Why a sudden shift in earned income to the already well-paid?
According to a Wall Street Journal analysis, the percentage of total wages and salaries paid to top executives rose from roughly 28 percent of the national total in 2002 to 33 percent in 2007, just five years later. (The figure excludes non-salary compensation, such as incentive stock options, which would tilt the ground even further.)
Now, that’s a pretty remarkable shift of earning power over a very short time, and as the Journal points out, it has serious implications for Social Security. That wage shift toward the already well-paid puts more of the nation’s paycheck out of reach of the payroll tax, which isn’t collected on salary and wages above the legal ceiling, which this year is $106,800. (In effect, the payroll tax operates as a surtax on the income of the working and middle classes, with much of the income of upper earners exempt.)
Because of that shift toward high earners, an additional $1 trillion in annual salary is now out of reach of the payroll tax, meaning the Social Security Trust Fund is projected to use up its surplus by 2037, four years earlier than expected.
I’d propose three basic ways to explain that sudden shift in earning power:
One, top executives and other well-paid employees became considerably more productive and worked even harder in that time frame, while the rest of the American work force slacked off. Thus, the shift is purely the product of personal merit and anybody who dares to even raise the issue is a socialist. (See comments below, no doubt). This is the merit-based, classic free-market explanation that pretends the market is an exacting judge of each person’s contribution to the overall good, and rewards each person appropriately.
Or two, for reasons ranging from technology to global trade, the overall economy is simply shifting in ways that reward the upper managerial class and penalize those who make their living in other ways. This global megatrend means that earning power is being transferred from one group to another regardless of the personal merit or hard work of those involved, and is totally impersonal in its operation.
Or, option three, those in the managerial and executive class control the compensation process and have tilted it in their own favor, skewing it to reward themselves and their peers at the expense of others. That doesn’t necessarily make them evil or even particularly greedy; given human nature, any group of people, granted such power without a countervailing power to offset it, would do the same thing over time and have no conscious sense of doing so. And in 21st century America, the forces that once discouraged such behavior — social and cultural norms, taxation policies, corporate bylaws, etc. — have weakened to the point of being ineffective.
Of course, no single explanation probably applies, and the real answer is a combination of the above. But we ought to talk about it as a nation, because the phenomenon is real, and the explanation we settle upon will determine what, if anything, should be done about it.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
336 comments Add your comment
So it ain't so, Joe
July 22nd, 2009
9:34 am
Kayaker71 @ 8:59, that myth that you speak of was handled by Clinton as Bosch stated. There are programs such as TANF, but requires heads of the household to hold down a job. And even programs like those have more in the majority on their roles for nothing more than sheer numbers in demographics.
California is not falling off a cliff due to public assistance, it is because you need a 2/3rds majority to get anything done in their statehouse. So you can reduce the budget, and you can’t raise taxes due to political games. Nice try though.
Turd Ferguson
July 22nd, 2009
9:35 am
You are correct. The bums and miscreants of this world receive my portion of wealth that is redistributed.
Kamchak
July 22nd, 2009
9:35 am
…I have no doubt that were you in the position of any of these CEOs getting very high salaries, the corporate earning would plummet far more than the salaries of said CEO.”
You really want to stand by that absurd statement? High priced CEOs can make incredibly stupid mistakes also. Two words immediately leap to mind—Bear Stearns.
Finn McCool
July 22nd, 2009
9:36 am
I guess everything that Swami dave said points to the reason Nardelli left Home Depot with a pile of cash while the company was going downhill the WHOLE time he was there.
You get paid for your hard work and the time you put in and the choices you make? Pleasssssssse.
Yeah, Swami, keep offering up that kool-aid.
Mrs. Godzilla
July 22nd, 2009
9:37 am
WHoever it was that made the statement about the problem in Califormia
needs to do a bit more homework…..start with googling the initiative
process in California.
pd
July 22nd, 2009
9:38 am
Under Eisenhower, every dollar a man made over $400,000 was taxed 92 cents. Now Eisenhower, of course, was a known Socialist.
I don’t want us to go back to that high of taxes, however, the graduated system graduates out too early. A person making $40,000,000 should be in a different tax bracket than one making $400,000 for example.
As far as Social Security goes, they should creat a gap. Tax the first $100,000 at 7%. Then leave the next $150,000 un taxed. Then tax the next $100,000 at 7% again. Should be MORE than enough money to pay for the benefits for the boomers. We can adjust it further when we get past the population bubble.
Also, full retirement age will have to be adjusted again…unfortunately.
Turd Ferguson
July 22nd, 2009
9:38 am
CA issues is WAY too many give away programs for the lazy.
Finn McCool
July 22nd, 2009
9:39 am
Running a company isn’t rocket science. It’s actually most of all a BS or sales job.
