Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #155734 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-01-01 10:49 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-01-03 17:11 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 320 — 37 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-01 10:49 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-01 13:33 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-01 12:05 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-02 04:41 -0400
Re: I Feel Old "Joe Morris" <j.c.morris@verizon.net> - 2016-01-02 11:50 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-02 17:14 +0000
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-02 17:36 -0800
Re: I Feel Old John Garza <john@127.0.0.1> - 2016-01-03 08:07 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-03 15:06 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-03 11:05 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-03 17:59 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-03 18:08 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 06:44 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-04 12:24 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-03 09:45 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Lon <lon.stowell@comcast.net> - 2016-01-03 13:12 -0700
Re: I Feel Old Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-03 16:56 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-03 14:27 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-03 23:53 +0000
Re: I Feel Old John Garza <john@127.0.0.1> - 2016-01-04 07:42 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-04 14:32 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-04 16:55 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-04 11:41 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-03 17:37 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Lon <lon.stowell@comcast.net> - 2016-01-03 13:11 -0700
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 07:48 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-04 16:01 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-04 16:23 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-03 17:30 -0400
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-04 14:55 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 13:15 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-05 14:59 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-05 13:31 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-05 22:11 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-04 17:07 -0800
Re: I Feel Old philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-01-06 19:21 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-01 21:33 +0000
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-01 22:52 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-01 15:57 -0800
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-01 20:52 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-02 00:45 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-02 06:40 +0000
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-02 17:25 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-03 08:18 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-03 07:26 -0500
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 07:34 -0800
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-02 14:27 +0000
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-02 17:28 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-02 19:56 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-03 07:26 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-03 10:00 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-17 08:48 -0800
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 07:44 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-04 13:42 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-05 11:15 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-06 11:27 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-06 12:02 -0600
Re: I Feel Old scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-06 18:52 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-06 18:06 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-07 12:04 -0500
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-07 09:22 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-13 15:55 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-07 09:36 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-07 17:47 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-07 18:47 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-07 19:23 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-08 10:58 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-08 06:37 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-08 15:53 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-08 11:26 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-09 09:53 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-09 11:24 +0100
Re: I Feel Old "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-10 06:06 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-08 10:13 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-08 17:42 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-09 07:30 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-09 07:07 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-09 11:55 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-09 15:40 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-10 06:13 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-09 13:36 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-09 15:30 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-08 10:43 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-08 10:33 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-08 10:46 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-08 10:59 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-08 10:44 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-08 22:53 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-09 12:53 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-09 11:29 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-09 11:26 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-12 16:22 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 10:03 +1100
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-12 21:01 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 14:22 +1100
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-13 10:14 -0800
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-13 18:51 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-14 07:02 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-13 13:06 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-09 09:51 +1100
Re: I Feel Old "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-09 06:01 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-08 13:21 -0600
Re: I Feel Old scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-08 20:58 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2016-01-08 20:36 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-09 11:31 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-09 18:33 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-09 07:30 -0500
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-09 12:59 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-09 15:31 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-09 17:22 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-09 17:07 -0800
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-10 11:25 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-11 17:08 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 07:43 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-12 08:44 -0800
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 09:52 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-12 12:28 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 10:58 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-12 14:49 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 13:57 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 18:19 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-12 17:37 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-12 18:46 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-08 16:08 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-09 18:38 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-09 21:43 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-09 22:56 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-11 23:49 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 07:46 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 11:28 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-12 14:58 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 14:01 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-12 16:42 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-12 22:07 +0000
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-08 10:36 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 05:04 -0500
