9:56 pm, July 9, 2014

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 6
       

  • 2% pay raise
    deployed decoy
    Not final until it is law. But apparently part of the Presidents plan to bribe Republicans to go along with the proposed tax law. Includes lowering the employee portion of social security from 6.5 to 4.5 percent. Now if this does become a one year thing as proposed we all make more in 2011 then we would have with the original raise. My only problem is I am in the middle of my Hi3 and I never have been one to be bought off. Course I missed the NSPS bribe in as a step 10, only to reconvert exceeding step 10 by 5% to a step 9. So I have really taken it in the shorts this year. Maybe I can sell Wikileaks the super secret USA invasion plans of Canadas oil sands region to afford retirement in some 3rd world country with health care for $10.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • "2% pay raise"
    m
    I was sure this was an unfounded rumor, since no one imagines Social Security to be overfunded. But I just looked quickly at a NYTimes story and indeed there is to be a decrease in the employee portion of "payroll taxes," the details of which were not spelled out. (I think "payroll taxes" is another way of saying Social Security or FICA, though not 100% certain. And isn't the current burden 6.2%, not 6.5% up to just past $100K of earnings, not beyond?) A reduction in those taxes will give you more money in your pocket, but it won't effect the computation of your Hi-3.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • 6.2 vs 4.2
    Rob
    It's not a raise but reducing the payroll tax from 6.2 to 4.2 would mean about $2000 more in take home pay for a GS13 in 2011. The problem is the reduction's for 1 year only so in 2012 you'd see your pay reduced by $2000 when the tax rate goes back to 6.2 and with no pay raise in 2012 that would be a blow to some. Plus, the $800 tax credit we got last year as part of Obama's "making work pay" stimulus disappears in 2011 so in 2012 you will lose the $800 tax credit plus your payroll tax would go back to 6.2%. Bottom line is you better adjust your withholdings for tax year 2012.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • payroll tax reduction
    Moderate
    I'm in worse shape. I am in CSRS with no social security. So I get nothing I guess.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Social Security Tax Cut
    Linda
    The reduction is going to be 1% to the employee and 1% to the employer for Social Security Taxes per the current proposal. All I can say is IS CONGRESS INSANE!. Social Security has enough problems. They should be raising this tax 1%, not decreasing it! I am not necessarily for higher taxes, but the Bush Tax Cuts just went too far, especially with a war added on right after. They should have been adjusted at that time to pay for the war, but were not. I hope the Democrats mutiney to their President and don't pass this nonsense. I wouldn't care about a pay freeze, or even a fulough, if other benifits and entitlements were cut as well. And I don't mean Social Security to those who paid in, that should be an earned benefit. But, at least cut Welfare, subsedies, get rid of some of those credits for the people who don't work much and have lots of kids. There is no reason to have children in this day and age unless you want them, and you should be able to afford them, not expect the government to pay for them. If you make money and can support your kids with no assistance, more power to you, have as many as you want. If you can't pay your own way, look into birth control! There is a lot of fat in government. If Congress wants to help stimulate the economy then provide money for infrastructure. It puts people to work and are one time projects. Improve roads, bridges and remodel schools or federal buildings that need it. Maintenance is already being done here, and capital improvements would actually reduce maintenance for awhile to save money.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • 2% Pay Raise
    Linda
    It is not 2% less from your pocket. It is proposed to be 1% from your pocket and 1% from the employers.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }