of Many Names, that is a very poor cut & paste job.

AND, in that article, they do admit that 51% pay no Federal Income Taxes.

When will everyone begin to pay their fair share? At that point you can start the discussion on needing to look at the tax structure for the top income earners. Until then...you've got nothing.

[Amused Slew]

Polly want a cracker ??? AWWWK ~! They pay more of other taxes, MORON ~! LMAOROTFU~!