Re: I Feel Old scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-11 14:48 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-11 17:28 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 19:01 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-09 07:30 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-09 16:59 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-07 13:13 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-07 18:55 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-08 17:40 +0000
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-08 23:20 +0000
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 07:29 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-04 18:30 +0100
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 10:59 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-04 19:48 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-05 06:27 -0800
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-05 16:26 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-05 12:27 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-05 11:08 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-04 13:14 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-04 14:43 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-04 22:38 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-12 17:47 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-13 01:27 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-13 11:18 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-13 19:05 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-13 20:22 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-14 14:09 -0600
Re: I Feel Old jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-15 14:51 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-15 09:48 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-15 17:26 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-15 13:19 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-15 09:20 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-15 17:44 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-15 12:57 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-19 12:42 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-19 15:27 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-15 19:15 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-15 13:44 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-15 15:02 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-16 08:58 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-15 23:51 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-17 16:01 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-15 17:11 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-16 08:03 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-16 08:29 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 03:38 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-16 15:32 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-16 16:59 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-16 16:45 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-17 02:11 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 14:02 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-17 14:22 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 05:09 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-17 15:00 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-18 03:59 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-16 16:15 +0100
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-17 11:39 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 04:41 +1100
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-16 16:33 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-16 11:19 -0600
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-16 18:36 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-16 17:23 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 13:01 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-16 20:55 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-16 14:53 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-17 05:43 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 19:50 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-17 09:22 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-17 14:33 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-17 15:19 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-17 19:27 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-17 15:00 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-16 15:32 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-16 22:49 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 16:12 +1100
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-17 11:32 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-17 12:06 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-17 09:22 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-17 10:05 -0500
Re: I Feel Old jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-17 15:26 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 05:14 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-17 15:38 -0600
Re: I Feel Old jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-16 14:09 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-16 15:19 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-15 19:29 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-15 14:25 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-14 13:46 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-14 05:17 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-14 13:11 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-04 22:37 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-05 04:44 -0400
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-05 18:46 +0000
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-05 11:06 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-05 18:46 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-04 17:04 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-04 17:36 -0800
Re: I Feel Old jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-02 15:01 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-02 15:58 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 06:40 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-04 12:31 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 22:06 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 07:09 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 12:11 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-03 20:42 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-04 16:43 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 22:05 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-04 18:21 +0100
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-04 17:47 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-04 16:10 -0500
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-04 13:26 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 21:57 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 19:46 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-07 12:04 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-07 17:36 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-07 13:43 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-08 15:35 +1100
Re: I Feel Old Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-08 00:15 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-08 19:41 +1100
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-07 12:44 -0800
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-07 21:32 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-05 14:51 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-05 12:59 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-05 22:17 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-08 14:35 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-05 22:17 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-05 19:24 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-05 17:31 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 07:38 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 06:50 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 13:26 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-06 05:49 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 14:32 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-06 07:13 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 16:08 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-08 14:39 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-06 09:14 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-06 10:22 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-15 17:45 -0600
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 18:42 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-06 14:20 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 14:34 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-06 19:52 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-06 12:35 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-06 20:54 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 18:44 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-06 23:48 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 19:38 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-07 07:46 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-07 06:44 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-09 21:47 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 05:45 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-10 12:18 +0000
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 08:12 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-10 13:40 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-07 12:04 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-07 08:15 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-06 05:48 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-06 11:29 -0500
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 10:20 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 20:52 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-06 06:54 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-06 11:34 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 18:40 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-06 18:39 -0500
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-06 10:22 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-15 17:43 -0600
Re: I Feel Old JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 20:13 -0600
Re: I Feel Old Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-06 11:26 -0500
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-08 14:37 -0600
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-08 23:25 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Freddy1 <something@something.com> - 2016-01-02 21:35 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-03 05:34 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-03 08:33 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Freddy1 <something@something.com> - 2016-01-03 15:17 -0500
Re: I Feel Old Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-03 20:52 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-04 05:09 -0800
Re: I Feel Old "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-05 14:57 -0600
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-01 20:46 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2016-01-02 07:00 +0000
Re: I Feel Old Louis Krupp <lkrupp@nospam.pssw.com.invalid> - 2016-01-02 01:44 -0700
Re: I Feel Old hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-02 13:46 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-02 09:11 -0800
Re: I Feel Old Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-02 11:49 -0600
Re: I Feel Old John Garza <john@127.0.0.1> - 2016-01-03 08:14 -0600
Re: I Feel Old mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-03 17:11 +0000
Page 4 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 16 Next page →
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-07 09:22 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <caeafbad-bb0a-448e-bcee-cea40ef7b3e3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #156165 |
On Wednesday, January 6, 2016 at 7:06:51 PM UTC-5, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > For some perspective, only 43.9M private-sector workers and retirees > even _have_ a pension, or ~18% of US adults--and most of those people > are already retired or will be soon. Pensions are nearly extinct, in > large part because nearly every company that had one went bankrupt. Where are these numbers from? I know quite a few people who work for long standing companies that did _not_ go bankrupt, yet have lost or nearly lost their pension. Those people are forced to work past 65. The lucky ones can still at their current jobs, at least earning a decent salarly and can built up their savings. The unlucky ones are forced to find whatever they can get. (One fortunate aspect is that these days, many employers _like_ older workers for their maturity, especially if no benefits are involved.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-13 15:55 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n76gv2$kok$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #156209 |
On 07-Jan-16 11:22, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> For some perspective, only 43.9M private-sector workers and >> retirees even _have_ a pension, or ~18% of US adults--and most of >> those people are already retired or will be soon. Pensions are >> nearly extinct, in large part because nearly every company that had >> one went bankrupt. > > Where are these numbers from? 43.9M is from PBGC. ~18% is Census Bureau's 14.5% of population under 18 inverted (to get 18 or over, i.e. adults) and multiplied by total population, also from Census Bureau, and then divided into 43.9M. I'm not sure both figures are from the same year, hence the ~; it might be a percentage point or two off in either direction due to that, but not enough to matter for our purposes. > I know quite a few people who work for long standing companies that > did _not_ go bankrupt, yet have lost or nearly lost their pension. The only way a company can legally dump its debts is bankruptcy or getting its creditors (workers in this case) to voluntarily agree. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-07 09:36 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <5e6c5439-02aa-48ff-88b4-ee4022aad672@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #156165 |
On Wednesday, January 6, 2016 at 7:06:51 PM UTC-5, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > The max is ~$55k/yr for single-employer plans, which isn't "lavish", > though it doesn't look that bad on the surface. $55,000 a year pension is not a lot of money these days, especially for two people. Some states tax pension income. Some states have onerous property taxes. Selling a home under duress is costly in itself. Some elders have lived in a location for a long time. They may have no mortgage, but some old neighborhoods (or houses) decay and aren't worth very much to sell (or need expensive fixing up.) Health care, such as a supplemental policy for what Medicare doesn't cover, is very expensive. Prescriptions are expensive. The physical condition of retired people varies tremendously. Some elders are in wonderful shape and can do anything. But for a great many people, sh** happens by age 65, some modest, some serious. They have to spend money for assistance for things that young people take for granted. There is senior housing that offers services, but that is extremely expensive. A market rate apt in such a facility costs about double or triple what a comparable apt would cost in a plain building to pay for services. When someone has to pay $48,000 a year for housing and support, a $55k pension doesn't go very far, and savings will go down fast. What is frustrating is that many 'powers that be' manage to 'game' the system to screw retirees yet enrich themselves or their constituents. That is, there is money available, but it gets diverted elsewhere. People make legal excuses and buy into the screw job. Imagine if you opened a savings account at a bank when you began working. When you retired you went to withdraw it, but the bank tells you your account really wasn't FDIC insured and the bank has to be 'competitive', so it will screw you on all interest and keep 10% for itself. You know the bank president, his staff, and the stockholders are all doing quite well. This is what is happening to both private and public employees.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-07 17:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n6m8ca0c5d@news6.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #156211 |
On 2016-01-07, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, January 6, 2016 at 7:06:51 PM UTC-5, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > >> The max is ~$55k/yr for single-employer plans, which isn't "lavish", >> though it doesn't look that bad on the surface. > > $55,000 a year pension is not a lot of money these days, especially > for two people. > > Some states tax pension income. Some states have onerous property > taxes. Selling a home under duress is costly in itself. Some > elders have lived in a location for a long time. They may have > no mortgage, but some old neighborhoods (or houses) decay and > aren't worth very much to sell (or need expensive fixing up.) Or property values skyrocket and city hall, salivating over the prospect of a tax windfall, doesn't bother to adjust mill rates accordingly. People on fixed incomes get taxed off the land. > What is frustrating is that many 'powers that be' manage to > 'game' the system to screw retirees yet enrich themselves > or their constituents. That is, there is money available, > but it gets diverted elsewhere. People make legal excuses > and buy into the screw job. > > Imagine if you opened a savings account at a bank when you > began working. When you retired you went to withdraw it, > but the bank tells you your account really wasn't FDIC > insured and the bank has to be 'competitive', so it will > screw you on all interest and keep 10% for itself. You know > the bank president, his staff, and the stockholders are > all doing quite well. This is what is happening to both > private and public employees. Reminds me of that South Park episode where Stan's father takes him to the bank to open an account. The teller takes Stan's money and fiddles with his computer terminal while muttering "Now we do this... and this... and... it's gone." -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-07 18:47 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n6n0qf$64o$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #156214 |
On 07-Jan-16 11:47, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2016-01-07, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: >> Stephen Sprunk wrote: >>> The max is ~$55k/yr for single-employer plans, which isn't >>> "lavish", though it doesn't look that bad on the surface. >> >> $55,000 a year pension is not a lot of money these days, >> especially for two people. To put it in perspective, the median _household_ income is $31k/yr, and I'd bet that nearly all of them are paying rent or, at best, paying a mortgage. Nearly twice that (over three times that for a couple) doesn't seem like a hardship, especially if they own their home. >> Some states tax pension income. Some states have onerous property >> taxes. Selling a home under duress is costly in itself. Some >> elders have lived in a location for a long time. They may have no >> mortgage, but some old neighborhoods (or houses) decay and aren't >> worth very much to sell (or need expensive fixing up.) > > Or property values skyrocket and city hall, salivating over the > prospect of a tax windfall, doesn't bother to adjust mill rates > accordingly. People on fixed incomes get taxed off the land. OTOH, many (most?) states have provisions that the taxable value can't go up more than a certain percentage per year; it's usually higher than inflation adjustments to "fixed" incomes, so this just delays the problem, but at least it helps. Many also have exemptions for seniors for similar reasons, on top of the usual homestead exemption. Also, in some states, the taxable value is the last purchase price rather than fair market value, which sounds a lot better for those on a fixed income, but it also means they may not be able to move out of a declining neighborhood--putting their health and safety at risk. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-07 19:23 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n6n2tu$685$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #156211 |
On 07-Jan-16 11:36, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> The max is ~$55k/yr for single-employer plans, which isn't >> "lavish", though it doesn't look that bad on the surface. > > $55,000 a year pension is not a lot of money these days, especially > for two people. It's more than the median household income, and most of the people earning less are still paying a rent/mortgage _and_ have kids, so their monthly costs are much higher. Also, keep in mind that _doesn't_ include whatever they're getting from Social Security. > Some states tax pension income. Some states have onerous property > taxes. US median property tax is $1838/yr, ranging from $183/yr (LA) to $6,082/yr (NJ). That's not a significant problem for someone getting $55k/yr, especially if they don't have a mortgage. And, if they are smart, they'll move somewhere with low property taxes and no income taxes on pensions; it's not like they have a job to worry about. Also, keep in mind that _doesn't_ include whatever they're getting from Social Security. > Selling a home under duress is costly in itself. That depends on the market, of course, but if this is likely to become a problem, then one should do it _before_ one is under duress. > Some elders have lived in a location for a long time. They may have > no mortgage, but some old neighborhoods (or houses) decay and aren't > worth very much to sell (or need expensive fixing up.) If it's not worth much, then the property taxes shouldn't be onerous. > Health care, such as a supplemental policy for what Medicare doesn't > cover, is very expensive. Prescriptions are expensive. Indeed, and that's why I pointed out that PBGC doesn't cover _any_ supplemental benefits, e.g. health or long-term care insurance. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-08 10:58 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <gqd4mc-lr.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #156232 |
In article <n6n2tu$685$1@dont-email.me>, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >On 07-Jan-16 11:36, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >> Stephen Sprunk wrote: >>> The max is ~$55k/yr for single-employer plans, which isn't >>> "lavish", though it doesn't look that bad on the surface. >> >> $55,000 a year pension is not a lot of money these days, especially >> for two people. > >It's more than the median household income, and most of the people >earning less are still paying a rent/mortgage _and_ have kids, so their >monthly costs are much higher. > >Also, keep in mind that _doesn't_ include whatever they're getting from >Social Security. > >> Some states tax pension income. Some states have onerous property >> taxes. > >US median property tax is $1838/yr, ranging from $183/yr (LA) to >$6,082/yr (NJ). That's not a significant problem for someone getting >$55k/yr, especially if they don't have a mortgage. And, if they are >smart, they'll move somewhere with low property taxes and no income >taxes on pensions; it's not like they have a job to worry about. I am constantly surprised by the tax burden of these leftopondians. $6k median property tax? I pay ~$450, and I am well above medium in my property, and the municipality is very tax-happy. Or is NJ such an outlier? >Also, keep in mind that _doesn't_ include whatever they're getting from >Social Security. > >> Selling a home under duress is costly in itself. > >That depends on the market, of course, but if this is likely to become a >problem, then one should do it _before_ one is under duress. > >> Some elders have lived in a location for a long time. They may have >> no mortgage, but some old neighborhoods (or houses) decay and aren't >> worth very much to sell (or need expensive fixing up.) > >If it's not worth much, then the property taxes shouldn't be onerous. > >> Health care, such as a supplemental policy for what Medicare doesn't >> cover, is very expensive. Prescriptions are expensive. > >Indeed, and that's why I pointed out that PBGC doesn't cover _any_ >supplemental benefits, e.g. health or long-term care insurance. I realise we get a pretty good deal for the 14.2% pension&health contribution we pay over here. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-08 06:37 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <1838774521.473944650.574506.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156244 |
Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: > In article <n6n2tu$685$1@dont-email.me>, > Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >> On 07-Jan-16 11:36, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>> Stephen Sprunk wrote: >>>> The max is ~$55k/yr for single-employer plans, which isn't >>>> "lavish", though it doesn't look that bad on the surface. >>> >>> $55,000 a year pension is not a lot of money these days, especially >>> for two people. >> >> It's more than the median household income, and most of the people >> earning less are still paying a rent/mortgage _and_ have kids, so their >> monthly costs are much higher. >> >> Also, keep in mind that _doesn't_ include whatever they're getting from >> Social Security. >> >>> Some states tax pension income. Some states have onerous property >>> taxes. >> >> US median property tax is $1838/yr, ranging from $183/yr (LA) to >> $6,082/yr (NJ). That's not a significant problem for someone getting >> $55k/yr, especially if they don't have a mortgage. And, if they are >> smart, they'll move somewhere with low property taxes and no income >> taxes on pensions; it's not like they have a job to worry about. > > I am constantly surprised by the tax burden of these leftopondians. > $6k median property tax? I pay ~$450, and I am well above medium in > my property, and the municipality is very tax-happy. > > Or is NJ such an outlier? Tweedle-dee, tweedle-dum. Governments are going to get their money somehow. How much does VAT add up to in Norway? How much is your tax on gasoline? You have to look at the total tax burden. NJ is a bit high, but I'm paying around 2% of market value, including county/town, miscellaneous assessments (library etc.), and school, with some off for being an old fart. School tax is probably twice the others altogether, although I'm starting to see higher and higher costs for Medicaid. NJ is probably high because the home value there is quite high compared to here, so even if the percentage is the same, and I doubt it is, they'd pay a lot more. > >> Also, keep in mind that _doesn't_ include whatever they're getting from >> Social Security. >> >>> Selling a home under duress is costly in itself. >> >> That depends on the market, of course, but if this is likely to become a >> problem, then one should do it _before_ one is under duress. >> >>> Some elders have lived in a location for a long time. They may have >>> no mortgage, but some old neighborhoods (or houses) decay and aren't >>> worth very much to sell (or need expensive fixing up.) >> >> If it's not worth much, then the property taxes shouldn't be onerous. >> >>> Health care, such as a supplemental policy for what Medicare doesn't >>> cover, is very expensive. Prescriptions are expensive. >> >> Indeed, and that's why I pointed out that PBGC doesn't cover _any_ >> supplemental benefits, e.g. health or long-term care insurance. > > I realise we get a pretty good deal for the 14.2% pension&health > contribution we pay over here. > > -- mrr > -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-08 15:53 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <r4v4mc-tr.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #156251 |
In article <1838774521.473944650.574506.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: >> In article <n6n2tu$685$1@dont-email.me>, >> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >>> On 07-Jan-16 11:36, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>>> Stephen Sprunk wrote: >>>>> The max is ~$55k/yr for single-employer plans, which isn't >>>>> "lavish", though it doesn't look that bad on the surface. >>>> >>>> $55,000 a year pension is not a lot of money these days, especially >>>> for two people. >>> >>> It's more than the median household income, and most of the people >>> earning less are still paying a rent/mortgage _and_ have kids, so their >>> monthly costs are much higher. >>> >>> Also, keep in mind that _doesn't_ include whatever they're getting from >>> Social Security. >>> >>>> Some states tax pension income. Some states have onerous property >>>> taxes. >>> >>> US median property tax is $1838/yr, ranging from $183/yr (LA) to >>> $6,082/yr (NJ). That's not a significant problem for someone getting >>> $55k/yr, especially if they don't have a mortgage. And, if they are >>> smart, they'll move somewhere with low property taxes and no income >>> taxes on pensions; it's not like they have a job to worry about. >> >> I am constantly surprised by the tax burden of these leftopondians. >> $6k median property tax? I pay ~$450, and I am well above medium in >> my property, and the municipality is very tax-happy. >> >> Or is NJ such an outlier? > >Tweedle-dee, tweedle-dum. Governments are going to get their money >somehow. How much does VAT add up to in Norway? How much is your tax on >gasoline? You have to look at the total tax burden. Gas tax is about one dollar per liter, all inclusive. VAT is 25%, but it is not a sales tax, there are deductions for the VAT paid for any business. Direct tax is 27%, soon 25% on both business and earned income up to a level of around $60k with a deduction of around $15k, plus 14.2% health&pension contributions. Comparing with the US we get a very reasonable deal from this latter one. And the resulting ~39% tax is also comparable with the US. But as you say, we take it back on gas, alcohol, tobacco and VAT. >NJ is a bit high, but I'm paying around 2% of market value, including >county/town, miscellaneous assessments (library etc.), and school, with >some off for being an old fart. School tax is probably twice the others >altogether, although I'm starting to see higher and higher costs for >Medicaid. NJ is probably high because the home value there is quite high >compared to here, so even if the percentage is the same, and I doubt it is, >they'd pay a lot more. Here we pay zero to 0.4% depending on municipality. Plus 0.7% of assets, to be lowered "soon". The assets are valued pretty low for any non-liquid ones; housing at 25-30%. >>> Also, keep in mind that _doesn't_ include whatever they're getting from >>> Social Security. >>> >>>> Selling a home under duress is costly in itself. >>> >>> That depends on the market, of course, but if this is likely to become a >>> problem, then one should do it _before_ one is under duress. >>> >>>> Some elders have lived in a location for a long time. They may have >>>> no mortgage, but some old neighborhoods (or houses) decay and aren't >>>> worth very much to sell (or need expensive fixing up.) >>> >>> If it's not worth much, then the property taxes shouldn't be onerous. >>> >>>> Health care, such as a supplemental policy for what Medicare doesn't >>>> cover, is very expensive. Prescriptions are expensive. >>> >>> Indeed, and that's why I pointed out that PBGC doesn't cover _any_ >>> supplemental benefits, e.g. health or long-term care insurance. >> >> I realise we get a pretty good deal for the 14.2% pension&health >> contribution we pay over here. >> >> -- mrr -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-08 11:26 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n6orc3$n8j$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #156256 |
On 08-Jan-16 08:53, Morten Reistad wrote: > Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >> NJ is a bit high, but I'm paying around 2% of market value, >> including county/town, miscellaneous assessments (library etc.), >> and school, with some off for being an old fart. ... > > Here we pay zero to 0.4% depending on municipality. Plus 0.7% of > assets, to be lowered "soon". The assets are valued pretty low for > any non-liquid ones; housing at 25-30%. Generally, only real property is taxed here. Some states do it at FMV (or some fraction thereof, with higher rates to compensate), while others at the last purchase price. Some states also tax vehicles, but rarely other personal assets. But, yes, our property taxes overall are much higher than yours; one of the reasons is that property tax is quite difficult to evade or avoid and generally more stable, so it's a more reliable funding mechanism for the govt than taxes on wages or consumption. It's also a political issue dating back to the late 1800s/early 1900s, when American economists noticed the idle nobility in Europe owned all the land and funded their extravagant lifestyles by extracting rent from hard-working peasants, which evolved into home ownership being the "American Dream". Many European economists had noticed this too, of course, but they were never able to do anything about it. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "879" <879@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-09 09:53 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dfasv7Fuce0U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #156264 |
"Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message news:n6orc3$n8j$1@dont-email.me... > On 08-Jan-16 08:53, Morten Reistad wrote: >> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> NJ is a bit high, but I'm paying around 2% of market value, >>> including county/town, miscellaneous assessments (library etc.), >>> and school, with some off for being an old fart. ... >> >> Here we pay zero to 0.4% depending on municipality. Plus 0.7% of >> assets, to be lowered "soon". The assets are valued pretty low for >> any non-liquid ones; housing at 25-30%. > > Generally, only real property is taxed here. Some states do it at FMV > (or some fraction thereof, with higher rates to compensate), while > others at the last purchase price. Some states also tax vehicles, but > rarely other personal assets. > > But, yes, our property taxes overall are much higher than yours; one of > the reasons is that property tax is quite difficult to evade or avoid > and generally more stable, so it's a more reliable funding mechanism for > the govt than taxes on wages or consumption. > > It's also a political issue dating back to the late 1800s/early 1900s, > when American economists noticed the idle nobility in Europe owned all > the land and funded their extravagant lifestyles by extracting rent from > hard-working peasants, which evolved into home ownership being the > "American Dream". Many European economists had noticed this too, of > course, but they were never able to do anything about it. They did actually, home ownership rates increased dramatically in quite a few european countries.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-09 11:24 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ho37mc-kr.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #156290 |
In article <dfasv7Fuce0U1@mid.individual.net>, 879 <879@nospam.com> wrote: > > >"Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message >news:n6orc3$n8j$1@dont-email.me... >> On 08-Jan-16 08:53, Morten Reistad wrote: >>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> NJ is a bit high, but I'm paying around 2% of market value, >>>> including county/town, miscellaneous assessments (library etc.), >>>> and school, with some off for being an old fart. ... >>> >>> Here we pay zero to 0.4% depending on municipality. Plus 0.7% of >>> assets, to be lowered "soon". The assets are valued pretty low for >>> any non-liquid ones; housing at 25-30%. >> >> Generally, only real property is taxed here. Some states do it at FMV >> (or some fraction thereof, with higher rates to compensate), while >> others at the last purchase price. Some states also tax vehicles, but >> rarely other personal assets. >> >> But, yes, our property taxes overall are much higher than yours; one of >> the reasons is that property tax is quite difficult to evade or avoid >> and generally more stable, so it's a more reliable funding mechanism for >> the govt than taxes on wages or consumption. >> >> It's also a political issue dating back to the late 1800s/early 1900s, >> when American economists noticed the idle nobility in Europe owned all >> the land and funded their extravagant lifestyles by extracting rent from >> hard-working peasants, which evolved into home ownership being the >> "American Dream". Many European economists had noticed this too, of >> course, but they were never able to do anything about it. > >They did actually, home ownership rates increased >dramatically in quite a few european countries. There are large variations between countries, though. In Norway home ownership is the general norm, but around 30% is through building coops. In Sweden they have these "folkhem" areas where people rent, at subsidised and very regulated rates; but still quite profitable for the owner. These contribute nearly half the dwellings in Sweden. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "879" <879@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 06:06 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dfd427Fgut2U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #156312 |
"Morten Reistad" <first@last.name.invalid> wrote in message news:ho37mc-kr.ln1@sambook.reistad.name... > In article <dfasv7Fuce0U1@mid.individual.net>, 879 <879@nospam.com> wrote: >> >> >>"Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message >>news:n6orc3$n8j$1@dont-email.me... >>> On 08-Jan-16 08:53, Morten Reistad wrote: >>>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>> NJ is a bit high, but I'm paying around 2% of market value, >>>>> including county/town, miscellaneous assessments (library etc.), >>>>> and school, with some off for being an old fart. ... >>>> >>>> Here we pay zero to 0.4% depending on municipality. Plus 0.7% of >>>> assets, to be lowered "soon". The assets are valued pretty low for >>>> any non-liquid ones; housing at 25-30%. >>> >>> Generally, only real property is taxed here. Some states do it at FMV >>> (or some fraction thereof, with higher rates to compensate), while >>> others at the last purchase price. Some states also tax vehicles, but >>> rarely other personal assets. >>> >>> But, yes, our property taxes overall are much higher than yours; one of >>> the reasons is that property tax is quite difficult to evade or avoid >>> and generally more stable, so it's a more reliable funding mechanism for >>> the govt than taxes on wages or consumption. >>> >>> It's also a political issue dating back to the late 1800s/early 1900s, >>> when American economists noticed the idle nobility in Europe owned all >>> the land and funded their extravagant lifestyles by extracting rent from >>> hard-working peasants, which evolved into home ownership being the >>> "American Dream". Many European economists had noticed this too, of >>> course, but they were never able to do anything about it. >> >>They did actually, home ownership rates increased >>dramatically in quite a few european countries. > > There are large variations between countries, though. In Norway home > ownership > is the general norm, but around 30% is through building coops. In Sweden > they have > these "folkhem" areas where people rent, at subsidised and very regulated > rates; but still quite profitable for the owner. These contribute nearly > half > the dwellings in Sweden. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-08 10:13 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8760z4549f.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #156256 |
Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> writes: > Direct tax is 27%, soon 25% on both business and earned income up to > a level of around $60k with a deduction of around $15k, plus 14.2% > health&pension contributions. Comparing with the US we get a very > reasonable deal from this latter one. And the resulting ~39% tax is > also comparable with the US. one of the claims about congress being the most corrupt institution on earth is taking money for tax loopholes ... that creates enormous gap between the tax rate and the effective tax GAO: U.S. corporations pay average effective tax rate of 12.6% http://money.cnn.com/2013/07/01/news/economy/corporate-tax-rate/ that has also reduced the percentage of what corporations contribute to total taxes collected http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/background/numbers/revenue.cfm Revenue from the corporate income tax fell from between 5 and 6 percent of GDP in the early 1950s to 1.3 percent of GDP in 2010. ... the above graph actually skews things for corporations since payroll taxes are included. In theory payroll taxes are what is being paid into pension funds for worker retirment ... but by cooking the books, it has been turned into funds for current operations (pension reserves for retirement disappear). If you just compare individual/corporate split ... then individual/corporate split was about 65/35 in 1950 changed to 80/20 in 2010. Part of the current problem is that congress had been looting the SS Trust Fund for day-to-day operation during the period when the baby boom workers were paying in much more than needed to pay out for the much smaller previous generation. As baby boomers move to retirement their pension reserves are non-existant. the paying for loopholes goes along with shift in wealth going to the top 1% from the middle-class http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/09/04/opinion/04reich-graphic.html this goes along with the past discussion about many worker intensive industry cook the books to shift the economics from worker contributions to things that have been heavily computerized. Airlines shifted the profit from passenger flying to selling tickets, in negotiations with unions, they show that actually flying passengers is barely breakeven, while the parent company walks away with boat loads of money from the subsidiary that sells the tickets (even helps if the subsidiary selling the tickets is off-shore). heavy equipment builders shifted from directly selling to buyers, to "wholesale" selling at cost to off-shore "distributor" (subsidiary) corporation, the off-shore "distributor" then makes the (profitable) retail sale to buyers ... and all the profit is booked in foreign country (the direct delivery of equipment from manufacturing plant to buyer didn't change). Auto industry cook the books, so that actual building and selling of autos appears to be a break even operation (major impact in union negotiations), but the parent company books nearly all profit from auto loans. skews the appearance of the business to excuses for making loans ... manufacturing appears to be secondary objective purely for the purpose of getting customers to take out loans. Last decade, the auto industry then jumped into the securitized mortgage market scheme ... and were packaging auto loans, paying for triple-A rating and selling to victims (even auto employee pension funds). With wallstreet help, they even started looking for bad auto loans, because wallstreet wanted securitized instruments designed to fail (with the triple-A rating they could sell off as fast as they could be created), where they then could take out CDS gambling bets, that they would fail. some past posts mentioning CDS gambling bets: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012f.html#63 One maths formula and the financial crash http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012m.html#12 Does the IBM System z Mainframe rely on Security by Obscurity or is it Secure by Design http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012m.html#45 General Mills computer http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012m.html#46 General Mills computer http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012o.html#7 Beyond the 10,000 Hour Rule http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013c.html#66 How to Cut Megabanks Down to Size http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013d.html#25 Senator Sherrod Brown Drops a Bombshell in Mary Jo White's Hearing http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013d.html#72 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013e.html#9 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013e.html#22 What Makes bank regulation and insurance Bizarre? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013e.html#24 What Makes bank regulation and insurance Bizarre? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013f.html#2 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013f.html#34 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013h.html#55 OT: "Highway Patrol" back on TV http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013m.html#53 Retirement Savings http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014e.html#62 Before the Internet: The golden age of online services http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014e.html#80 Before the Internet: The golden age of online services http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014h.html#37 Married Couples and the Financial Mess http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014i.html#95 How Comp-Sci went from passing fad to must have major http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014j.html#3 How Comp-Sci went from passing fad to must have major http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014j.html#106 only sometimes From looms to computers to looms http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#13 weird apple trivia http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#14 weird apple trivia http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#29 LEO http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#31 LEO http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#32 LEO http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#33 LEO http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#73 The Watchdog that Didn't Bark ... Again http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#99 US Debt In Public Hands Doubles Under Barack Obama http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#126 Wall Street's Revenge http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#131 Memo To WSJ: The CRomnibus Abomination Was Not "A Rare Bipartisan Success" http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#157 LEO http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014m.html#158 LEO http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015.html#17 Cromnibus cartoon http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015.html#48 The 17 Equations That Changed The Course Of History http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015.html#54 How do we take political considerations into account in the OODA-Loop? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015b.html#0 S&L Crisis and Economic Mess http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015b.html#2 do you blame Harvard for Putin http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015b.html#5 Swiss Leaks lifts the veil on a secretive banking system http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015b.html#8 Shoot Bank Of America Now---The Case For Super Glass-Steagall Is Overwhelming http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015b.html#20 $2 Billion City Of Tampa Pension Story Major Media Missed http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015b.html#22 Two New Papers Say Big Finance Sectors Hurt Growth and Innovation http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015b.html#24 What were the complaints of binary code programmers that not accept Assembly? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015c.html#40 past of nukes, was Future of support for telephone rotary dial ? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015c.html#49 Global Fragility and the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015c.html#53 Servicers in DOJ s Crosshairs Following JPM Robo-Signing Settlement http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015c.html#88 How Wall Street captured Washington's effort to rein in banks http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015c.html#108 Occupy Democrats http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015d.html#4 "Trust in digital certificate ecosystem eroding" http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015d.html#5 7 years on from crisis, $150 billion in bank fines and penalties http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015d.html#18 Can we design machines to automate ethics? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015d.html#20 Wall Street Bailouts Are Finally Over, Right? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015d.html#28 Bernie Sanders Proposes A Bill To Break Up The 'Too Big To Exist' Banks http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015d.html#69 Western Union envisioned internet functionality http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015d.html#70 Western Union envisioned internet functionality http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015d.html#76 Greedy Banks Nailed With $5 BILLION+ Fine For Fraud And Corruption http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015d.html#79 Greedy Banks Nailed With $5 BILLION+ Fine For Fraud And Corruption http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#0 The WSJ and Barron's Apologists for the Banksters Peddle Wallison's Fables http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#34 43rd President http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#39 Poor People Caused The Financial Crisis http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#44 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#47 Do we REALLY NEED all this regulatory oversight? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#54 In Dramatic Decision Judge Finds Fed Bailout Of AIG Was "Illegal", Government "Violated Federal Reserve Act" http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#71 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#80 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#82 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015e.html#93 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015f.html#4 Jeb: George W. Bush is a top foreign policy adviser http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015f.html#16 Interactive Data Corp taps banks for sale or IPO -sources http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015f.html#27 Federal Subsidies http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015f.html#36 Eric Holder, Wall Street Double Agent, Comes in From the Cold http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015f.html#67 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015g.html#25 After 6 Years Of QE, And A $4.5 Trillion Balance Sheet, St. Louis Fed http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015g.html#49 seveneves http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015g.html#57 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015g.html#65 Michael Hudson's New Book: Wall Street Parasites Have Devoured Their Hosts -- Your Retirement Plan and the U.S. Economy http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015g.html#70 AIG freezes defined-benefit pension plan http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015g.html#73 Economists' Tribal Thinking http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015g.html#81 Now the DOJ Admits They Got it Wrong http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015g.html#86 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#25 Hillary Clinton's Glass-Steagall http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#44 rationality http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#45 rationality http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#53 rationality http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#56 rationality http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#65 Economic Mess http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#78 The Global Financial Crisis: Analysis and Policy Implications http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016.html#0 Repealing Glass-Steagall http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016.html#6 Repealing Glass-Steagall http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016.html#8 "Too Big To Fail" http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016.html#10 25 Years: How the Web began -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-08 17:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dfaao1Fp6naU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #156251 |
On 2016-01-08, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
[25 lines snipped]
>> I am constantly surprised by the tax burden of these leftopondians.
>> $6k median property tax? I pay ~$450, and I am well above medium in
>> my property, and the municipality is very tax-happy.
>>
>> Or is NJ such an outlier?
>
> Tweedle-dee, tweedle-dum. Governments are going to get their money
> somehow. How much does VAT add up to in Norway? How much is your tax on
> gasoline? You have to look at the total tax burden.
My parents have lived in the USA for 35 years. I live in the UK. Overall,
their tax burden would be lower here. We have discussed this at length, since
they can choose where to have some of their income taxed, and to our surprise,
the answer was "in the UK."
--
Today is Pungenday, the 8th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3182
I don't have an attitude problem.
If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-09 07:30 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <1188122294.474034525.378778.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156263 |
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: > On 2016-01-08, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: > > [25 lines snipped] > >>> I am constantly surprised by the tax burden of these leftopondians. >>> $6k median property tax? I pay ~$450, and I am well above medium in >>> my property, and the municipality is very tax-happy. >>> >>> Or is NJ such an outlier? >> >> Tweedle-dee, tweedle-dum. Governments are going to get their money >> somehow. How much does VAT add up to in Norway? How much is your tax on >> gasoline? You have to look at the total tax burden. > > My parents have lived in the USA for 35 years. I live in the UK. Overall, > their tax burden would be lower here. We have discussed this at length, since > they can choose where to have some of their income taxed, and to our surprise, > the answer was "in the UK." > My point was that there are lots of kins ofbtaxes, and places that are low in, say income tax, might be ghigher in sales tax, property tax, or gasoline tax. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-09 07:07 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <dfcf0sFbbq9U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #156314 |
"Peter Flass" wrote: > Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: >> On 2016-01-08, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: >> >> [25 lines snipped] >> >>>> I am constantly surprised by the tax burden of these leftopondians. >>>> $6k median property tax? I pay ~$450, and I am well above medium in >>>> my property, and the municipality is very tax-happy. >>>> >>>> Or is NJ such an outlier? >>> >>> Tweedle-dee, tweedle-dum. Governments are going to get their money >>> somehow. How much does VAT add up to in Norway? How much is your tax >>> on >>> gasoline? You have to look at the total tax burden. >> >> My parents have lived in the USA for 35 years. I live in the UK. Overall, >> their tax burden would be lower here. We have discussed this at length, >> since >> they can choose where to have some of their income taxed, and to our >> surprise, >> the answer was "in the UK." >> > > My point was that there are lots of kins ofbtaxes, and places that are low > in, say income tax, might be ghigher in sales tax, property tax, or > gasoline tax. Yes. I was surprised at the NJ real-estate tax, it is roughly three times the rate in my state. But my higher state income tax makes up for it - in spades! In the US, in general, I think sales taxes are all over the map, mostly in what is taxed. Income tax starts at zero and goes up from there. I commonly came back from business trips with a big (checked) suitcase packed full of cartons of cigarettes,
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-09 11:55 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ad33e149-ab07-43e2-ace2-9d9518bd8262@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #156318 |
On Saturday, January 9, 2016 at 8:07:42 AM UTC-5, Osmium wrote: > In the US, in general, I think sales taxes are all over the map, mostly in > what is taxed. Income tax starts at zero and goes up from there. I commonly > came back from business trips with a big (checked) suitcase packed full of > cartons of cigarettes, Pennsylvania is planning a huge sales tax increase, not only in the rate, but also broadening what is taxed. A sales tax is the hardest on poor people, an income tax is the easiest. But the state legislature refuses to consider raising the income tax.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-09 15:40 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n6ruj8$bp0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #156318 |
On 09-Jan-16 07:07, Osmium wrote: > "Peter Flass" wrote: >> My point was that there are lots of kins ofbtaxes, and places that >> are low in, say income tax, might be ghigher in sales tax, property >> tax, or gasoline tax. > > Yes. I was surprised at the NJ real-estate tax, it is roughly three > times the rate in my state. But my higher state income tax makes up > for it - in spades! As previously stated, NJ's median is 3.5x the national one, and most states cluster around the same absolute value (~$2k/yr) because rates tend to be inversely related to median values. > In the US, in general, I think sales taxes are all over the map, > mostly in what is taxed. Often "essentials" like rent or unprepared food are exempt, and goods or services subject to (much higher) excise taxes are often exempt from sales taxes because it's simpler to tax them once, but those are the most significant variations I've seen. Aside from states with no sales tax at all, of course. > Income tax starts at zero and goes up from there. Yes, there are several states with no income tax. Property and other taxes tend to be higher in those states, but often the govt simply does less (and/or survives mostly on handouts from DC). > I commonly came back from business trips with a big (checked) > suitcase packed full of cartons of cigarettes, That's mostly due to excise taxes, not a sales taxes. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-10 06:13 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dfd4f5Fh2c1U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #156314 |
"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1188122294.474034525.378778.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org... > Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: >> On 2016-01-08, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: >> >> [25 lines snipped] >> >>>> I am constantly surprised by the tax burden of these leftopondians. >>>> $6k median property tax? I pay ~$450, and I am well above medium in >>>> my property, and the municipality is very tax-happy. >>>> >>>> Or is NJ such an outlier? >>> >>> Tweedle-dee, tweedle-dum. Governments are going to get their money >>> somehow. How much does VAT add up to in Norway? How much is your tax >>> on >>> gasoline? You have to look at the total tax burden. >> >> My parents have lived in the USA for 35 years. I live in the UK. Overall, >> their tax burden would be lower here. We have discussed this at length, >> since >> they can choose where to have some of their income taxed, and to our >> surprise, >> the answer was "in the UK." >> > > My point was that there are lots of kins ofbtaxes, and places that are low > in, say income tax, might be ghigher in sales tax, property tax, or > gasoline tax. And some are dramatically lower in the total tax take than others.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web