Look at all those companies that lined up to hire Chainsaw Al back in the 80’s as hed successivly ran companies into the ground and walked away with a fat wad of cash.
The middle and poor classes are being sold a snow job. Wake up folks. We’re all in this boat.
AmVet
July 22nd, 2009
9:39 am
“I don’t want the government “redistributing” any of my money. How absurd.”
Great sentiment, but just an empty Republican slogan ala Mission Accomplished.
Your dollars have always been “redistributed” all the way up and down the food chain. And simplistic mean-nothing slogans do nothing to better understand or change that obvious fact.
For the “fiscally conservative” conned this slogan is Republicode for acheiving their goal of paying nothing.
Just like the multinationals that bend them over do now.
Garner ALL of the benefits of living in the greatest country in the history of mankind, but contibute as little, and preferably zero, if possible.
That is their Reaganesque “I got mine, screw you” solution to “income redistribution”.
Bosch
July 22nd, 2009
9:40 am
Mrs. G.,
It was Kayaker. As usual, every thing is due to the poor people who are just too damn lazy to work.
Bosch
July 22nd, 2009
9:42 am
Mrs. G.,
Excuse me. I should have written – all the problems and world woes are due to the poor poeple who are just too damn lazy to work.
Bosch
July 22nd, 2009
9:42 am
Turd,
Really? Name one.
Peter
July 22nd, 2009
9:44 am
Without a doubt SS is a Ponzi Scheme !
Finn McCool
July 22nd, 2009
9:45 am
Blue is totally lying to him/herself: The top 10% of earners pay over 50% of the federal tax burden.
If you make that kind of jack and you are paying taxes you are an idiot. People pay a lot of money to those who can figure out how to reduce one’s tax bill to zero.
The wealthy and corporations have systems and teams of accountants in the wings to determine how to avoid taxes.
Go sell that stupid somewhere else.
mm
July 22nd, 2009
9:45 am
Republican tax cuts have all of the states in financial trouble.
In FL in 2008, the GOP controlled legislature got an amendment on the ballot to reduce property taxes statewide by increasng the homestead exemption. The result? Service cuts, educational cuts, extracurricular cuts in schools, etc. Now individual counties are raising their property taxes to make up the difference.
Nice job wingnuts. Not only did you bankrupt the country, now you are bankrupting each state.
Paul
July 22nd, 2009
9:46 am
Hey Shawny (9:03)
Remember when we used to have those threads about the President ignoring Congress, not following the rule of law, Imperial Presidency, making its own rules, etc? Man oh man, I miss those topics. They’re over, now. It’s no longer happening. But that’s what happens when a new administration from another party takes power and completely reverses the practices of its predecessor.
Getalife 9:04
LOL! But isn’t that the definition of an ideologue? Holding fast to a system of beliefs regardless of circumstances or new facts?
For the record…. 9:04
I was going to posit a few ideas of how life circumstances just might not be entirely due to personal choice, then I got to the ‘hang with their homeys’ phrase and realized it’d likely be a wasted effort.
Blue 9:04
Your first sentence (the top 50% of income earners already pay 97% of the federal income burden (check out the IRS site for that). The top 10% of earners pay over 50% of the federal tax burden.):
I specified I was speaking of the total rate paid by a household, not the aggregate paid by a group. So again, does it make sense that a household making a million dollars a year (about twenty times the median household income) should have a total tax burden that’s much less as a percentage of income than a household making the average? In other words, the average household pays lots more, as a percentage, of their income in total taxes than does someone making twenty times as much?
Never said high earners don’t pay a lot – just that, as a percentage of total income, it’s many many times less than the average household pays.
[[I give about 40% of my income to taxes for you already.]] Ummm, you DO know the implications of ASSuming another’s circumstances, don’t you?
(BTW – I have one of those ‘killer, Cadillac, gold plated” health insurance benefits. And, I’m in favor of taxing its value. ‘Course, I’m a left wing nut job. Or a right-wing, Obama-biased neocon. I forget which… maybe that health policy will get me some memory drugs… I’ll have to check…)
Brad Steel 9:08
[[Smart executives take their compensation in deferred options and thus pay only the measly 15% capital gains tax on the lion’s share of their pay.]]
Same thing is (was) true with hedge fund managers. Their yearly earnings were many, many times the earnings of those ‘evil, rich corporate CEOs’ many like to criticize – yet they don’t pay income tax on their earnings… they’re capital gains, 15 percent.
Thank Rep Charlie Rangel, head of the House Ways and Means, and the Democrats in power for perpetuating this.
Kayaker 71
I’d offer that much of California’s problems is due to the healthy pay, benefits and retirement packages earned by state and local government workers. Much more of an impact than the welfare stuff.
