Gee, ya think?!?!!?!!?!?

[kbot]

I'd say over time in part what complicates matters is, the measure of 'truly' needy has been subject to change - for instance, anyone who remembers the Great Recession might understand the need for relaxing work requirements then... OTOH, might not improved circumstances IN the economy now warrant revisiting those adjustments AND if not, WHY not? Sans correction, when do temporary aid measures become unquestionably unalterable 'solutions'?

'Course, all-around fostering of government dependency and establishment of a permenant and ever-expanding underclass isn't necessarily ALL bad is it? There's no denying the political benefits from any dependable electoral edge that comes as a consequence - just so long as the system doesn't run out of other people's money that is.

I'd think that when it's multi-generational, then it's a problem. Even so, what is wrong with requiring an exchange of work or service for the financial support? I have read any studies concerning this - just going by anecdotal evidence, but it seems to me that, compared to, say the 1930s with The Great Depression, and nearly complete government non-support, that today's Great Society world has a much higher crime rate.

Sure, FDR instituted some programs, but back then if you received any government support, you were required as a condition of receiving said support to do something. It wasn't a handout like we have today.

And, I'm not speaking about programs where people have already paid-into some sort of plan (such as Medicare).

It just seems to me that, we have taken the work ethic out of society to a point where a good many people ask themselves "Why bother? I'm going to get what I need from the government for free anyway".

At least when we required work and/ or service in exchange for financial support that we didn't have a large idle population, leading to crime.

[kbot]

Over the weekend, we received a letter from our federal rep who YES had to obtain ACA. As stated in the letter, the individual will now have to pay 68% MORE than what the original insurance company charges were. AND higher deductibles.

----
Crazy - ridiculous and totally ludicrous!

---
As for the other subject matter, we hear loud complaints from people who will lose their UC benefits in a couple of days. Some have been on these for over two years. Many refuse to take other jobs because oh gee those jobs don't pay as much as when they had jobs. EVEN if taking the lower pay jobs would be more than the UC benefits. However, many of these on UC also get other benefits -- EBT, other welfare help.

(Should note even fast food wages around here are higher than minimum wages, as are many jobs in this area.)

Was listening to one of those finance talk shows last night and the speaker was talking about the 2014 tax season and the shock people are going to be in when they review the shellacking they will be taking for things such as capital gains (well, that doesn't affect me..... yet) and other tax areas to offset the costs associated with Obamacare.

At some point people are probably going to make this a campaign issue just over the increased costs that will be affecting them in a number of areas of their lives.

So the question is - "Is phased-in shock better than full-blown in-your-face- shock?". Seems we are having shocks to our system - in a number of areas, generally speaking. But, as it applies to healthcare, we have been promised one bill of goods, which has morphed into a behemoth of regulation and watered-down coverage - resulting in a mushrooming debt necessary to cover the program. And, that's even before one additional person has actually been covered and/ or used their "new benefits".

Maybe it's me......

[Cherry Kelly]

kbot - oh ya a whole lot of people are going to be in "shock" when taxes hit - like I was last year with the lack of deductions on my small home business...in spite of having 20yrs of backup of the normal small deductions for an office, storage, etc. Then I hear from people who supposedly took off same deductions they always did.

Another thing as a baby-boomer and senior citizen - over the years putting monies into IRA - PRE-taxed monies, plus putting any yearly interest in the part B interest earned, I did look ahead - as far as being taxed on when withdrawing monies. I am wondering if they plan to still try to tax those - when I pull some per year. Technically - well at one time, when you reach age 70 - no taxes?? who knows if they have changed that too?

At least my extra med insurance rate is not going up, but deductions went up. NO idea if they will take more out of my Part B for Medicare yet. NONE of which I use.

[kbot]

I don't know, but it wouldn't surpirse me to learn that the changes are in there somewhere.

I saw a news segment where the story concerned an auto dealership and how they were reacting to Obamacare. First, they cancelled the existing policy because the new regulatiosn meant that their existing policy was now null and void.

Rather than going the traditional route, they brought-in and insurance specialist who made recommendations. The result - the lower-paid/ less time-in employees will make out well. The employer is paying slightly more than they did last year inorder to assist employees find a plan. Or not - if they choose not t use the money and can qualify for federal assiatnce, they can go that route, whcih many at this company apparently did.

