Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Policy

Despite Deal, Most Americans Get Hit by Tax Hike

J.D. Tuccille | 1.2.2013 2:15 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

As pointed out on Reason 24/7, the fiscal cliff deal may have spared most Americans from an income tax hike, but the majority of us are taking a big hit in terms of increased Social Security payroll taxes. That's because temporary relief from some of the burden of that tax expired at the end of 2012, and the feds are quietly anticipating increased revenue as the bulk of American workers glance at their pay stubs and notice an extra bite missing. That can be a big deal because, as the Tax Policy Center tells us, as of 2007, two-thirds of taxpayers paid more in payroll taxes than in income taxes.

The same organization told the Chicago Tribune that the vast majority of Americans are about to get hit pretty hard by the largely under-the-radar tax hike.

While the tax package that Congress passed will protect 99 percent of Americans from an income tax increase, most of them will still end up paying more federal taxes in 2013.

That's because the legislation did nothing to prevent a temporary reduction in the Social Security payroll tax from expiring. In 2012, that 2-percentage-point cut in the payroll tax was worth about $1,000 to a worker making $50,000 a year.

The Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan Washington research group, estimates that 77 percent of American households will face higher federal taxes in 2013 under the agreement negotiated between President Barack Obama and Senate Republicans. High-income families will feel the biggest tax increases, but many middle- and low-income families will pay higher taxes too.

Households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will face an average tax increase of $579 in 2013, according to the Tax Policy Center's analysis. Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will face an average tax increase of $822.

If it makes you feel any better, soaring payroll taxes are nothing new. In fact, they've been taking a growing chunk of Americans' paychecks ever since entitlement programs were dreamed up. Says the ever-helpful Tax Policy Center, "Congress has raised the Social Security tax rate 21 times and the Medicare tax nine times since the inception of each program."

Oh, but those entitlement programs are worth every penny, right?

The Rattler is a weekly newsletter from J.D. Tuccille. If you care about government overreach and tangible threats to everyday liberty, this is for you.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Myanmar Using Airstrikes Against Rebels

J.D. Tuccille is a contributing editor at Reason.

PolicyTaxesSocial SecurityMedicare
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (294)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. sloopyinca   12 years ago

    Bitch should have had a V-8 instead of tax hikes.

  2. Hugh Akston   12 years ago

    Look JD, we all know that if we cut even one dollar of entitlement spending that the streets will be flooded with destitute grandmothers whoring themselves out to be able to buy cat food at the 99? store.

    1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

      I'm so tired of all of this. Can we just start over? I'll start redlining the Constitution.

      1. $park?   12 years ago

        It would be so much easier to just start a new one.

        1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

          Draft your own, then.

          1. $park?   12 years ago

            I already did, but you can't cheat off it.

            1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

              Madison gave me his notes to copy off of, so I'm good.

              1. $park?   12 years ago

                HA! Yours is going to suck if you use those notes. I've already seen where that one goes.

                1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

                  I have some enhancements to add. And some clarifications.

          2. A Serious Man   12 years ago

            Article I: You can haz free shit.

            Article II: POTUS can give you free shit

            Article III: SCOTUS can only agree with above

            1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

              Article I: Maybe.
              Article II: Not unless I agree.
              Article III: No, fuck that.

          3. Diogenes of Sinope   12 years ago

            Draft your own, then.

            Cool!

            "Congress shall make no law."

            Done.

          4. Francisco d Anconia   12 years ago

            "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of production and trade . . ."

          5. SIV   12 years ago

            Preamble: The Constitution is a living breathing document, not a suicide pact.

            I. General Welfare
            II. COMMERZE!
            III.Militia shall be the whole of the Troops and Police who can only use guns by Regulation.
            IV.The Rights of the Women to Free Birth Control and Abortion Shall Not Be Infringed.

            Amendments:

            1. No shouting fire in crowded theaters.
            2. It's called HOLIDAY you Christ-Fags
            3.Freedom From Want.
            4. Freedom From Fear.

            1. Joshua   12 years ago

              You forgot the right to not be offended.

              1. SIV   12 years ago

                That's what penumbras and emanations are for.

      2. Anton2013   12 years ago

        Better you can consult your financial advisor.
        http://www.findmeanadvisor.com/medicare.html

    2. Hyperion   12 years ago

      Not to mention that the destitute grandmothers will probably fall and break a hip while climbing over the bodies of dying children in the streets.

      1. BakedPenguin   12 years ago

        Their tax rates had fallen, but they apparently could get back up.

  3. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

    Two percent! I want my two percent!

    1. Hyperion   12 years ago

      $2, cash!

  4. sloopyinca   12 years ago

    OT: Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

    Where's Terry Schiavo's ex- when we need him to make a decision?

    1. Raston Bot   12 years ago

      Sean Penn is fresh out of friends.

    2. Randian   12 years ago

      I hope it's painful.

      1. SugarFree   12 years ago

        Comas rarely are.

        1. Randian   12 years ago

          Don't steal my hope! It's too early in the year.

          1. SugarFree   12 years ago

            I wish I could believe in Hell.

            1. Tim   12 years ago

              You could try driving in Boston.

              1. SugarFree   12 years ago

                With Chavez on the bumper?

                1. Tim   12 years ago

                  Wearing a Yankees hat.

            2. Diogenes of Sinope   12 years ago

              Ever been to Maryland?

              1. Hyperion   12 years ago

                Ever been to Maryland?

                I live there, don't rub it in.

          2. RBS   12 years ago

            It could be like Tony Soprano's coma and Hugo is stuck as some mid level bureaucrat.

    3. Loki   12 years ago

      Hugo Chavez is in an induced coma being kept alive by life support following complications during cancer surgery, it was claimed today.
      Sources at the hospital in Cuba where he is being treated

      B-b-but, Cuba has socialized medicine! How can this be? /derp

      Oh well, at least it was "free", right?

  5. Stormy Dragon   12 years ago

    Funny how the Gover Norquists of the world, while willing to fight to the death to hold the line on the income tax rates, don't consider payroll tax hikes to count as tax increases.

    1. sloopyinca   12 years ago

      I don't exactly see them sucking each others dicks in celebration. Do you?

      1. Stormy Dragon   12 years ago

        No, but the hypocrisy of calling for hikes to the payroll tax on one hand, while saying any increase to income taxes would destroy the economy on the other hand is part of why the Republicans came across as phony to so many Americans in the last election.

        1. sloopyinca   12 years ago

          is part of why the Republicans came across as phony to so many Americans in the last election.

          Too bad they don't come across as phony to more Americans. After all Team Red sucks ballz just as bad as Team Blue does.

        2. robc   12 years ago

          To be fair, if:

          1. You think we need to tax enough to pay for what spending we do
          2. You accept the basic concept of the Laffer curve

          then it follows that the payroll tax is probably one of the better ones to raise, in order to get more "revenue". Taxing the rich isnt going to help.

      2. BladdyK   12 years ago

        Actually, he has come out and said that this is not really a tax increase. Now that he has lost the vote, he needs to look like he won, so now the tax increases were going to happen anyway so the vote was for a tax cut.

        All I know is that given the same situation in 2013 as in 2012, I will pay more taxes in 2013. That's a tax increase. PERIOD.

        1. sloopyinca   12 years ago

          Yes it is. But that still doesn't mean Team Red backers are happy the Reps and Senators rolled over so easily on this tax and spend boondoggle. As a matter of fact, I would imagine people are being prepped to primary every one of the bastards that voted for this piece of shit. Hell, I vowed to primary Devin Nunes if he voted Yea, but he actually did well last night.

          1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

            If nothing is done to address spending this year, and we dive into another full-blown recession, then perhaps people will do something next election.

          2. RBS   12 years ago

            You should primary him anyway. Then let the commentariat run your campaign.

            1. sloopyinca   12 years ago

              I really am thinking about it. Last night, a couple of guys from CA said they'd contribute. I'm gonna start exploring it and the state house at the same time.

              1. Banjos   12 years ago

                I love you more than anything honey, but please reconsider. You should pursue a more noble profession, like loan sharking or pimping.

          3. mad libertarian guy   12 years ago

            Unfortunately, my district has a douche D in the House. I've never voted for him, and he has no incentive to do anything I want.

            My Senator, OTOH, (well one of them anyways), voted NAY.

            Rand Paul: A warm fuzzy blanket of liberty.

            He's not ALWAYS right, but he represents far more of my ideas than anyone else could ever hope to, especially re: 4A issues.

    2. Mike M.   12 years ago

      Yeah, it's kind of like how the Chony Krugnuts of the world, while willing to fight to death to raise income taxes on the evil rich, have no problem with lowering everyones' payroll taxes. Which by the way, the last time that I checked, are supposed to fund their beloved big welfare programs.

    3. Emmerson Biggins   12 years ago

      I agree. Norquist is not nearly enough of a hard ass.

      1. Certified Public Asskicker   12 years ago

        Or not at all.

    4. Juice   12 years ago

      It's also funny because employees do not have a payroll. They have an income. The payroll tax taxes income. Therefore to the employee, it's an income tax. It's only a payroll tax to the employer. Calling it a payroll tax is just a lie.

  6. sloopyinca   12 years ago

    Were Americans just asleep at the wheel as their rates more than quadrupled in 20 years between 1947 and 1967?

    1. A Serious Man   12 years ago

      Yeah, but that's when all this good shit happened, like the internet and putting people in space!

      Don't you know that prosperity only happens when there's high tax rates? Paul Krugman and the liberals from ThinkProgress told me so!

    2. Episiarch   12 years ago

      It's quietly been taken from their paychecks, just another example of how no actions of Milton Friedman's can ever make up for his most evil idea ever: withholding. And this hike is going to do the same.

      1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

        At least Uncle Miltie didn't go to his grave denying that that was a big mistake.

        1. Episiarch   12 years ago

          I don't give a fuck about any apologies, that was handing the government one of the greatest weapons it has ever had for stealing and he willingly gave it to them. It's even worse than direct force because people fight back against direct force.

          Even if, as Randian says below, it was inevitable, we don't know when inevitable would have occurred and it certainly would have slowed the growth of the government to not have withholding for longer.

          1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

            As fuck-ups go, it was a doozy.

          2. califernian   12 years ago

            It would have happened regardless.

      2. nicole   12 years ago

        You would bring that up, if only to remind us that we can never have any nice things at all.

        1. Episiarch   12 years ago

          I exist only to remind you of that, nicole. Well, that and reminding Hugh that he's a huge jerk.

          1. nicole   12 years ago

            You're very good at what you do.

            1. Episiarch   12 years ago

              Thank you, I take pride in my work.

          2. Hugh Akston   12 years ago

            Epi did you get the christmas gift I sent you? You don't know how hard it was to find Justin Bieber bedsheets in queen size.

            1. SugarFree   12 years ago

              Idiot. I saw his list and he specifically asked for a Bieber body pillow.

              1. Bobarian   12 years ago

                An 'anatomically correct' body pillow.

            2. Episiarch   12 years ago

              I did, Hugh, thanks. Your mom loves them too.

      3. Randian   12 years ago

        Withholding is basically like a nuclear weapon - that genie was coming out of the bottle one way or the other.

        1. nicole   12 years ago

          Especially since people are such weapons-grade stupid that they all think they are getting something when they get their refund, instead of getting something back. I mean, we even still call it a refund, but they don't get that they're getting dicked on the interest on their forced loan to the government.

          1. Doctor Whom   12 years ago

            I've talked to lots of people like that. They even have to do tax forms to figure out how much the government is going to "give" them, and they still don't get it. How much more blazingly obvious does it have to be?

  7. Heroic Mulatto   12 years ago

    I can't wait, in another ten years or so, when the Baby Boomers are dragged from their nursing home beds, led out into the streets, and hanged from the nearest lamppost or tree branch. And despite their elderly dementia, even as the noose tightens around their neck, they will sneer at us. They will cling to their unwarranted sense of self-importance and righteousness until the very end.

    This will be the ignoble end of the most arrogant and self-involved generation to have sullied the American landscape with their footsteps.

    1. Hyperion   12 years ago

      Well, as long as their are politicians among them, can I join in the lamp post decorations? Even though I might be considered one of them?

      1. Hyperion   12 years ago

        by one of them, I mean boomers, not pols.

      2. Rasilio   12 years ago

        Just start mumbling Smells Like Teen Spirit when they come for you, then they'll confuse you for one of the older members of Gen X and you'll be saved

    2. Randian   12 years ago

      I really don't believe in sweeping generational generalizations.

      1. Almanian.   12 years ago

        Typical [insert generational title here]

        1. Randian   12 years ago

          Whoomp there it is.

    3. Episiarch   12 years ago

      Let's not collectively guilt people here. There are people within the boomer generation that are a perfect example of what you describe but it sure as hell isn't all of them.

      1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

        Agreed. We need a Star Chamber to review each case.

      2. Randian   12 years ago

        You would think someone who is half-black would know better.

        1. Heroic Mulatto   12 years ago

          You would think someone who is half-black would know better.

          It's more like 1/4, but Heroic Quadroon doesn't have as much as a ring to it.

          Secondly, of course not all of that generation deserve hangin', but I fear the angry mobs that will roam the wasteland that will be the America of the future won't care to be too discerning.

          1. Randian   12 years ago

            It's more like 1/4, but Heroic Quadroon doesn't have as much as a ring to it.

            Yes it does! CHANGE YOUR HANDLE RIGHT NOW. You should take any excuse to use the word 'quadroon'

            1. nicole   12 years ago

              I'm torn. On the one hand, I agree with Randian. On the other, that severely decreases the chances anyone will get the joke of the handle. On the third hand, of course, almost no one gets the joke as it is and just assumes HM is racist.

              1. Randian   12 years ago

                Who was it who tried to race-bait HM the other day? That was hilarious.

                1. nicole   12 years ago

                  I don't know, it seems to happen pretty regularly though.

                  1. Killazontherun   12 years ago

                    I didn't see that. Someone get me that link! Nothing I love more than humorless jackassery in regards to race.

              2. Brett L   12 years ago

                "on the third gripping hand"

                Know your tropes.

            2. tarran   12 years ago

              Two references to Archer in one day?

              You're all right, Randian... you're all right.

              Just remember to be careful when converting the age of hot young women from metric to English units.

              1. Randian   12 years ago

                Malory: Well, Conway's gone. And I'll have nothing to remember him by.

                Cheryl: Except his little mocha love child!

            3. Heroic Quadroon   12 years ago

              I normally don't succumb to peer pressure so easily.

              1. nicole   12 years ago

                You just want us to call you HQ now.

              2. Heroic Mulatto   12 years ago

                Haha. My meta plan to get this screen name has finally come to fruition.

                Randian, nicole thank you both for being unwitting pawns in my elaborate scheme.

                MUAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

                1. Randian   12 years ago

                  What hath God wrought?

                  1. Loki   12 years ago

                    I don't think God had anything to do with that.

                2. sloopyinca   12 years ago

                  HQ, you just let me know if/when you want your handle back. I'll hold it in safe keeping for you so as to keep it away from some of the less savory characters on here that might misuse or abuse it.

      3. Hyperion   12 years ago

        Yeah, come to think of it, what about folks in their 30s, of sound mind and body, who have been on welfare for years, refuse to even look for a job, and continue having more kids so that they can get even more free shit, when they already have subsidized housing, free food, and pretty much free everything, and no requirement and no incentive to work again, ever.

        The Tonys of the world will tell you that these people do not exist, and like on most things, they would be wrong.

        1. Heroic Mulatto   12 years ago

          Yeah, come to think of it, what about folks in their 30s, of sound mind and body, who have been on welfare for years, refuse to even look for a job, and continue having more kids so that they can get even more free shit, when they already have subsidized housing, free food, and pretty much free everything, and no requirement and no incentive to work again, ever.

          We've mentioned the Obamaphone generation before. Who do you think will make up the angry mobs of lumpenproletariat that will dispense karmic justice upon the Boomers?

          1. Hyperion   12 years ago

            They had better hope that all of the boomers guns have been confiscated by then. I know a few boomers that might just surprise them.

            1. Heroic Quadroon   12 years ago

              The Boomers with guns aren't the one's I'm thinking of, unless they were radical Yippies or something.

              1. Randian   12 years ago

                Yes! Your name is now certified 100% More Awesome.

                1. Ptah-Hotep   12 years ago

                  Yes! Your name is now certified 100% More Awesome.

                  I agree.

                  1. Hyperion   12 years ago

                    I can't really believe that you guys coerced HM into changing his name. Racists!

  8. GILMORE   12 years ago

    While the tax package that Congress passed will protect 99 percent of Americans from an income tax increase, most of them will still end up paying more federal taxes in 2013

    MORE RETHUGLICAN LIES!!

    No, really. Funny how these elements recieved little/no criticism in the media every time Obama said, "keep taxes from rising for 99% of Americans"...

    1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

      I have so much money. The government takes so much. Now they're taking more.

      How we all just sit around taking this crap is beyond me.

      1. Hugh Akston   12 years ago

        Drones, bruh.

        1. mad libertarian guy   12 years ago

          Drones, bruh.

          This.

          Were it not for the chance of jail or death, I'd say fuck 'em. But they have. and use, force because they know that people wouldn't stand for their bullshit if they didn't.

      2. Hyperion   12 years ago

        We can't vote them out as long as a majority are either totally dependent upon government assistance, or just ignorant. And the other side is not up for logical and reasonable debate.

        So, what's the plan?

        Only thing I can think of, is let them tax and spend all they like, no opposition at all, until they run out of money.

        That, or states start to rebel.

      3. DesigNate   12 years ago

        The sad fact is too many of us are busy trying to survive to be able to do something.

        1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

          Set your allowances for deductions to 11.

  9. sarcasmic   12 years ago

    Listening to NPR and they framed it in a totally different light. It wasn't so much that more was being taken out of your paycheck. No, you're just getting less.

    Subtle difference.
    In the former the compensation is yours, and the taxes are what is taken away.
    In the latter the compensation belongs to the government, and the paycheck is what you are allowed to keep.

    "Be thankful I don't take it all..."

    1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

      From each according to his ability, to each according to his political pull.

      1. Emmerson Biggins   12 years ago

        That is a nice succinct description. Would make a good bumper sticker to piss off all the right sorts of people.

    2. Hugh Akston   12 years ago

      Pray I don't alter the deal further.

  10. Almanian.   12 years ago

    No, fuck you, cut spending.

    Too late? It's never too late. Till then....fight the power...

    1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

      It's not too late, because they're still spending more than ever before. Until they stop. . . .

      1. Almanian.   12 years ago

        Exactly. My tax-avoidance efforts have just become - let's just say "more intensive" for now.

        Fuck Washington DC in the ass. And the fucking morons that elected them. I don't give a shit what Epi thinks about "collectivist thought" - real people voted for these assholes, and it wasn't me. Fuck them in the ass.

        1. Episiarch   12 years ago

          No, you go right ahead and fault people for a collective action. They all did in fact do the thing you say they did, so they are in fact all guilty of it. There's nothing wrong with hating on people for their actual actions.

          1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

            Maybe libertarian advocates should take a totally different approach and simply start advocating that citizens all "steal" back their taxes from the federal government. You know, take federal highway signs, repossess federal cars, that sort of thing.

            1. NeonCat   12 years ago

              If you steal an "Official US Government Property" sign, does that count for more points?

              1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

                It's all about dollar value and getting back your taxes, but sure, that's worth some style points.

              2. mad libertarian guy   12 years ago

                If you steal an "Official US Government Property" sign, does that count for more points?

                Sure. But it also counts for more jail time too.

            2. Killazontherun   12 years ago

              Would it not be easier to steal PS3s and canned hams from the homes of able bodied welfare recipients? Does the non aggression principle apply to the beneficiaries of violence? Where would you draw the line? Would those who received heavily subsidized student loans count? Frankly, my malice is much higher for the Lena Dunhams of this world than those born to the circumstances of generational poverty caused by Great Society programs.

              1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

                I dunno. I say steal a jet.

                1. Killazontherun   12 years ago

                  I don't want a jet, I want a boat. Steal an aircraft carrier. Yeah. Fuck yeah!

              2. Michael S. Langston   12 years ago

                I thought this same thing when I saw an article detailing several families (none in "poverty") who were getting government assistance to help them with their home payments for 24 months.

                I wanted addresses and to walk in and just grab a TV or something and say "Yeah, I paid for this."

        2. R C Dean   12 years ago

          Mrs. Dean is about to get the Acme Tax-Avoidance Toolkit, namely, a small business of her very own.

          Speaking of which, the local gun store got their freedom delivery today. I lightened their inventory by one (1) Sig P938.

          1. Brett L   12 years ago

            I started one of those Tax-Avoidance toolkits. Now all I need is an accountant who hates the IRS.

          2. Jesus H. Christ   12 years ago

            Funny how the self-employment tax wipes out a lot of the benefits.

  11. Zeb   12 years ago

    " It wasn't so much that more was being taken out of your paycheck. No, you're just getting less."

    Well, they just neglected to explain the cause of getting less. What has been irritating me much more on NPR is their referring the tax rate increases as "revenue".

    1. Almanian.   12 years ago

      It'd be meta ironic kind of if they meant it in the same sense the old timey moonshiners called them "Revenuers".

      But it's not, so it's not.

  12. Certified Public Asskicker   12 years ago

    The Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan Washington research group...

    They are about as nonpartisan as the Chicago Tribune.

  13. Almanian.   12 years ago

    OT and PS - God DAMN these are some fine corn muffins we're having on the last day of vacation. Lunch was chicken soup and corn muffins - and the corn muffins are every bit of "outstanding". Mmmmmmuffins!

  14. Proprietist   12 years ago

    It's sad-funny because payroll taxes are technically the most regressive income taxes, being a flat rate up until the six figure cutoff, after which it gets more and more regressive. While the total payoff may not be regressive, the internal assumption in that argument is that there will be any SS or Medicare in 40 years or so to pay them back with. As there probably won't be, it will end up being a long-term tax that disproportionately cuts into the poor's limited and non-discretionary income while crushing any chance they have to save anything for retirement/emergencies/etc.

  15. Raston Bot   12 years ago

    A 2% tax hike on all workers will not go unnoticed.

    1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

      I have an idea. Let's flip out. I mean, Americans as a group. It serves none of our interests to simply submit on this issue.

      1. Hugh Akston   12 years ago

        But ProLib, after a while you get used to the feel of a boot on your face. You even start to crave it, and fear its absence.

        1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

          They'll grind it in harder if we actually rise in a taxpayer revolt, I'm sure.

          So it's win-win!

      2. Hyperion   12 years ago

        They don't care. Why? Because we don't have the votes anymore. Too many takers, who will not be affected at all by this, and who are cheering on the wonderful fact that others have to pay more taxes, while they continue to pay nothing.

        1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

          I'm not sure that's quite true, but it's close enough to make life very scary for the rest of the century.

  16. Randian   12 years ago

    Alright, so am I supposed to be happy or sad about this deal? I need my feelings summarized for me in a few sentences, please. Because, I mean, the KosKids and Krugman are butthurt and the Republicans are basically "meh", so what the hell is going on?

    1. nicole   12 years ago

      You're getting fucked in the ass. And not in the good way.

      Does that help? I guess it's not really feelings-y.

      1. Heroic Mulatto   12 years ago

        You're getting fucked in the ass. And not in the good way.

        There's a good way?

        1. nicole   12 years ago

          You just want to make me say that of course there's a good way.

          Of course there's a good way.

          1. Heroic Mulatto   12 years ago

            1.) Pain
            2.) Your thing touches the ca-ca hole, full of ca-ca with ca-ca germs.

            Even if you love all of God's creatures, like I do, I don't see the good in tushy sex.

            1. Randian   12 years ago

              I'm signing onto this opinion in its entirety.

              1. nicole   12 years ago

                Well, it's your thing, or not, so obviously (2) is your call. And obviously a lot of other people with things don't care.

                1. Heroic Quadroon   12 years ago

                  And obviously a lot of other people with things don't care.

                  You know, nicole, your erotic Harry Potter/Indiana Jones slash fiction doesn't accurately portray masculine same-sex sexuality.

                  1. Contrarian P   12 years ago

                    Good lord, after reading that, I hope not!

          2. Way Of The Crane   12 years ago

            Of course there's a good way.

            Does it involve hamsters or gerbils?

            1. DesigNate   12 years ago

              All I can tell you is that it doesn't involve Warty and Epi tag teaming you.

            2. NoVAHockey   12 years ago

              I had an EMS partner that claimed to have run a call that involved that once. I don't know how it ended. frankly, i don't want to know. but i'm fairly certain he was BSing me. at least, i hope so.

              1. SugarFree   12 years ago

                I think gerbiling is one of those cases where someone made an outlandish joke that got around and then people started trying it.

                Wouldn't the gerbil just immediately suffocate, even if you didn't break its neck trying to shove it in your ass? What's the point? Is the scrabbling of its tiny paws for maybe a minute impart some rare pleasure that could make it worth the expensive of going and buying a gerbil and trouble of shitting out a dead one afterwards?

                1. NoVAHockey   12 years ago

                  well, this story was basically that, but instead of duct-taped hamster wiggling around in there, it started chewing his rectum.

                  1. SugarFree   12 years ago

                    It wasn't chewing, nothing so vulgar. They were just love nibbles.

                    1. Tim   12 years ago

                      (sigh) Can't we have ONE thread without going anal?

                  2. sloopyinca   12 years ago

                    Oh shit, man. That hurts worse than you could ever imagine. I mean, I've heard that that hurts worse than you could ever imagine.

                    Look over there, a pony!

      2. Randian   12 years ago

        *shrug* Math is going to be the only thing that solves the entitlement programs, so NBD there, and I've already planned not to rely on them, so I'm thankful that the "Bush Tax Cuts" are now the Obama Permanent Tax Rates.

        1. nicole   12 years ago

          My point is more: they couldn't manage to stomach a very small amount of not-actually-cuts, let alone an actual spending freeze or real cuts to spending. I don't see how, without that, we aren't fucked.

    2. A Serious Man   12 years ago

      Weird how neither side got what they wanted and yet they still fucked over every worker in America and did nothing to address the budget and deficit problem.

      1. Episiarch   12 years ago

        It's not weird at all, it is the obvious and direct outcome of democracy and government.

      2. Randian   12 years ago

        The payroll tax holiday, IIRC, was a piece of naked pandering on the part of the Obama Administration anyway.

        1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

          So what? Pander some more. I'm still paying a shitload of money to the feds.

      3. sloopyinca   12 years ago

        No, weird would have been if the opposite had happened.

  17. Proprietist   12 years ago

    Tax hikes are better and less destructive than future debt monetization. If one has the option of being forced to eat fecal matter vs. being injected with fecal matter straight into one's veins, most people would choose the latter. Voters (even many libertarians) are the same way when it comes to comparing taxes with currency devaluation. Of course, this is irrational if your goal is long-term survival. You'd puke up most of the fecal matter if forced to eat it. Direct injection won't taste bad but will kill you much more quickly.

    1. Randian   12 years ago

      Tax hikes are better and less destructive than future debt monetization.

      I think that frankly depends on your personal financial situation. Anyone with lots of low-interest debt is rooting for monetization.

      1. Proprietist   12 years ago

        Personal financial situations won't matter if they devalue the dollar another 95% over the next few decades. If you have a fixed interest rate maybe it will benefit you in the short term, but in the long term, everyone still has to live with the sky-high prices. If racking up debt is your personal thing, your habit's unlikely to change just because each dollar is worth less.

        1. Randian   12 years ago

          They do if you have guaranteed COLA in your contract! Bring on the monetization! Woot woot.

          1. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

            Contractual COLA's can be eliminated with Barack Obama's pen.

      2. R C Dean   12 years ago

        We're monetizing now.

        Monetization, which leads to serious inflation, is in the short-term interest of debtors, and inflicts pain on savers in equal measure.

        The problem with monetization is that it has never, as far as I know, ever been unwound in less than catastrophic fashion. So everyone, debtor and saver alike, will feel massive pain when the monetization/inflation feedback cycle goes out of control and wrecks the currency and the economy.

        1. Bobarian   12 years ago

          So...

          We're eating poop and having it injected in at the same time?

          It's the best of both worlds!

    2. Proprietist   12 years ago

      The best option is, of course not having to eat or inject fecal matter at all, but unfortunately, we're strapped to a gurney in a room with a cruel, psychopathic government with a sick fecal fetish. So that's not a real choice.

      1. sloopyinca   12 years ago

        You guys are both full of shit.

      2. Way Of The Crane   12 years ago

        The best option is, of course not having to eat or inject fecal matter at all, but unfortunately, we're strapped to a gurney in a room with a cruel, psychopathic government with a sick fecal fetish. So that's not a real choice.

        Were you up late last night watching Human Centipede?

        1. Proprietist   12 years ago

          I was watching the news, so basically yes.

          Wanted the banira pesuto, but we got the katorufishu.

  18. John   12 years ago

    A majority of the country voted for Obama. Either they want to pay higher taxes or are too stupid to have any sympathy for.

    1. sarcasmic   12 years ago

      Either they want to pay higher taxes or are too stupid to have any sympathy for.

      I believe the correct answer is "yes".

    2. Hyperion   12 years ago

      It's a very simple and 2 part problem.

      1. The freepers. They absolutely do not want to pay taxes, or any taxes. They want YOU to pay more taxes because they want more free shit.

      2. Women. Women pretty much sealed the deal for the jug eared doofus in chief. Why? Because the GOP will put vaginas in chains, and fairness. White males are the problem. They oppress all the other people of earth. Including women and all minorities. The GOP represents white males. So, women vote the other way.

      It really is that simple if you want the truth.

      1. Episiarch   12 years ago

        Uh, let's not collectively guilt women either, dude. Because your statement is way hyberbolic but I'm hoping that's more for dramatic effect than anything else.

        1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

          Give me your man card, pussy.

          1. Episiarch   12 years ago

            I already gave mine away years ago to your mom, ProL.

            1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

              That explains a lot.

            2. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

              That explains much that was heretofore unexplained.

        2. Hyperion   12 years ago

          It's just facts, Epi. Look at the statistics. Women voted for Obama, and the reasons are exactly what I said they are.

          If you want to see what our country will look like in another decade or so, just look at Europe. The Swedes in particular have went full on retard with the fairness indoctrination shit. In France, Muslims burned over 1000 cars in the streets on New Years, and the western media is so scared of offending any group of people that you do not even see this reported in the MSM.

          1. Episiarch   12 years ago

            It is beyond ridiculous to say that all women voted for Obama. Seriously, just back away now before you go full on misogynist. You want to hate on all people who actually voted for Obama, go for it. After all, they did in fact do the thing you said they did. But saying all women voted for Obama and therefore they're the problem is fucking obnoxious.

            1. Banjos   12 years ago

              It's as obnoxious as saying that brown people won't get teh liberty message.

            2. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

              I thought it was pretty close to 50%, give or take 5%.

            3. Hyperion   12 years ago

              Geez, Epi, what the fuck is it with you today? I never said all women voted for Obama. I said MOST of the women who voted, voted for Obama, and that is one half of HOW he got the votes he did.

              You see misogynist in that? Lol, whatever.

              Did I mistakenly post on Jezebel.com today, instead of Reason?

              1. nicole   12 years ago

                You never said "all women," but you said "women," repeatedly, not "some women," or even "a majority of women" (not sure if that is true) or "a majority of women who voted." You did not, in fact, say "most."

                1. Hyperion   12 years ago

                  Ok, I 'meant' most women. I stand corrected. But that is what I meant. To think that I meant 'all' women, which I did not say either, is a ridiculous assumption. Epi was just going off a witch hunt looking for woman haters and vampires, or something, and I was convenient, I suppose.

              2. Episiarch   12 years ago

                I wasn't aware that disliking collective guilting of women made me a Jezebel poster. But now I know, thanks for that. Maybe you can collective guilt me too while you're at it?

                1. Hyperion   12 years ago

                  Maybe you can collective guilt me too while you're at it?

                  Well, geez, first I need a category for you so that I can collective guilt you. I can't just colletively guilt you with nothin to go on.

                  1. Hyperion   12 years ago

                    Oh, wait. Yes I can. Here goes.

                    MEN voted for Romney. There, you see. I didn't say MOST men, I just said men. So therefore, you should interpret that as me having meant ALL men, although you know that would be a ridiculous assumption.

                    There now. Are you offended? I didn't think so.

                    So take your collective guilt witch hunt elsewhere, mister!

          2. mad libertarian guy   12 years ago

            It's just facts, Epi. Look at the statistics. Women voted for Obama, and the reasons are exactly what I said they are.

            Mine didn't.

            She voted Gary Johnson. And unbeknownst to me before she pulled the proverbial lever. I was proud as a pig in shit.

      2. SugarFree   12 years ago

        Because the GOP will put vaginas in chains

        The GOP did it to themselves. Don't blame the bullet, the gun, the foot or the finger when you pull the trigger all on your own.

        1. Randian   12 years ago

          Sort of yes and sort of no. The Administration planted that question with Stephanopolous. Yes, I really believe that.

          There was a special kind of retard who thought Mitt Romney was a serious danger to abortion and social services.

          1. SugarFree   12 years ago

            If you show a retard cake--despite knowing what will happen--getting attacked is on you.

            1. nicole   12 years ago

              They do all want cake. You can't say you weren't warned.

            2. Randian   12 years ago

              Man, we just called the entire populace cake-obsessed retards.

              1. $park?   12 years ago

                Man, we just called the entire populace cake-obsessed retards.

                Well you are.

                1. Randian   12 years ago

                  Well you are.

                  I'm not a sweets person, myself. I wonder if I could possibly forego anti-government advocacy for a promise of Pinot Noir. Although it would be Government Wine, which means I'd be getting vinegar half the time and the dreaded Chardonnay the other half.

              2. SugarFree   12 years ago

                Man, we just called the entire populace cake-obsessed retards.

                This is why there are no women libertarians.

                1. Hyperion   12 years ago

                  There are some women libertarians. Just not many.

                  The reasons are obvious to me, but discussing that usually brings out the very worst in the wimins folk, so I keep it to myself.

                  Also, if I was a woman, I would never come here, you vile disgusting pigs.

              3. nicole   12 years ago

                I have to come clean. I really like cake too.

                1. Heroic Mulatto   12 years ago

                  Yes, but do you like retard cake?

                  What is retard cake anyway? Is it the dessert version of deep-dish?

                  1. SugarFree   12 years ago

                    Ah, the joys of GIS...

                  2. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

                    "Is it the dessert version of deep-dish?"

                    It's known as derp-dish.

          2. John   12 years ago

            You really do. It is amazing how people can get themselves so lathered up over the dumbest possibilities. It is no different that the Right thinking Obama was somehow going to stop fighting the war on terror.

        2. Hyperion   12 years ago

          You aren't getting the point of my post, SF.

          I am not saying that the GOP did not do it to themselves. I have been saying exactly that ever since they nominated Romney and since they cannot find the wisdom to let go of the losing SoCon formula.

          But my point is why Obama won, how he got the votes, not about whose fault it was.

      3. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

        the deal was sealed by minorities and wimmins. per the CS Monitor:

        Look at the basic breakdown of Mr. Obama's victory, according to exit polls (which may yet be revised). He won 93 percent of African-Americans, 71 percent of Hispanics, and 73 percent of Asians. He took 55 percent of the overall female vote, down only one percentage point from his comparable 2008 showing.

        Mitt Romney, meanwhile, won about 59 percent of the white vote. That's the best a GOP nominee has done among whites since 1988, and not too long ago such a performance might have guaranteed a winning margin of 270 electoral votes. After all, whites still make up 72 percent of US voters.

        Romney won white men by 25 points. It wasn't enough

        --i should note that technically he did not win white men by 25 points. the CS monitor is wrong. he won NONhispanic white men by 25 points. most hispanics in the US are white.

        1. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

          Eat shit while dying in a fire, cunt.

    3. sloopyinca   12 years ago

      A majority of the country voted for Obama.

      Majority: you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

      1. John   12 years ago

        If you didn't vote, you can't really complain.

        1. Way Of The Crane   12 years ago

          If you didn't vote, you can't really complain.

          But they can still share the blame.

          1. $park?   12 years ago

            If you didn't vote, you can't really complain.

            But they can still share the blame.

            Wrong and wrong. Apparently you two belong with Tony in believing that not doing something is doing something.

            1. sarcasmic   12 years ago

              There is a difference between signing the social contract in blood by never choosing to leave the country, and staying home on election day.

              Though to be honest, I think election outcomes would be better if more low information voters ignorant fucktards stayed home, rather than by having more people vote.

              1. Way Of The Crane   12 years ago

                Wrong and wrong. Apparently you two belong with Tony in believing that not doing something is doing something.

                I'm not saying that by not voting you therefore voted for Obama. I'm saying that by not voting, you didn't vote for (insert candidate name here). Just because a candidate of substance didn't stand a chance in this election, it doesn't mean you didn't have someone worth voting for. Face it, if you chose not to vote, you threw your vote away.

                1. $park?   12 years ago

                  Just because a candidate of substance didn't stand a chance in this election, it doesn't mean you didn't have someone worth voting for.

                  There were no candidates of substance, therefore there was no one worth voting for.

                  Face it, if you chose not to vote, you threw your vote away.

                  Throwing ones vote away implies a wasted vote for the wrong person. I did no such thing by not voting.

                  1. Way Of The Crane   12 years ago

                    Throwing ones vote away implies a wasted vote for the wrong person. I did no such thing by not voting.

                    My point was that by not choosing, you made a choice. By not voting, you essentially chose to vote for "no one." Well Mr. No One had less substance than any other candidate out there. So your vote was thrown away.

                    1. sloopyinca   12 years ago

                      My point was that by not choosing, you made a choice. By not voting, you essentially chose to vote for "no one." Well Mr. No One had less substance than any other candidate out there. So your vote was thrown away.

                      By that metric, "No One" should have won and nobody should be occupying the White House for the next four years. A satisfactory outcome, but not an option. Therefore, not voting is a valid position and one that should grant one the right to bitch about the assholes a gamed system helped put into office.

                    2. Way Of The Crane   12 years ago

                      By that metric, "No One" should have won and nobody should be occupying the White House for the next four years. A satisfactory outcome, but not an option. Therefore, not voting is a valid position and one that should grant one the right to bitch about the assholes a gamed system helped put into office.

                      You're second premise is right on. Not voting is a valid position and should grant one the right to bitch. Unfortunately, the US constitution does not recognize my view on the vote for "no one," though this country would probably run better with no president as opposed to Obama or Romney in office.

                      I support Sparky's right to not vote. I also support my right say he threw his vote away for the wrong candidate. I fail to see a problem here.

            2. Hyperion   12 years ago

              Tony only believes that doing nothing is doing something when it comes to penaltaxes. Otherwise, it's still doing nothing.

              IOW, doing nothing constitutes doing something when the government can't find any more revenue from existing sources.

        2. sarcasmic   12 years ago

          Why not? If you think the choices all suck, or that the only choice that you believe will actually represent you has no chance of winning, what's the point?
          This last election was the complete inverse of my ballot.
          If I had not voted the outcome would have been the same.

          Why does going through some pointless ceremony of making marks on paper that will not be counted give you more of a right to complain than someone who didn't bother because they know that their vote will not matter?

          1. Way Of The Crane   12 years ago

            Why does going through some pointless ceremony of making marks on paper that will not be counted give you more of a right to complain than someone who didn't bother because they know that their vote will not matter?

            I agree with you to a point sarc. I think we all have plenty to complain about, and I don't think it requires one to cast a ballot in order to have the right to do so. However, I don't agree that voting is pointless just because your candidate doesn't win. Maybe that's because I still have a small sliver of hope that this country isn't doomed to destruction. But I've been wrong before.

            1. $park?   12 years ago

              I don't agree that voting is pointless just because your candidate doesn't win.

              Voting is pointless because no matter who wins nothing is going to change. The size and scope of government is well beyond any one person to do anything about, even the President.

              1. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

                lol nothing is going to change.

                we have had immense changes in govt. many negative and many positive (heller, mcdonald, etc. etc.).

                that's simply utter rubbish. SO much has changed.

                heck, just due to my state supreme court (and they are elected) we have had DOZENS of pro privacy, anti-statism court decisions in the last 10 yrs - from the outlawing of pretext stops (rare amongst states), to the elimination of search of a motor vehicle incident to arrest, to the ferrier decision, etc.

                immense changes. and many very positive.

                1. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

                  http://reason.com/blog/2013/01.....nt_3462638

              2. Hyperion   12 years ago

                The only way any real change is coming to this country, in our lifetime, is if states rebel against the feds. Outside of economic collapse. Which will probably be very, very bad for most people. Although, probably not any worse than the tyranny that is going to ensue with the extended expansion of big centralized government.

                We already have a small example of that in CO and WA legalizing weed. Think that would ever happen if it were up to the feds. No way.

                Of course that trend could also go in the wrong direction for liberty, in some cases, see Cali. But at least we could pick and choose which state we wanted to live in and move to a freer state.

              3. Way Of The Crane   12 years ago

                Voting is pointless because no matter who wins nothing is going to change. The size and scope of government is well beyond any one person to do anything about, even the President.

                So you've given up hope then? Let's look at your choices:

                a) make for the hills and live off the radar so big government can't get you

                b) "Let the revolution begin!"

                c) bite the barrel and pull the trigger

                d) lock yourself in your mom's basement and piss and moan online until someone congratulates you on your intellectual superiority.

                Moron

                1. $park?   12 years ago

                  So you've given up hope then?

                  On the government in its current form, yes I have.

                  Moron

                  Right, the guy that believes the government is screwed and refuses to support it anymore is the moron here.

                2. califernian   12 years ago

                  You forgot: get so rich it doesn't matter anywore.

                3. sarcasmic   12 years ago

                  Crane, looks like you've spent too much time in the government indoctrination centers otherwise known as schools, otherwise you'd know that life is not a multiple choice exam where someone else determines the choices.

                  I choose e) to live my life as best I can and try not to worry too much about things that I cannot control.

        3. sloopyinca   12 years ago

          Do you mean to say "If you didn't vote for Mitt Romney you can't really complain", because I voted for Gary Johnson, and I'm proud of my vote.

          And non-action =/= action, John, so your entire premise is bullshit.

          1. sarcasmic   12 years ago

            I don't call him Red Tony for nothing!

          2. Way Of The Crane   12 years ago

            because I voted for Gary Johnson, and I'm proud of my vote.

            There's that sliver of hope I was talking about. I'm proud of you too sloopy

            1. $park?   12 years ago

              There's that sliver of hope I was talking about. I'm proud of you too sloopy.

              There's that assumption that Gary Johnson would have been the right man for the job.

              1. sloopyinca   12 years ago

                There's that assumption that Gary Johnson would have been the right man for the job.

                Compared to Door #1 and Door #2, I'll take that chance.

              2. Way Of The Crane   12 years ago

                There's that assumption that Gary Johnson would have been the right man for the job.

                You're the one assuming things. I didn't say he would have been the right man. I implied he would have been the better man.

            2. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

              i voted for johnson because i live in WA and romney had no chance whatsoever in my state.

              if i lived in a state where romney had a chance, it would have been romney vote all the way. romney obama even though he has mass suckitude imnsho

              1. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

                http://reason.com/blog/2013/01.....nt_3462638

        4. Calidissident   12 years ago

          I thought you weren't going to vote? Might I ask who you decided to cast your ballot for?

    4. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

      um, no

      obama won 50.4% of the popular vote.

      that does not mean a majority of the country voted for him. hint: many people don't vote. winning 50.4% of the VOTES does not mean 50.4% of the country. not even close.

      1. Hyperion   12 years ago

        Also, if I recall, the voter turnout among women is much higher than among men. Adding to the Obama vote even more because of his advantage with the 'don't tread upon my vagina' crowd.

        1. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

          while true, the voter turnout among married women with children is highest amongst women, and that group has the lowest obama support compared to single women and single women with chilluns.

    5. DesigNate   12 years ago

      What's really fucked up when you actually think about it is that only a quarter of the country voted for Obama. The other 3/4 basically voted for not Obama (either by non-voting or through the other candidates).

      1. califernian   12 years ago

        I see it a different way. Virtually every non-vote is a vote that would have gone Democrat.

  19. Randian   12 years ago

    Another good thing about the Cliff Deal is that the House didn't take up the bloated Sandy aid package and every loathsome pol from NJ/NY is crying delicious tears.

    1. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

      silver lining dept: paul mccartney performing with the surviving members of nirvana.

      1. Randian   12 years ago

        I want to hear Dave Grohl's version of "Uncle Albert / Admiral Halsey"

  20. Joe M   12 years ago

    Chuck Garabedian: You gotta squeeze every penny. You see this tux? I got it cheap cause Roy Cohn died in it.
    Crowd: Ooh!
    Chuck: That fancy yacht? A bargain cause it smells like cat pee.
    Crowd: Ooooh!
    Chuck: And those beautiful women? They used to be men.
    Crowd: Eeew!

    1. Randian   12 years ago

      Thats right! You fat-cats didn't finish your plankton ... now its mine!

  21. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

    if you are tired of paying social security, you could always consider a career in law enforcement. many agencies are exempt and you don't have to pay social security.

    1. Heroic Mulatto   12 years ago

      Anything to keep the Praetorian Guard on your side.

      1. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

        or the New Centurions (great book)

        1. Heroic Quadroon   12 years ago

          They haven't made a good cop movie since the 70's.

          1. sloopyinca   12 years ago

            What about The Departed?

            And Training Day had a very realistic feel to it.

            1. Heroic Quadroon   12 years ago

              What about The Departed?

              That's artisanal mayo talk, bub. That Hollywood raped the Infernal Affairs trilogy, took everything that was interesting out of the setting (because HK is like, too ethnic! Can't have an Asian leading man, now can we?), and dumbed it down to pre-school level. Finally, Matt Damon.

              1. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

                agree 100%. infernal affairs is awesome.

                departed was sucky.

                also, as a former MA cop, infernal affairs didn't get the MA cop dynamics right.

                matt damon was better as a cop assaulter (goodwill hunting) than any sort of cop like entity.

                1. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

                  ugh. the DEPARTED didn't get the MA cop dynamic right. hint: Boston cop MA state trooper

    2. Jerry on the road   12 years ago

      Why do government workers even pay taxes? They can just give you a net pay slip. But of course we have to keep the illusion that government workers are equally paying their "fair share."

    3. H. Reardon   12 years ago

      F that. I'd rather join the Amish.

      1. Hyperion   12 years ago

        The Amish Mafia?

    4. Hyperion   12 years ago

      I have always thought that a career in the investigation of serious crime cases would be interesting. I am seriously hooked on shows like solved and missing. Although recently, my favorite is locked up abroad.

      Since my job now involves heavy amount of time spent analyzing things and I am apparently quite suited for it, might be a good transition for me.

      How do you get out of paying SS? I thought everyone had to pay it.

      1. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

        no. govt. agencies had a period of several years where they could opt out.

        my current agency, unfortunately, did not, but my prior agency did. friend of mine works for kirkland PD and she doesn't pay because they opted out.

        my understanding is that agencies that opted out MUST offer a 403(b). my agency offers one even though we didn't opt out and i max it out every year (about 16k). my personal philosophy is to put 25% of income into retirement savings/investments. iow, don't rely on social security. WA state has a DECENT (not great) retirement plan. probably the weakest part is unlike some plans, you can't continue the paid-for health insurance while in retirement and that can be a huge expense. my agency pays 100% of our medical plan!

  22. Tim   12 years ago

    Sure we pay a lot of taxes, BUT LOOK AT THE BENEFITS:

    1. We beat them Commies!

    2. Flags on the MOON!

    3. The best paid teachers on Earth!

    4. Mortgages for poor people.

    5. Credit cards for poor people.

    6. Medical care for poor people.

    7. We beat them Talibans!

    1. Hyperion   12 years ago

      7. Meh, not so sure, I think the Taliban will be back in power in Afghanistan sooner than we think. They may be beaten down, but not beaten.

  23. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

    WA update.

    Well, it's been almost a month since LEGAL MJ. no federal shenanigans yet that i can see.

    one interesting unintended consequence: drug dogs in my agency are largely decommissioned/useless. since they are trained to trigger on marijuana, among other kind of drugs, a dog "hit" is largely useless since it can't discriminate if the dog is hitting on pot or ILLEGAL drugs.

    my partner pulled over a car the other day and while they still got a ticket for a revoked driver's license, they got to keep their LEGAL pot.

    i have yet to respond to a paper detail where somebody is sitting inside a house puffing away at a joint, but it's just a matter of time.

    again, the feds have been whisper quiet. must be part of obama's 3 dimensional chess

    1. sloopyinca   12 years ago

      And in other Washington news, life goes on as normal.

      FTA: A female Seattle police officer alleged Morales, 30, punched her and kicked another officer. Morales was charged with assault for the incident.

      However, those charges were later dropped when a video of the scene revealed that no such assault on Morales' part took place.

      No officers were charged.

      1. Brett L   12 years ago

        Funny. I had an acquaintance get run over by his girlfriend (Wakulla County, fuck yeah!) after a dispute in front of the jail (he had to blow clean as part of his probation). The police listened to about five seconds of his bullshit story about the car being in the wrong gear or something, then made very clear to him that falsifying a police report was a felony.

        1. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

          derp derp derp derp

          1. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

            oh btw, while they may have claimed that, as a scare tactic, falsifying a NONsworn (as police reports are) is a misdemeanor. it's only a felony when it's sworn testimony, despite what some police report warnings say, and that only happens in court.

            1. sloopyinca   12 years ago

              Funny, it wasn't a felony when the officers in the linked story used it to get an arrest warrant sworn out. It wasn't a misdemeanor either. As a matter of fact, it won't cost anybody except the taxpayers of Seattle when the civil action comes down.

        2. sloopyinca   12 years ago

          Why didn't your acquaintance refer the investigator to his union contract and clam up until his buddies showed up and ran the investigation a couple of days later?

    2. Hyperion   12 years ago

      Only news I have heard is about some pot clubs opening up in CO. Haven't heard anything from WA.

    3. R C Dean   12 years ago

      again, the feds have been whisper quiet.

      From what I gather, they're still working on their strategy. I believe its either

      (1) Come down hard on producers/retailers, or

      (2) Come down hard on producers/retailers and users.

      The second one is in the running because they think they might be able to get a court victory on legalized use as being inconsistent with federal pot prohibition under the Supremacy Clause, but its a risky play, so they're having to think on it.

      The public pronouncements on this have been consistent with (1), but not consistent with foregoing enforcement of federal law in states that have legalized.

      1. Dunphy (the real one)   12 years ago

        i strongly doubt 2.

        recall that in WA, fwiw for the next 10 months or so there is no legal way to distribute (apart from medical mj) MJ under state law. unlike colorado's initiative, we didn't legalize nonmedical grows or any distribution network YET. it's coming but not for about a year.

        iow, you can legally possess it, but nobody can legally sell or distribute non medical MJ to you.

        nothing has changed in that the people are still getting it from the same places. the dealers are still TECHNICALLY breaking the law although at least in my agency, there is no push to go after small MJ sales since the possession of same is legal, it's viewed as un-cricket so to speak

      2. Hyperion   12 years ago

        I think the strategy for states should be, pass as many fucking referendums as you possibly can that will piss off the feds to the maximum amount possible, as fast as possible. Just overload them with such a load of battles that it overwhelms them and causes them to spontaneously combust and burn, baby, burn!

        1. sloopyinca   12 years ago

          "Those are some nice federal highway funds you got there. Would be a shame if something happened to them."

          1. Hyperion   12 years ago

            So, the feds collect money from the citizens of the states, and then coerce them with their own money.

    4. califernian   12 years ago

      again, the feds have been whisper quiet. must be part of obama's 3 dimensional chess

      They are waiting to go after producers, just like they have done in california for the past 4 years. duh.

  24. Rasilio   12 years ago

    Ok, so speaking of tax avoidance strategies. Do we have any accountants in here? Trying to decide whether it makes sense for my wife and I to get "divorced" for the tax and welfare benefits.

    I make ~$100k a year and she's a SAHM, we have 4 kids between us, one of whom is not biologically mine.

    I'm thinking that with both of us filing single head of household, her claiming my stepson and my claiming the other 3 we should end up with pretty close to a negative income tax liability. Only thing I worry about is whether we could get away with it since we would still be living together and the only thing which would change is our legal marriage status.

    1. Tim   12 years ago

      You may have to apply in her name for a section 8 apartment in a project to complete the illusion. USe it as a mail drop.
      You could sublet it to crack dealers, nobody would notice.

    2. R C Dean   12 years ago

      Get a duplex. One side is in her name, one is in yours. You're doing it "for the children", to keep their lives from being disrupted too much by the tragic collapse of your marriage.

      1. Rasilio   12 years ago

        Are you kidding? I live in Massachusetts, rent on a 1 bedroom shithole runs $1000 a month. The rent on a second apartment would actually exceed our total tax liability.

        Thing is we wouldn't be filing for welfare or medicare or anything like that, just looking to shave a few grand off of expenses and possibly get my wife a free ride back to finish her degree so I'm not really sure what the legal ramifications are.

        1. Hyperion   12 years ago

          You can't even rent a one bedroom apartment anywhere in Baltimore, that you wouldn't be in constant fear for your life, 24/7, for less than $1200 a month. 2 bedrooms start around $1400.

        2. Delroy   12 years ago

          "I live in Massachusetts"

          Ah, I think I see your problem.

          1. Rasilio   12 years ago

            Yeah well I tried living in low cost of living states, I spent the last 15 years in Atlanta Ga, Columbus/Cincinnati Ohio, and Louisville KY and the problem I kept running into was every time 1 job ended there were no other jobs in my field in the city (Software QA) so I decided to try an area with a huge number of jobs in my field and see how that worked out because I'd like to live in one place for a while now that my kids are in Middle School.

    3. califernian   12 years ago

      As a married couple with 4 kids making a 100K, you probably don't pay very much income tax anyway as it is, assuming you own a home.

      1. Rasilio   12 years ago

        Nope, not very much, I think I've averaged a total income tax liability of somewhere around $1500 a year the last 4 years, however since that is going up and I really can't afford the increase I'm looking for ways to keep it the same or even go down some

  25. mad libertarian guy   12 years ago

    Households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will face an average tax increase of $579 in 2013 . . .

    Awesome. It's not like I could use that money to help keep my kid out of government school prisons, or to help substantially with a nice vacation with my family. I guess only Emperor Barack and The First Wookie deserve nice vacations.

    I didn't need that money anyways. I mean, my wife is an evil 1% Executive Asst. at a KKKORPORASHUN and all; surely that money is MUCH better off in the hands of bureaucrats.

    1. Hyperion   12 years ago

      Well, the best that you can hope for is that your wifes place of employment is not one of those smaller, yet still evil no doubt, corps, that the feds are about to tax out of existence.

      1. mad libertarian guy   12 years ago

        They're not Walmart big, but it's more than a small local outfit. They have an international presence with thousands of employees.

  26. Emmerson Biggins   12 years ago

    I reiterate my 2 step solution to the SS/Medicare/FICA problem:

    1) Raise eligibility age for SS/Medicare by 45 days per year. Starting next year. Don't touch anybody already on the dole, or any body who will be there within one year. DO NOT have a frikkin sunset clause on this. Don't use the word "dole" when explaining to the un-monocled.

    2) merge all current FICA taxes into normal income tax code. Including the "employer contribution", which will now show up as being paid by employee. No actual changes occur to how much any person pays. It's strictly an accounting and reporting change. IRS will be in charge of collecting this tribute. Disband collection arms of SS/Medicare.

    Probably still end up in a hyperinflationary spiral. But this would give us a shot.

    1. robc   12 years ago

      Instead of 45 days, it should be 2 months per year.

      That was what they did to phase in the change from 65 (born 1937) to 67 (born 1960), although it paused for 1943-54 at age 66.

      Continue that phase in, and apply it to medicare as well as SS. Born in 1966, age 68. Born in 1972, age 69. etc.

      For myself, born in 1969, that would mean 68 years and 6 months.

      This isnt a huge hardship. People born in 1961 are still 15 years away from age 67, so that is plenty of time to adjust for an additional 2 months.

    2. Hyperion   12 years ago

      What about the option of allowing younger contributors to just opt out for a partial return on what they have paid?

      If I could opt out, and I am only about 15 years or so from possible retirement, I would take 50% of what I paid in and get out now.

      The entire thing is doomed for collapse anyway. It makes no sense to keep paying into a system that the age of payback keeps rising indefinitely until there is no chance of getting anything back before death.

    3. califernian   12 years ago

      Combine this with means testing. The quickest possible way out of this mess is to phase it out as fast as possible.

      If you are a millionaire sorry, your congress made promises they coudln't keep.

      If you are living on catfood, fine, we wont' cut you off yet.

      If you aren't yet on social security, here's our adjusted plan for what we'll pay you, ASSUMING you retire broke. ...(graduated schedule dropping to 0 ).

      Done.

      Oh, and eliminate payroll tax, it's evil.

      But.. the point of social security is to steal from the working class so this won't happen until the net gains from FICA are below 0.

  27. waaminn   12 years ago

    lol, the Sheeple are bamboozled yet again lol. Its the American way!

    http://www.otAnon.tk

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

How Making GLP-1s Available Over the Counter Can Unlock Their Full Potential

Jeffrey A. Singer | From the June 2025 issue

Bob Menendez Does Not Deserve a Pardon

Billy Binion | 5.30.2025 5:25 PM

12-Year-Old Tennessee Boy Arrested for Instagram Post Says He Was Trying To Warn Students of a School Shooting

Autumn Billings | 5.30.2025 5:12 PM

Texas Ten Commandments Bill Is the Latest Example of Forcing Religious Texts In Public Schools

Emma Camp | 5.30.2025 3:46 PM

DOGE's Newly Listed 'Regulatory Savings' for Businesses Have Nothing to Do With Cutting Federal Spending

Jacob Sullum | 5.30.2025 3:30 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!