TnGelding
July 22nd, 2009
9:47 am
union boy
July 22nd, 2009
9:30 am
Well if you know of anyone, you need to report them:
http://www.ssa.gov/oig/
Paul
July 22nd, 2009
9:48 am
Finn McCool 9:45
[[If you make that kind of jack and you are paying taxes you are an idiot. People pay a lot of money to those who can figure out how to reduce one’s tax bill to zero.]]
You mean like Kennedy and Pelosi with the family trusts or that great social justice benefactor, George Soros, with his Caribbean accounts not subject to US tax?
Paul
July 22nd, 2009
9:48 am
mm 9:45
So, what’s the solution?
Turd Ferguson
July 22nd, 2009
9:48 am
Botch…thats just what the Media/CNN – MSNBC are reporting. Since has the most liberal senator Ms Maxine “beat with an ugly stick” Waters and some of the highest social program payouts I would not disagree with CNN/MSNBC.
Finn McCool
July 22nd, 2009
9:49 am
AmVet wrote: Garner ALL of the benefits of living in the greatest country in the history of mankind, but contibute as little, and preferably zero, if possible.
You can say that again!
This isn’t about jealousy, this is about greed. I don’t want any more than I have! I have a great job and I’m paid pretty well. And I married pretty well too so I took care of the future.
It’s all about greed. Follow the money.
Montrell11
July 22nd, 2009
9:49 am
The rich people in this country have way too much money. I’m glad Obama’s making them pay a lot more taxes to give to other people who need money! I just got laid off again and need some cash fast—hopefully, that new tax money starts coming in fast so the unemployment benefits can keep coming for another year.
Finn McCool
July 22nd, 2009
9:50 am
Paul, exactly. They are all in that boat.
Turd Ferguson
July 22nd, 2009
9:51 am
“The rich people in this country have way too much money.” Ya…kinda like when The Hildabeast made the comment about “excess profit”. Just what is an excess profit…lol.
TnGelding
July 22nd, 2009
9:52 am
pd
July 22nd, 2009
9:38 am
If the younger folks follow the advice so “liberally” given here, they shouldn’t need SS benefits.
Any good 8th grade math student could “fix” it, but there isn’t the political will.
RW-(the original)
July 22nd, 2009
9:52 am
Of course, no single explanation probably applies, and the real answer is a combination of the above. But we ought to talk about it as a nation, because the phenomenon is real, and the explanation we settle upon will determine what, if anything, should be done about it.
Did the article accidentally get chopped right there? It sure seems like a proposal to solve this perceived problem should have followed that.
It seems to me like that’s a pretty tight time frame to use in making your point and ignores the fundamental changes leading into that time period. During the dot com bubble there were huge numbers of people with relatively small skill levels making big money. The bursting of that bubble gets the most blame for those jobs going away but the reality is that they were a self destructive set of jobs. If your skill set didn’t cover a very broad range then you helped develop the very technology that put you out of or severely devalued your job.
Jeff
July 22nd, 2009
9:52 am
“I guess I am lucky that I am not rich.”
Now I want you to keep saying that until you realize what you’re saying: “I guess I am lucky that I don’t have as much as someone else.” Let me ask you: Would you rather have half of ten million dollars or all of what you’ve got now?
I can’t remember who said it, but it’s true: “The rich subsidize the poor in any society worth living in.” Guess what? YOU’RE NOT RICH.
Gandalf, the White! (Shiek Abooty)
July 22nd, 2009
9:56 am
Jeff it was a moron who said “rich subsidize the poor in any society worth living in” and it’s a lie. Look at Russia…get the picture?
Rebecca
July 22nd, 2009
9:57 am
Under Sarbanes-Oxley, a CEO must certify that his company’s SEC filings are factual. If an accountant makes an honest mistake on those filings, the CEO is subject to $1,000,000 in fines and ten years in prison. If the mistakes are willful, the CEO is subject o $5,000,000 in fines and 20 years in prison. How much would you have to earn each year to be willing to put your personal financial health AND your freedom on the line like that?
Gandalf, the White! (Shiek Abooty)
July 22nd, 2009
9:58 am
Barry picked the Surgeon General on one issue.
Michelle, the Fugly to Barry ” any female you choose for another post better be more FUGLY than me!”
Excellent Column About The Rich Getting More While YOU Get LESS - Politics and Other Controversies - City-Data Forum
July 22nd, 2009
9:59 am
[...] Rich Getting More While YOU Get LESS Really, if you work for a living, you should read this: Why a sudden shift in earned income to the already well-paid? | Jay Bookman This is why the cap on income that pays the Social Security tax and Medicare tax should be [...]
@@
July 22nd, 2009
10:01 am
Well you know what they say, jay. As California goes so goes the nation.
Democrats Solution: Flat Tax?
Close the loopholes and let’s get this done already!
Class warfare only serves political interests, not the peoples’.
Gandalf, the White! (Shiek Abooty)
July 22nd, 2009
10:01 am
Barry to Michelle the FUGLY, “Mission Accomplished!”
AmVet
July 22nd, 2009
10:02 am
I’m a little surprised I’ve yet seen from one of our “fiscally conservative” faithful that popular but mindless canard, “Corporations don’t pay taxes, they just pass them along.”
Thee has been a corporate crime wave in this country for thirty years or more. Ronnie, Willy and King George merely invigorated it.
And until last September, nobody really cared.
They’re caring now…
Turd Ferguson
July 22nd, 2009
10:03 am
And just where has the Goron been of late? Oh yea…he is starting his green/carbon credits/BS company so he too can make more millions and find ways to take advantage of tax shelters.
I dont particularly care for “The Goron”, however, I dont blame him for tossing his sheeple over the cliff if they are that stupid.
As PT Barnum once said…”There is one born every minute” and “Never give one an even break”. Seems the Dems have taken that to heart and use it mostly on their constituents. Jesse and Al have it memorized and stamped into their brains.
Gale
July 22nd, 2009
10:03 am
Rebecca, you must realize that SOX rules don’t keep any smart accounting team from finagling the books while still following the “rules”. The corporate problem is the race to meet short term goals while ingoring long term health.
josef nix
July 22nd, 2009
10:06 am
Where does “poor” end, and “middle class” begin, where does “middle class” end and “rich” begin? To a person making $25k, $75k is middle class, and one making $250k is rich. To someone making $40 million, $250k is penny ante. Where is the dividing line between “making ends meet,” “comfortable” and “more than you need?”
Like Normal and probably others here as well, I owe no one anything and have a little bit set aside for a rainy day and retirement. I’m comfortable. To a single mother whose husband has walked out on her and left her with three kids to raise on minimum wage, I’m rich. To a CEO I’m a church mouse.
USinUK and others calling for a flat tax have at least some idea as to how to make this more egalitarian. Hit me, the working mom and the CEO all with the same rate. Then when the working mom needs a little help putting food on the table, clothes on the back or a roof over the head, she’s still paying her fair share.
And those who would claim that they are “taking nothing” from the “welfare state,” I’d submit that this might hold more credence when you stay off the freeways, fill in your own potholes, call the CEO for a peace-keeper, ambulance or fire truck…the list of “public services,” i.e. social welfare, is endless.
Are we getting our dollar’s worth? That’s another question entirely.
Paul
July 22nd, 2009
10:06 am
AmVet
Follow-up from last evening: today’s headline “Why a sudden shift in earned income to the already well-paid?”: seems that succinctly states what I was driving at with further subsidies and tax benefits (child care and the rest) proposed by Sen Boxer for military members. I mean, I’ve questioned subsidizing health insurance for families making $70-90k a year… doesn’t seem consistent to make an exception just because of one’s chosen profession.
Brad Steel
July 22nd, 2009
10:07 am
Blue solipsistically displays his ignorance with the following soliloquy:
“You can pick and choose quotes from people that are obviously liberal all you like, and it has no bearing or validity to me. I consider myself superior to NO man, but consider myself very blessed. I also help a LOT of people who struggle. I live my life by the credo “I believe God has allowed and will allow a lot of money to pass through my hands as long as I don’t let it all stick to my fingers”. I believe my professional success will continue as long as I use it to help others as well. Nice of you to try to use a quote to lump us all in together, though. I would NEVER accuse all liberals of wanting to be lazy and leach off of successful people.”
Blue may want of note the irony of rant by taking a second look of the Gailbrath quote, although I am sure he knows nothing about Gailbrath:
“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. ”
John Kenneth Galbraith
Paul
July 22nd, 2009
10:08 am
josef, josef, josef, where you been? Haven’t you been following all the Administration’s proposals? $250,000 is the new middle class!
wbk
July 22nd, 2009
10:09 am
Mrs. G. I think you got it right. You are guilty of those things.
However, I do not like the size of the salaries and compensations for CEO’s. I do not like how the CEO get those bonuses either. It should go toward the stockholders.
I can not imagine the salaries these CEO’are getting and but I sure can reason they did not earn that. Just like the ball players! I do not buy tickets. I will not support that kind of greed. However, I am lambasted with commericals so they can receive those salaries. I really hate that but I do have a remote control.
There are times when I can see a company really paying extremely high salaries to reward good stewardship of a company but to reward CEO’s for failing is beyound my reasoning.
What?
July 22nd, 2009
10:12 am
Everybody say it with me… F R E E M A R K E T
You get what you are worth. If you don’t get what you are worth, go to work somewhere else that will pay you what you are worth. If you still don’t get what you are worth, maybe you overvalue your worth.
Dave R.
July 22nd, 2009
10:17 am
TN Gelding @ 8:45:
“How much money does one household need?”
That is NOT for YOU to decide, Gelding, nor is it for the government to decide. It is for those who earn it to decide how much they need.
Turd Ferguson
July 22nd, 2009
10:19 am
I think selfishness starts from the bottom up. The “unwed mother” was selfish enough to engage in unprotected sex (live for the moment) and a fatherless child is the result.
The bum is willing to steal from others because of his/her laziness to do anything other than that. From that pespective, I guess Galbraith is correct.
Chris Salzmann
July 22nd, 2009
10:19 am
I don’t have a problem with executive pay as long as:
1) It’s approved by shareholders and NOT the Board of Directors.
2) The company is profitable (for bonuses)
3) Severance payments amounting to millions of dollars should be illegal (there’s a good reason you are being asked to leave and usually its because you suck at your job)
4) “Golden Parachutes” should be outlawed, i.e, company sinks, you sink with it!
Its all common sense.
lovelyliz
July 22nd, 2009
10:20 am
How about the REALLY FAIR TAX. Everybody gets the standard deduction. After that, all income is taxed at the same rate. Wages earn should not be taxed more than other forms of income such as gains on stock options, etc
Or is that too simple and FAIR?
Chris Salzmann
July 22nd, 2009
10:22 am
Turd Ferguson July 22nd, 2009 10:19 am SAID: I think selfishness starts from the bottom up. The “unwed mother” was selfish enough to engage in unprotected sex (live for the moment) and a fatherless child is the result.
CHRIS SAYS: No child is fatherless but there are absent fathers who need to step up. Interesting also how you blame this all on the mother.
AmVet
July 22nd, 2009
10:22 am
Paul, we’ll just have to fundamentally differ on what GIs should get. For the sacrifices they and their families make, I will NEVER buy into this idea that civilian compensation is in any way comparable as a barometer.
I guess I’m just a pro-veteran, pro-active duty service member socialist…
Off to pay for more corporate welfare and the dual quagmires…
Turd Ferguson
July 22nd, 2009
10:24 am
Just one example Salzberger…Im sure there are plenty of example where men would be selfish. Feel better now?
Dan
July 22nd, 2009
10:24 am
Complete nonsense, whats worse is Jay knows it (or should) This wouldn’t be a problem if social security remained as intended to aid one after retirement, understand for that benefit, or more properly reimbursement, what you recieve is based on what you put in. The biggest reason their is a problem is because it is used largely as a welfare program. Talk about unfair, there are many “poor families who receive far more than they ever contributed, I guarantee 99% of people above the 106 line will not collect what they put in
Question
July 22nd, 2009
10:25 am
Isn’t the following exactly what PresBo said we were NOT going to do???
BANGKOK — The Obama administration is consulting with allies on a new “comprehensive package” of incentives aimed at persuading North Korea to abandon its nuclear programs, senior U.S. officials confirmed Tuesday.
Kamchak
July 22nd, 2009
10:25 am
nosef jix—a cautionary tale on the subject of tribal inbreeding.
Turd Ferguson
July 22nd, 2009
10:28 am
BANGKOK — The Obama administration is consulting with allies on a new “comprehensive package” of incentives aimed at persuading North Korea to abandon its nuclear programs, senior U.S. officials confirmed Tuesday.
Candy ass Obama. He and Jimmy Carter must be cousins.
Doggone/GA
July 22nd, 2009
10:28 am
“Interesting also how you blame this all on the mother”
Not interesting…TYPICAL
Soothsayer
July 22nd, 2009
10:29 am
For those who didn’t take time to read the link by TnGelding @ 8:34, I recommend that you add it to your favorites and read it at some time when you are not in “full howl.” I found two quotes that I think are telling:
Senator Byron L. Dorgan (D-ND), who says: “I think we will look back in 10 years’ time and say we should not have done this but we did because we forgot the lessons of the past, and that that which is true in the 1930’s is true in 2010;” (Commenting in 1999 on the passage of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which repeals Glass-Steagall. Talk about predicting the future.)
“Globalization was always going to risk putting G7 bankers into a dangerous corner at some point. We have got to that point,” Janjuah says. RBS debt market chief Kit Jukes says Europe will not be immune from the problems: “Economic weakness is spreading and the latest data on consumer demand and confidence are dire.”
We have in this country been playing a game since the end of WWII. That game is similar to the game where you try to remove pieces of wood from the stack without the whole thing falling in. Only in this case, we have been removing pieces of our economy. Unfortunately, we have reached “critical mass” and our economy has collapsed.
The collapse of the housing market, the credit crunch–all these are “symptoms” of the disease of globalization.
Many are wishing and hoping for a “miracle” turnaround and a return to prosperity. However, I believe that in this “global” economy you should “get used to it.” Try to find a service job that must be personally delivered.
josef nix
July 22nd, 2009
10:29 am
Kamchak–well, I guess I finally do have to concede that point here!
Normal
July 22nd, 2009
10:30 am
Hormal, I kind of like that…brings beef stew to mind and I’m beefy in my own mind…
getalife
July 22nd, 2009
10:31 am
@@,
Going to Oakland to see a doctor:
“Oakland Voters Pass Landmark Marijuana Tax”.
Just smokin.
Paul
July 22nd, 2009
10:32 am
AmVet
I’ve no problem with agreeing to disagree. I rather thought I was making the point of much of what we see is, in fact, using civilian compensation models to ‘reward’ military members?
Just a point to consider: where does it end? At what level?
I Report :-) You Whine :-(
July 22nd, 2009
10:34 am
Be it resolved that the Alaska State Legislature hereby claims sovereignty for the state under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.
Be it further resolved that this resolution serves as Notice and Demand to the federal government to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.-Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska/ Patriot
bwa
Stand down, Obozo!
Or else!
Trust me
July 22nd, 2009
10:35 am
If our taxes are too high, why are we borrowing money from China and others in order to fund such things as $500+ billion annually for defense plus capital gains tax cuts plus a farm bill plus a prescription drug program… And, why is the money that working class Americans are paying into social security being drawn out to fund the above items as well. Why aren’t there any Republicans or conservatives or whatever dealing with these issues.
Kamchak
July 22nd, 2009
10:36 am
josef
Just sayin.’
Jeff
July 22nd, 2009
10:38 am
Gandalf, I don’t see much subsidizing of the poor in Russia. In fact, why Russia is pertinent I have no idea. Conservatives love to go there, I know, but there’s more to the world than the conservative USA and Russia (shock! horror!).
getalife
July 22nd, 2009
10:38 am
Sarah is seceding?
Hilarious, it’s the new bither.
Speaking of birthers:
“Liz Cheney Defends Obama “Birthers,” Carville Stunned”.
I guess she is running for office.
Pandering to the whack job base.
Politics is fun.
Trust me
July 22nd, 2009
10:38 am
Stand down, Obozo!
Or else!
“Or else I’ll just up and quit,” declared Samurai Sarah.
TnGelding
July 22nd, 2009
10:39 am
Dave R.
July 22nd, 2009
10:17 am
But when they’re getting too much compensation, there isn’t enough for the underlings and they end up “investing” in Ponzi schemes and off-shore tax havens to the detriment of society. Like I said, the stockholders need to get more involved. How many don’t even return their proxy statements?
@@
July 22nd, 2009
10:39 am
Getalife:
You’ve gotta go all the way to Oakland for marijuana???
A lady I knew right here in Georgia got a prescription in pill form.
Crush it, stuff it, roll it and smoke it…
or go to Cali’s melting pot.
Bon voyage!
USinUK
July 22nd, 2009
10:40 am
hahahahaha … an “Or else!” threat from St. Sarah of the Tundra??? oooooo … scary.
getalife
July 22nd, 2009
10:41 am
@@,
I have to go check it out. Tired of opiates.
Cali is calling me
Turd Ferguson
July 22nd, 2009
10:41 am
Some of my proxy statements make for a fine fanny-wiping material.
TnGelding
July 22nd, 2009
10:42 am
Dave R.
July 22nd, 2009
10:17 am
It’s for those that decide how much they are compensated. The boards and top execs are a little too cozy in too many instances. The most successful companies are those that understand the value of their employees.
Gandalf, the White! (Shiek Abooty)
July 22nd, 2009
10:43 am
Jeff, u are correct sir! But what system came before this? Socialism! See our future there after Barry destroys our once great country!
TnGelding
July 22nd, 2009
10:44 am
lovelyliz
July 22nd, 2009
10:20 am
Why any deduction at all?
TnGelding
July 22nd, 2009
10:47 am
Dan
July 22nd, 2009
10:24 am
You must have missed my earlier posting:
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is a Federal income supplement program funded by general tax revenues (not Social Security taxes):
It is designed to help aged, blind, and disabled people, who have little or no income; and
It provides cash to meet basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter.
http://www.ssa.gov/ssi/
josef nix
July 22nd, 2009
10:49 am
USinUK–there you go again, making statements that just aren’t true. Get your facts straight. She is not Ste. Sarah of the Tundra. She’s still Beata Sarah.
Avocatus Diaboli
The Carnivore
July 22nd, 2009
10:49 am
Pretty simple. The top executives move this country forward, and if the government authorizes legalized theft from those who are most productive, then they will simply change the mix of wages and capital gains to best suit their own tax situation. Overly taxing the rich guy becasue he has money has never worked before and it won’t work now.
I am building a business and am not even considering hiring any US workers at all. They will all be overseas contractors. Why would I subject myself to an 8% payroll tax and an ever-increasing health care burden? Or unions and too-high wages, for less work done in return? This administration is making my decision very easy to offshore everything.
The national sales tax is a far better method of fairly distributing the nation’s tax burden.
Whatever
July 22nd, 2009
10:51 am
The whole point is, the mega rich gripe about taxes but in reality, they are NOT paying them. But you folks just keep drinking down the Fox News propaganda that the mega rich pay for to keep them earning more and keeping more while the folk in the middle foot the bill for everyone. Great plan.
Irish In America
July 22nd, 2009
10:51 am
Jay, tell us, what is your ^ figure salary? Do you really think you deserve it?
I mean heck, all you do is write a bunch of BS.
FAIRTAX.ORG
I Report :-) You Whine :-(
July 22nd, 2009
10:51 am
USinUK- That is what the British said in 1776, fool.
Obama has scheduled a prime-time news conference Wednesday, expected to focus on health care. It’s turning into a major test of his leadership. One Republican senator says if the party can stop Obama on health care, it will break him.
He will be ejaculated.and emasculated, like all good socialist wind up being.
Don’t tread on me, Obozo!
TnGelding
July 22nd, 2009
10:53 am
Soothsayer
July 22nd, 2009
10:29 am
Well put. Our piece of the pie is getting smaller, with the complicity of Congress and several administrations. Fortunately we can afford to cut back a little and still live comfortably. Education is even more important. Living abroad for a few years might become a necessity for the more ambitious among us.
DB, Gwinnettian
July 22nd, 2009
10:54 am
She’s still Beata Sarah.
And her fanboys are Master Beatas.
Thank you, I’ll be here all week.
TnGelding
July 22nd, 2009
10:55 am
Trust me
July 22nd, 2009
10:35 am
Our taxes aren’t too high. They’re irresponsibly low.
USinUK
July 22nd, 2009
10:57 am
Jo Nix … “She is not Ste. Sarah of the Tundra. She’s still Beata Sarah.” I dunno, I think Joe the Plumber may have done a little lobbying following the Letterman brouhahaha and now she’s reached sainthood
Whiner –
“That is what the British said in 1776, fool.”
um. so, we’re supposed to be threatened by a governor that just quit her job??? not to mention, Alaska is a net RECIPIENT of federal money – if they quit the union, they’d feel the hurt a lot more than we would.
USinUK
July 22nd, 2009
10:58 am
Gwinecian –
“Thank you, I’ll be here all week.”
(applause)
I Report :-) You Whine :-(
July 22nd, 2009
10:58 am
DETROIT (Reuters) – General Motors posted Wednesday a 22 percent global sales drop from a year earlier for the first six months of 2009 amid the economic slowdown and the automaker’s slide into bankruptcy.
What wonders thee Obozo has worken on thee Government Motors, shall we have him spread his, uh, magic on thee health care system?
Hell no!
No Taxation without Representation, Obozo!
Disgusted
July 22nd, 2009
10:59 am
Living abroad for a few years might become a necessity for the more ambitious among us.
May I recommend the army, Gelding? Plenty of overseas living, and you can be all you can be.
TnGelding
July 22nd, 2009
11:00 am
Irish In America
July 22nd, 2009
10:51 am
But it isn’t fair. Just simple.
Normal
July 22nd, 2009
11:00 am
Sister Sarah, Didn’t she kill a bar when she was only three? Queen of the wild frontier, that she is….
TnGelding
July 22nd, 2009
11:01 am
I Report
You Whine 
July 22nd, 2009
10:51 am
Too late. You’re road kill.
Doggone/GA
July 22nd, 2009
11:02 am
“But it isn’t fair. Just simple.”
and for the simpleminded
USinUK
July 22nd, 2009
11:04 am
“and for the simpleminded”
honey, you just said a mouthful
TnGelding
July 22nd, 2009
11:04 am
USinUK
July 22nd, 2009
10:57 am
And they’re extorting us on oil just like OPEC.
Normal
July 22nd, 2009
11:05 am
Whiner, You are worrying so much about everything, I thought I’d try to lighten up your day. Enjoy, dude…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcjXRiIHmnw – 91k
Gordon
July 22nd, 2009
11:06 am
First of all, there is no Social Security trust fund. It’s just money the government owes itself. The SSA is just part of government. You can’t spend and save the same dollar.
If you have a problem with how much an executive gets paid, take it up with the Board of Directors, who are elected by the shareholders. If you are aren’t a shareholder, it’s none of your business. If you are and don’t agree with the BOD, sell your shares.
If it is a private company, it is none of your business.
Stop whining about people who are more successful than you are.
TnGelding
July 22nd, 2009
11:07 am
Disgusted
July 22nd, 2009
10:59 am
I dodged the draft and joined the USAF. Our military structure is very good for some tho, especially the undisciplined. But I’m afraid the rewards aren’t good enough for those that want to be wealthy.
Finn McCool
July 22nd, 2009
11:09 am
CArnivore wrote: Overly taxing the rich guy becasue he has money has never worked before and it won’t work now.
Carnivore, do you have any idea what the tax on the wealthy was before Reagan came into office? It was over 70%! He dropped it down to 27%!
Reagan promptly cut income taxes on the very rich from 70% down to 27%. Corporate tax rates were also cut so severely that they went from representing over 33% of total federal tax receipts in 1951 to less than 9% in 1983 (they’re still in that neighborhood, the lowest in the industrialized world).
The result was devastating. Our government was suddenly so badly awash in red ink that Reagan doubled the tax paid only by people earning less than $40,000/year (FICA), and then began borrowing from the huge surplus this new tax was accumulating in the Social Security Trust Fund. Even with that, Reagan had to borrow more money in his 8 years than the sum total of all presidents from George Washington to Jimmy Carter combined.
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_6522.cfm
Obama just wants to get the rate back to the 35% rate it was under Clinton.
USinUK
July 22nd, 2009
11:09 am
Normal –
“Didn’t she kill a bar when she was only three?”
yeah. “sportsman” that she is, she shot it from a helicopter …
Wyld Byll Hyltnyr
July 22nd, 2009
11:10 am
Jay, I assume my banishment has ended.
First, let me express my dismay for the circumstances that led to my time in exile. After I threw a verbal bouquet to one of the more beautiful minds and source of moral clarity on the blog, I was, for no reason, mocked by one of the blog’s outspoken liberal denizen. The liberal, brimming with hate and filled with disgust at the very thought of two conservative minds wrapped in mutual admiration, then threatened to “splutter” if the recipient of my verbal bouquet responded to me. Thus jibed in such an inappropriate and unprovoked manner, I responded to my provoker with a single line concept. For me, the liberal mind is best described by the old country song lyric, “You have got to stand for something or you’ll fall for anything.” So my response, falling in line with the fact that liberals will swallow, “hook, line, & sinker”, any sob story or piece of dogma from their leaders, “I thought you people all swallowed.” Thus, after an unprovoked attack, I was banished for so innocuous a comment.
That said, I have come to the conclusion that this blog is neither intended to be a marketplace in which the best ideas will prevail or a forum in which insight, experience, knowledge, and expertise have higher value than naked liberal dogma. While the examples are innumerable, below are a few that clearly identify the blog’s preference for fiction over fact.
The blog and its readers, when considering the economy, have reacted more favorably to the naked dogma from the Huffington Post and Daily Koos than the real world experiences and expertise of an active c-level executive.
The blog and its readers, when considering homo marriage, have reacted more favorably to the naked dogma and talking points of the “I’m here and I’m queer” perverts than very Word of the Lord G-d and those who follow him.
The blog and its readers, when considering accountability and activities of diverse groups of people, have reacted more favorably to the naked dogma and talking points from Jerine Garafalo than the practical experience of one who has a very long track record of productive relationships with actual coloured, actual homos, and actual jews.
The blog and its readers, when considering accountability and activities of real people such as Ralph Reed, have reacted more favorably to the naked dogma and stale old stories from the liberal media than the personal experience of one who has worked, hunted, dined, chased, prayed, and, yes, looked intio the very soul of Ralp and found him to be an honourable, Christian man.
And the examples go on and on, but I’ll stop here.
As a result, I have reached the conclusion that my contributions to a blog where old-wives-tales out way fact, where desired outcomes replace recognition of reality, and any yaboo who can type, no matter status and past achievement, can out yell men of uncommon distinction, knowledge, and expertise.
With that said, Ol’ Wyld Byll is going to head softly into that good night as I will no longer post on this blog so you won’t have Wyld Byll Hyltnyr to kick around anymore.
Best wishes to my conservative travelers in arms, Palin/Jindahl in 2012 will nake it all right. Dear@@, the email address is wyldbyllhyltnyr@gmail.com if you want to get in touch.
TnGelding
July 22nd, 2009
11:10 am
Doggone/GA
July 22nd, 2009
11:02 am
Actually, with a little tinkering, I could support it. Our current system is just too complicated and costly to comply with.
USinUK
July 22nd, 2009
11:12 am
Finny –
“Obama just wants to get the rate back to the 35% rate it was under Clinton.”
noooo … not the clinton years! you know, when unemployment was declining steadily and wealth was rising