4:49 pm, July 10, 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.

  • 19
       

  • HaHaHa
    Cindi
    .05 payraise, why would they even try to insult me like that? That won't even cover the raise in my taxes and health insurance. Those bums need to be kicked out of Washington, (all of them).
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • The raise stinks
    Moderate
    I agree with your concept that a .5% raise stinks after a 2 year freeze. However, since I am a CSRS employee and did not benefit from the 2% social security reduction, I will probably see a minute raise. of course that might disappear before I see it due to the resolution of the sequestration issue.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • so far, so good? REALLY
    Rob
    If you're a FERS employee you wouldn't think so far, so good. The payroll tax just went back to 6.2% from 4.2% which means a 2% reduction in take home pay to start the year. So far, so good?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Reduction Ramifications
    UmbratilisFed
    I understand that SS benefits are calculated based on quarters worked and money paid in. If so, reduction of your contribution will eventually cut your benefits.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • No Reduction in Benefits
    Rob
    There's plenty of official info out there issued by SSA that clearly states the 2% reduction in payroll tax the last two years has no impact on future benefits.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • No Reduction of Benefits
    UmbratilisFed
    Another bill to pay for future generations?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • I agree - temporary tax breaks are stupid but.....
    Rob
    These temporary tax breaks do more harm than good. The one year payroll tax reduction was given two years ago and extended an additional year in 2012. What was the purpose of the reduction, why was it extended in 2012, and what has changed since 2011. Wow, I didn't realize people are better off today than in 2011? Seems to me things are as bad if not worse. This 2% reduction in pay is getting little attention from the media despite the fact that most Americans are going to be hit. What would the headlines read if a republican raised taxes on the poor and middle class? I guess things are so good now that the average American can afford a 2% reduction in take home pay. This is why the stupid reduction should never have been given in the first place. Aside from the fact the country couldn't afford it, the problem when you let a break like this expire is it hurts the people who need it most.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Blame for raising taxes on the lower and middle class
    Moderate
    I agree with you that this tax reduction should not have taken place. However, no one suffered when the reduction was eliminated. Those that benefitted got a 2 year tax break. And the Republicans did raise taxes on the poor and middle class. So did the Democrats. The House is Republican and the Senate is Democratic with a Republican Party that filibusters what it does not like. So, your friends are equally at fault for eliminating a tax break that should not have been.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Reduction Ramifications
    Moderate
    You are incorrect in your understanding. SS benefits are based on your taxable for social security salary and self employment income. The amount you npaid in due to the reduction in tax rates is not relevant on that issue. of course, if social security does not have enough money to pay the benefits, then the benefits might be changed.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Shared sacrifices
    Sam B
    "Given what the nation has been through — the clumsy and prolonged fiscal cliff ballet — and extended pay freezes in the private sector, it is not hard to see the public backing an extension of the federal pay freeze. The fact that federal health premiums rose an average of 4.5 percent in 2013 won't get much sympathy in the private sector where premiums are up an average of 6 percent and employers pay a much smaller portion of the total premium, or among the 12 million unemployed who can't get or afford health insurance." And when the economy bounces back and private sector employees are treated with expense accounts, profit sharing, etc. once again... will public sector employees get that shared benefit? Public sector employees are expected to take the hit when times are tough and then expected to understand why they don't get similar benefits when times are booming.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Shared Sacrifices
    UmbratilisFed
    How many Feds have been laid off to date?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Layoffs
    Sam B
    To date? Since 1776? You have to be more specific.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Layoffs
    UmbratilisFed
    Why don't we try from 2008?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Bonus
    Big Joe
    How many non-Feds got bonuses from 2000-2008? I know all my neighbors did on my block....in fact...one went out and bought a brand new car with his $50k bonus!! Why does no one remember the good times and the free rolling option train/housing boom when money was flowing like honey? Now that times are tough you are begrudging feds because no one got laid off? Its called "shared sacrifice", yet I don't see much sharing!! For us feds, it should go both ways....but I don't remember seeing a boom time in the last 12 years for me....and I'm in the tech sector!
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Bonus
    UmbratilisFed
    I'm not begrudging Feds Big Joe. I'm simply pointing out that there are benefits to being a Fed that sometimes Feds forget about. Like not being laid off, getting within grade step increases and promotional raises during the freeze, huge health insurance subsidies, life insurance subsidies, transit subsidies etc... Bt the way, as a long time Fed, I don't recall any offers to share by Feds or the private sector in good times or bad.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Bonus
    Moderate
    As to how many feds have been laid off, go to the Clinton and Bush eras for the contracting out. Pleanty of feds have lost their jobs due to this issue.----We do not share diring times of propsperity
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Bonus
    UmbratilisFed
    Executive Branch Civilian Work Force, OPM stats in millions: 1960-1808, 1970-2203, 1980-2161, 1990-2250, 2000-1778, 2010-2133
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Not entirely correct
    Linbob
    Not every Fed is entitled to a step increase every year; not every Fed gets promoted every year; Feds are not laid-off, they are furloughed (unpaid leave). Most Feds did not get a step increase or a promotional raise during the freeze. True, there have not been any furloughs yet. The federal workforce was the only segment of the US working population contributing to deficit reduction for the last two years. No sacrifice was asked of the rest of the population. And, for those $50,000 bonuses mentioned by Big Joe - those only go to the highest paid executives, not the bulk of those who help people who come into the SS offices, or who inspect your food, water, and air for contaminants, or serve in Afghanistan patroling for terrorists.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • SS in Red
    ben
    I read that SS drew about $47 billion from the general fund in FY12. The 2 percent will help to put it back in the black.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }