Why Economic Recovery Requires Confronting the Long-Term Fiscal Challenge

Discussion in 'Politics' started by KenH, Dec 26, 2008.

  1. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
  2. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bull pippy. The generation that fought the wars is almost dead. The generation that made the US the most powerful nation is almost almost dead. The generation that spoiled their kids rotten and are half died off. The spoiled rotten generation who never unintentionally missed a meal are contemplating the possibility of missing several years and are ready to dump the old people to prevent it.
     
  3. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don't forget, we're going to spend our way out of debt... :thumbs:
     
  4. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Put the FICA tax on Capital gains . PROBLEM SOLVED. Found an interesting chart from http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/central.html The formatting will probably be goofed:

    Average and Median Amounts of Net Compensation
    Average net compensation Median net compensation Ratio of median to average
    Increases Increases
    Year Amount Annual Cumulative Amount Annual Cumulative
    1990 $20,172.11 NA NA $14,498.74 NA NA 71.875%
    1991 20,923.84 3.727% 3.727% 15,075.94 3.981% 3.981% 72.052%
    1992 22,001.92 5.152% 9.071% 15,610.40 3.545% 7.667% 70.950%
    1993 22,191.14 0.860% 10.009% 15,690.77 0.515% 8.222% 70.707%
    1994 22,786.73 2.684% 12.962% 16,118.02 2.723% 11.168% 70.734%
    1995 23,700.11 4.008% 17.489% 16,650.16 3.302% 14.839% 70.254%
    1996 24,859.17 4.891% 23.235% 17,403.45 4.524% 20.034% 70.008%
    1997 26,309.73 5.835% 30.426% 18,277.43 5.022% 26.062% 69.470%
    1998 27,686.75 5.234% 37.253% 19,157.40 4.815% 32.131% 69.193%
    1999 29,229.69 5.573% 44.902% 20,102.35 4.933% 38.649% 68.774%
    2000 30,846.09 5.530% 52.915% 20,957.18 4.252% 44.545% 67.941%
    2001 31,581.97 2.386% 56.563% 21,767.29 3.866% 50.132% 68.923%
    2002 31,898.70 1.003% 58.133% 22,152.84 1.771% 52.791% 69.447%
    2003 32,678.48 2.445% 61.998% 22,576.71 1.913% 55.715% 69.087%
    2004 34,197.63 4.649% 69.529% 23,355.83 3.451% 61.089% 68.297%
    2005 35,448.93 3.659% 75.732% 23,962.20 2.596% 65.271% 67.596%
    2006 37,078.27 4.596% 83.810% 24,891.59 3.879% 71.681% 67.133%
    2007 38,760.95 4.538% 92.151% 25,737.20 3.397% 77.513% 66.400%
    Note: Median net compensation is estimated.
    Average and median net compensation are shown in the graph below. Also shown is the ratio of median to average amounts.

    The last column is ratio of median to average pay.

    in 1990 the median pay was around $20K and the average was $25K. In 2008 it was $26k and $39K. This is a hugh jump.
     
  5. Martin Luther

    Martin Luther
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Messages:
    423
    Likes Received:
    0

Share This Page

Loading...