2012 Elections

[stessier]

Doesn't matter that much to me. It is political masturbation. They didn't deal with the real issues as usual. I don't pay a payroll tax as I don't collect payroll, I am a self-employed consultant.

Wait, don't you actually pay the whole 12% as a result of being self employed (6% employer + 6% employee)? Or hadn't you better be? And it must have dropped to 10% during the holiday, no?

[Rip]

Doesn't matter that much to me. It is political masturbation. They didn't deal with the real issues as usual. I don't pay a payroll tax as I don't collect payroll, I am a self-employed consultant.

Wait, don't you actually pay the whole 12% as a result of being self employed (6% employer + 6% employee)? Or hadn't you better be? And it must have dropped to 10% during the holiday, no?

I am an LLC and I take my income through cash distributions so it is handled quarterly, but I draw very little and much of the money I have to spend is a business cost. In the end I "make" very little, my wife does collect a payroll check from her employer though. So it does effect me, but I just jack up my hourly rate to cover it. My customers then pass it along to you poor oil consumers.

It hurts my wife and daughters incomes greatly though as they both work not far above the min wage.

[noxiousdog]

Oh right. Total benefits would have to be decreased by roughly 15%. And kudos for those that are willing to do it. I've long said I'd rather have my portion, the government can have the employer portion, and I could forego benefits. I'm perfectly ok with that.

But alas, there's no support and it needs funded.

Doesn't matter that much to me. It is political masturbation. They didn't deal with the real issues as usual. I don't pay a payroll tax as I don't collect payroll, I am a self-employed consultant.

Wait, don't you actually pay the whole 12% as a result of being self employed (6% employer + 6% employee)? Or hadn't you better be? And it must have dropped to 10% during the holiday, no?

Yes, he should, and no I don't think it dropped. I think only the employee portion was temporarily suspended.

[Kraken]

But I do agree that it's madness that the payroll tax is going up. I take it you agree that letting the payroll tax go up was bad?

This is the problem with "temporary" tax cuts. People barely even noticed when that extra 2% appeared in their pay but everybody screams bloody murder when it goes away.

Including myself. I just finished making the January/February budget. Combined with the wife's automatic 1% 401k increase, her biweekly checks are going down by $63. $126/month is not a trivial amount. But if it turns out that we can't handle it, we'll cut her 401k contribution by 3% to get back where we were last year.

Realistically I'm not sure how the payroll tax will impact me this year. I'm not expecting my employer to announce a 2% across the board pay cut, though I suppose they could... and with 40,000 employees the money has to come from somewhere.

The employer share of the tax has always been 6.2%. Only the employee portion was cut.

[coopasonic]

Realistically I'm not sure how the payroll tax will impact me this year. I'm not expecting my employer to announce a 2% across the board pay cut, though I suppose they could... and with 40,000 employees the money has to come from somewhere.

The employer share of the tax has always been 6.2%. Only the employee portion was cut.

That's tells you how little I understand my paycheck. At least now I understand why soc sec was brought up.

[Kraken]

I had to learn all that stuff when I became my own employer. Issuing paychecks to yourself and then paying both personal and corporate payroll taxes is an eye opener. Everybody who gets a paycheck is paying the full 12.4% + 2.9% for SS and Medicare, but most people only ever see their own half.

[Pyperkub]

I have always liked the guy. And as crappy a deal as both sides feel the fiscal cliff bill is, both sides seem to acknowledge he was the driving force behind getting SOMEthing cobbled together since the typical party leader knuckleheads couldn't.

The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 is unworthy of any praise, as it was a colossal failure on every level; it did not reduce the deficit, it did not cut debt or even touch the debt ceiling, it did nothing in terms of entitlement reform, it delayed sequestration, and also included a bunch of irresponsible additional pork. 'SOMEthing' may've been done, but that's a far cry from 'SOMEthing even remotely worthwhile' getting done. If anything, it represents a nadir in American politics, crammed with exactly the sort of sad-sack posturing that we have come to expect from our elected officials.

It wasn't supposed to do any of that, only NOT getting a deal done would have accomplished those goals.

tapatalkin'

[Kraken]

Looks like Barney Frank might be doing an encore. He's volunteered to finish out John Kerry's term, and the guv is interested in the idea. Frank wants a piece of the debt ceiling showdown.

[RunningMn9]

The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 is unworthy of any praise, as it was a colossal failure on every level; it did not reduce the deficit, it did not cut debt or even touch the debt ceiling, it did nothing in terms of entitlement reform, it delayed sequestration, and also included a bunch of irresponsible additional pork.

WTF are you talking about? The bill didn't do what YOU wanted it to, so that makes it a failure? The point of the bill wasn't to reduce the deficit, cut debt or touch the debt ceiling. It wasn't suppose to reform entitlements, or deal with sequestration.

The point of the bill was to not let all of the Bush tax cuts expire and to not let a slate of intentionally crippling budget cuts go into effect. That's it.

And that's what it did. This bill wasn't about you and what you wanted it to be (or the author of the bitchfest you linked to).

The bill is obviously an example of the broader problem that Washington has with an inability to work together now that compromise has been declared a dirty word, and we are intentionally held hostage every four months. But the bill itself did the only thing it was intended to do.

What I don't understand is that the day after the election, the markets tanked and conservatives were all "See?!? This was a terrible decision!!!". This bill gets passed and the market goes bonkers in direct response, and...nothing.

Still no word from msduncan about how his employer feels about the bill. I can only assume they are still partying.

[Anonymous Bosch]

The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 is unworthy of any praise, as it was a colossal failure on every level; it did not reduce the deficit, it did not cut debt or even touch the debt ceiling, it did nothing in terms of entitlement reform, it delayed sequestration, and also included a bunch of irresponsible additional pork.

WTF are you talking about? The bill didn't do what YOU wanted it to, so that makes it a failure? The point of the bill wasn't to reduce the deficit, cut debt or touch the debt ceiling. It wasn't suppose to reform entitlements, or deal with sequestration.

The point of the bill was to not let all of the Bush tax cuts expire and to not let a slate of intentionally crippling budget cuts go into effect. That's it.

And that's what it did. This bill wasn't about you and what you wanted it to be (or the author of the bitchfest you linked to).

The bill is obviously an example of the broader problem that Washington has with an inability to work together now that compromise has been declared a dirty word, and we are intentionally held hostage every four months. But the bill itself did the only thing it was intended to do.

None of which is worthy of praise, which was simply the (granted, subjective) point I was making. Pardon me if I do not share your gratitude to our esteemed elected officials for their considerable can-kicking capacities.

[RunningMn9]

I repeat, WTF are you talking about? Who is PRAISING this bill? Aside from the indirect praise Wall Street showed of course. Is someone here praising this mediocre bill?

[Anonymous Bosch]

I repeat, WTF are you talking about? Who is PRAISING this bill? Aside from the indirect praise Wall Street showed of course. Is someone here praising this mediocre bill?

My post was made in response to Carpet_pissr, who implied Biden was to be praised for being the driving force behind getting SOMEthing cobbled together.

[pr0ner]

Realistically I'm not sure how the payroll tax will impact me this year. I'm not expecting my employer to announce a 2% across the board pay cut, though I suppose they could... and with 40,000 employees the money has to come from somewhere.

The employer share of the tax has always been 6.2%. Only the employee portion was cut.

That's tells you how little I understand my paycheck. At least now I understand why soc sec was brought up.

How little you understand your paycheck is how the government likes it.

[RunningMn9]

Praising Biden for being the grown up that led to averting falling off the cliff is very different than praising the bill itself. No one is praising the bill.

[Anonymous Bosch]

Praising Biden for being the grown up that led to averting falling off the cliff is very different than praising the bill itself. No one is praising the bill.

If you say so. However, given that the impending 'fiscal cliff' was common knowledge for the better part of two years, cobbling together a shitty stopgap measure at the very last minute, that specifically avoids dealing with the rationale behind the 'fiscal cliff', is far from my idea of "being the grown up" and still unworthy of praise.

[GreenGoo]

Praising Biden for being the grown up that led to averting falling off the cliff is very different than praising the bill itself. No one is praising the bill.

If you say so. However, given that the impending 'fiscal cliff' was common knowledge for the better part of two years, cobbling together a shitty stopgap measure at the very last minute, that specifically avoids dealing with the rationale behind the 'fiscal cliff', is far from my idea of "being the grown up" and still unworthy of praise.

Well, maybe we can call him the 12 year old babysitter, with the rest of congress being a combination of toddlers and infants (but everyone is still pooping in their pants).

When, as you say, everyone had 2 years to do something and no one did anything, someone who accomplishes something *IS* worthy of praise, whether you'd have preferred nothing to the something is another question.

[geezer]

Doesn't matter that much to me. It is political masturbation. They didn't deal with the real issues as usual. I don't pay a payroll tax as I don't collect payroll, I am a self-employed consultant.

Wait, don't you actually pay the whole 12% as a result of being self employed (6% employer + 6% employee)? Or hadn't you better be? And it must have dropped to 10% during the holiday, no?

I am an LLC and I take my income through cash distributions so it is handled quarterly, but I draw very little and much of the money I have to spend is a business cost. In the end I "make" very little, my wife does collect a payroll check from her employer though. So it does effect me, but I just jack up my hourly rate to cover it. My customers then pass it along to you poor oil consumers.

It hurts my wife and daughters incomes greatly though as they both work not far above the min wage.

FWIW, not taking any salary and just taking distributions is just crying out for an audit, IMO. I've had multiple accountants tell me (in fact insist) that it's better to take a salary, show a loss, then take the loss as a deduction than it is to just take distributions...

[Kraken]

Doesn't matter that much to me. It is political masturbation. They didn't deal with the real issues as usual. I don't pay a payroll tax as I don't collect payroll, I am a self-employed consultant.

Wait, don't you actually pay the whole 12% as a result of being self employed (6% employer + 6% employee)? Or hadn't you better be? And it must have dropped to 10% during the holiday, no?

I am an LLC and I take my income through cash distributions so it is handled quarterly, but I draw very little and much of the money I have to spend is a business cost. In the end I "make" very little, my wife does collect a payroll check from her employer though. So it does effect me, but I just jack up my hourly rate to cover it. My customers then pass it along to you poor oil consumers.

It hurts my wife and daughters incomes greatly though as they both work not far above the min wage.

FWIW, not taking any salary and just taking distributions is just crying out for an audit, IMO. I've had multiple accountants tell me (in fact insist) that it's better to take a salary, show a loss, then take the loss as a deduction than it is to just take distributions...

Yup, that's a common payroll tax dodge. The IRS stipulates that a business owner must take a "reasonable" salary. Guess who decides what's reasonable?

[Rip]

Doesn't matter that much to me. It is political masturbation. They didn't deal with the real issues as usual. I don't pay a payroll tax as I don't collect payroll, I am a self-employed consultant.

Wait, don't you actually pay the whole 12% as a result of being self employed (6% employer + 6% employee)? Or hadn't you better be? And it must have dropped to 10% during the holiday, no?

I am an LLC and I take my income through cash distributions so it is handled quarterly, but I draw very little and much of the money I have to spend is a business cost. In the end I "make" very little, my wife does collect a payroll check from her employer though. So it does effect me, but I just jack up my hourly rate to cover it. My customers then pass it along to you poor oil consumers.

It hurts my wife and daughters incomes greatly though as they both work not far above the min wage.

FWIW, not taking any salary and just taking distributions is just crying out for an audit, IMO. I've had multiple accountants tell me (in fact insist) that it's better to take a salary, show a loss, then take the loss as a deduction than it is to just take distributions...

Interesting. I may do that. Just that income can be very volatile so it is easier to take some if I have it and do without when things are slow.

[Carpet_pissr]

Praising Biden for being the grown up that led to averting falling off the cliff is very different than praising the bill itself. No one is praising the bill.

Thank you.

[Kraken]

Doesn't matter that much to me. It is political masturbation. They didn't deal with the real issues as usual. I don't pay a payroll tax as I don't collect payroll, I am a self-employed consultant.

Wait, don't you actually pay the whole 12% as a result of being self employed (6% employer + 6% employee)? Or hadn't you better be? And it must have dropped to 10% during the holiday, no?

I am an LLC and I take my income through cash distributions so it is handled quarterly, but I draw very little and much of the money I have to spend is a business cost. In the end I "make" very little, my wife does collect a payroll check from her employer though. So it does effect me, but I just jack up my hourly rate to cover it. My customers then pass it along to you poor oil consumers.

It hurts my wife and daughters incomes greatly though as they both work not far above the min wage.

FWIW, not taking any salary and just taking distributions is just crying out for an audit, IMO. I've had multiple accountants tell me (in fact insist) that it's better to take a salary, show a loss, then take the loss as a deduction than it is to just take distributions...

Interesting. I may do that. Just that income can be very volatile so it is easier to take some if I have it and do without when things are slow.

I get around that by paying myself a percentage of gross sales. Summertime paychecks are next to nonexistent, Christmas paychecks are pretty good, but I pay myself something every two weeks in order to meet the "reasonable salary" requirement.

[Rip]

Doesn't matter that much to me. It is political masturbation. They didn't deal with the real issues as usual. I don't pay a payroll tax as I don't collect payroll, I am a self-employed consultant.

Wait, don't you actually pay the whole 12% as a result of being self employed (6% employer + 6% employee)? Or hadn't you better be? And it must have dropped to 10% during the holiday, no?

I am an LLC and I take my income through cash distributions so it is handled quarterly, but I draw very little and much of the money I have to spend is a business cost. In the end I "make" very little, my wife does collect a payroll check from her employer though. So it does effect me, but I just jack up my hourly rate to cover it. My customers then pass it along to you poor oil consumers.

It hurts my wife and daughters incomes greatly though as they both work not far above the min wage.

FWIW, not taking any salary and just taking distributions is just crying out for an audit, IMO. I've had multiple accountants tell me (in fact insist) that it's better to take a salary, show a loss, then take the loss as a deduction than it is to just take distributions...

Interesting. I may do that. Just that income can be very volatile so it is easier to take some if I have it and do without when things are slow.

I get around that by paying myself a percentage of gross sales. Summertime paychecks are next to nonexistent, Christmas paychecks are pretty good, but I pay myself something every two weeks in order to meet the "reasonable salary" requirement.

I might have to do that. Now to figure out what reasonable min is.

[RunningMn9]

Praising Biden for being the grown up that led to averting falling off the cliff is very different than praising the bill itself. No one is praising the bill.

Thank you.

It is just getting really irritating to watch people make shit up and then complain bitterly about it. It's cheap and a waste of time.

No one posting in this thread thinks that this compromise bill is legislation worthy of praise. There are some people that think that the bill is better than falling off the cliff, and as a result, they appreciate Biden's role in helping it happen.

There are some people that think that falling off the cliff would be better than this bill. And that's fine too. Present and defend that. Don't waste everyone's time by lamenting something that isn't happening, because it's easier to attack.

[Kraken]

Doesn't matter that much to me. It is political masturbation. They didn't deal with the real issues as usual. I don't pay a payroll tax as I don't collect payroll, I am a self-employed consultant.

Wait, don't you actually pay the whole 12% as a result of being self employed (6% employer + 6% employee)? Or hadn't you better be? And it must have dropped to 10% during the holiday, no?

I am an LLC and I take my income through cash distributions so it is handled quarterly, but I draw very little and much of the money I have to spend is a business cost. In the end I "make" very little, my wife does collect a payroll check from her employer though. So it does effect me, but I just jack up my hourly rate to cover it. My customers then pass it along to you poor oil consumers.

It hurts my wife and daughters incomes greatly though as they both work not far above the min wage.

FWIW, not taking any salary and just taking distributions is just crying out for an audit, IMO. I've had multiple accountants tell me (in fact insist) that it's better to take a salary, show a loss, then take the loss as a deduction than it is to just take distributions...

Interesting. I may do that. Just that income can be very volatile so it is easier to take some if I have it and do without when things are slow.

I get around that by paying myself a percentage of gross sales. Summertime paychecks are next to nonexistent, Christmas paychecks are pretty good, but I pay myself something every two weeks in order to meet the "reasonable salary" requirement.

I might have to do that. Now to figure out what reasonable min is.

There is no clear guidance in the tax code, although I would surmise that it's been settled in tax law. For myself, I just figured out how much my company can afford for salary after all other costs are met. It started at 15% and gradually crept up to 20%, where it's remained for the past 3 years. The end result is that about 3/4 of my annual income is salary and the rest is corporate distribution. I'm confident that that would meet any reasonable definition of "reasonable." I could avoid some payroll tax by reverting to 15% and taking more at the end of the year, but I kind of like the paychecks.

Not that they're ever likely to audit my dinky little company, but one must be prudent.

[Rip]

Doesn't matter that much to me. It is political masturbation. They didn't deal with the real issues as usual. I don't pay a payroll tax as I don't collect payroll, I am a self-employed consultant.

Wait, don't you actually pay the whole 12% as a result of being self employed (6% employer + 6% employee)? Or hadn't you better be? And it must have dropped to 10% during the holiday, no?

I am an LLC and I take my income through cash distributions so it is handled quarterly, but I draw very little and much of the money I have to spend is a business cost. In the end I "make" very little, my wife does collect a payroll check from her employer though. So it does effect me, but I just jack up my hourly rate to cover it. My customers then pass it along to you poor oil consumers.

It hurts my wife and daughters incomes greatly though as they both work not far above the min wage.

FWIW, not taking any salary and just taking distributions is just crying out for an audit, IMO. I've had multiple accountants tell me (in fact insist) that it's better to take a salary, show a loss, then take the loss as a deduction than it is to just take distributions...

Interesting. I may do that. Just that income can be very volatile so it is easier to take some if I have it and do without when things are slow.

I get around that by paying myself a percentage of gross sales. Summertime paychecks are next to nonexistent, Christmas paychecks are pretty good, but I pay myself something every two weeks in order to meet the "reasonable salary" requirement.

I might have to do that. Now to figure out what reasonable min is.

There is no clear guidance in the tax code, although I would surmise that it's been settled in tax law. For myself, I just figured out how much my company can afford for salary after all other costs are met. It started at 15% and gradually crept up to 20%, where it's remained for the past 3 years. The end result is that about 3/4 of my annual income is salary and the rest is corporate distribution. I'm confident that that would meet any reasonable definition of "reasonable." I could avoid some payroll tax by reverting to 15% and taking more at the end of the year, but I kind of like the paychecks.

Not that they're ever likely to audit my dinky little company, but one must be prudent.

That is my holdout. They would spend more money coming after me than they could possibly gain.

[LordMortis]

Ok I've got an idea. Rather than put up better candidates, we need to find better ways gerrymander in states where republicans control state legislatures but don't control the destiny of their federal representation.

http://swampland.time.com/2013/01/18/go ... tion-laws/" target="_blank

While some Republican officials warn of a political backlash, GOP lawmakers in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are already lining up behind proposals that would allocate electoral votes by congressional district or something similar.

Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder told The Associated Press on Tuesday that he “could go either way” on the change and doesn’t plan to push it. But he said it’s a reasonable issue to debate and that he prefers that leaders discuss it well before the next presidential election.

That's sounds like the Rick Snyder who wouldn't union bust unless the legislation crossed his desk.

I'm all for doing away with the electoral college but every time I think the republicans have to change because they simply can't get any slimey, I find out exactly how wrong my thinking can be.

[Octavious]

Just make the black and Hispanic vote count as half a vote. Problem solved!

[El Guapo]

Ok I've got an idea. Rather than put up better candidates, we need to find better ways gerrymander in states where republicans control state legislatures but don't control the destiny of their federal representation.

http://swampland.time.com/2013/01/18/go ... tion-laws/" target="_blank

While some Republican officials warn of a political backlash, GOP lawmakers in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are already lining up behind proposals that would allocate electoral votes by congressional district or something similar.

Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder told The Associated Press on Tuesday that he “could go either way” on the change and doesn’t plan to push it. But he said it’s a reasonable issue to debate and that he prefers that leaders discuss it well before the next presidential election.

That's sounds like the Rick Snyder who wouldn't union bust unless the legislation crossed his desk.

I'm all for doing away with the electoral college but every time I think the republicans have to change because they simply can't get any slimey, I find out exactly how wrong my thinking can be.

Also, this wouldn't do away with the electoral college, it would just shift the electoral unit from the state level to the county level, which would actually make it more anti-democratic given the immense population disparities at the county level. Like, Rural County X, population 50,000 would get 1 electoral vote as would the county that Detroit it in. Pennsylvania was toying with this before the election, and had it been enacted Pennsylvania would have given more electoral votes to Romney than to Obama notwithstanding Obama getting more votes in Pennsylvania.

I do think the backlash from something like this would be intense, as I think it would boggle voters' minds to see a candidate with fewer votes get more electoral votes in that state than the 'winning' candidate. Though it could swing one election at least.

[LordMortis]

Also, this wouldn't do away with the electoral college, it would just shift the electoral unit from the state level to the county level, which would actually make it more anti-democratic given the immense population disparities at the county level.

That's where my comment about better gerrymandering comes from.

Like, Rural County X, population 50,000 would get 1 electoral vote as would the county that Detroit it in.

Our districts don't work like and presumably it would shift to the district level rather than the county level.

I do think the backlash from something like this would be intense, as I think it would boggle voters' minds to see a candidate with fewer votes get more electoral votes in that state than the 'winning' candidate. Though it could swing one election at least.

I'm guessing it won't matter in Michigan. The republican party already decided to burn Lansing down this term. Heck, the only thing that stopped them from making schools into small arsenals were the Connecticut shootings happening the day before Snyder signed proposal into law.

[Remus West]

That's sounds like the Rick Snyder who wouldn't union bust unless the legislation crossed his desk.

Thought the exact same thing.

I'm all for doing away with the electoral college but every time I think the republicans have to change because they simply can't get any slimey, I find out exactly how wrong my thinking can be.

Yep, this. Gerrymandering on the local level is disgusting to me. Trying to move it to impacting the presidential elections goes beyond disgusting.