But, for those with longer tensure/ higher pay, they did not qualify for federal assistance. So, while they can use the funds provided by their employer, on the other side of the equation they ar getting wacked big time with deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums. They elected to purchase a group plan among themselves, but, even with this, it's bad.

They're not happy - and I'm sure that as the year unfolds we'll hear more of the same.

[voguy]

I'd think that when it's multi-generational, then it's a problem. Even so, what is wrong with requiring an exchange of work or service for the financial support?

Our culture has no work ethic. The larger percentage of the population feels, (perhaps learned), someone will always take care of their needs, and there is always money from somewhere so they don't have to provide for themselves.

The best thing that those with a work ethic, (and assets), can do is to hide what you have. When we do start sliding toward a society like Greece, I think our population will be more violent and justified in seizing what someone else has. We've gone too long without financial responsibility, putting our trust in people who use us, and it's going to be hard to get out of the mindset that we're "owed" something.

[strindl]

Originally posted by Cherry Kelly


Another thing as a baby-boomer and senior citizen - over the years putting monies into IRA - PRE-taxed monies, plus putting any yearly interest in the part B interest earned, I did look ahead - as far as being taxed on when withdrawing monies. I am wondering if they plan to still try to tax those - when I pull some per year. Technically - well at one time, when you reach age 70 - no taxes?? who knows if they have changed that too?

Wait a minute. Are you saying you are not planning on having to pay income taxes on money you put into a qualified retirement account, like a standard IRA, when you start taking money out of it?

Other than a ROTH IRA, which is funded with AFTER tax money, you have always been taxed at your normal income tax rate, when you withdraw money from your qualified retirement account. You just stated this:

Technically - well at one time, when you reach age 70 - no taxes??

That has never been the case. The advantage to putting money into a qualified retirement account is not that you never have to pay income taxes on money that you take as income, but that you can delay owing taxes on that money until you actually start taking income from it.

[strindl]

Just a FYI, the issue that began this thread, specifically the problems with the healthcare.gov website, are fixed.

People are signing up for health insurance now in large numbers. That's a good thing for our country.

WASHINGTON — Enrollment in the federal health insurance exchange surged in December, with almost half of the 975,000 signing up in the days before a Dec. 24 deadline.

The new numbers, announced by the administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in a Sunday blog post, bring to 1.1 million the number of Americans who have enrolled through the exchange since it opened Oct. 1.

"As we continue our open enrollment campaign, we experienced a welcome surge in enrollment as millions of Americans seek access to affordable health care coverage," wrote CMS Administrator Marilyn Tavenner.

Average daily enrollments have gone from less than 1,000 in October to 3,800 in November to 40,000 in December. And as the deadline approached, sign-ups were closer to 100,000 a day

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... s/4239197/

[Diogenes]

Hey I hope you all feel better because I sure do.

Millions of folks have had their so called inferior plans cancelled so 1M could sign up and included in that are the very sickest and those who have never had insurance so they are Medicaid - taxpayer subsidies.

Wait until the actuarials get a hold of these numbers for next years "renewal".

Strindl, you get the Goebbels award as far as I am concerned- you are a terrific cheerleader and propagandist for your team.

[Cherry Kelly]

Strindl - You do not seem to comprehend what I am talking about.

You have money that you have paid taxes on. You invest the money into a retirement account. At the end of the year you get a statement of interest. You put that interest on Part B on your income tax form under "interest earned". You pay taxes on that with your income tax for the year.

NOW you are saying that it does not matter if you have already paid TAXES on the monies you invest - that you have to pay additional taxes when you take it out of that account?

I AM NOT talking about monies you were able to deduct off income taxes - at one time limited to $2k a year. BECAUSE those monies were NOT taxed. So yes, on those monies you will pay taxes when you withdraw them from whatever account you invested in.

NOW consider the person who invests more than the 2K that was an allowed deduction. Anything invested OVER that 2K deduction would be monies already taxed.

[kbot]

Just a FYI, the issue that began this thread, specifically the problems with the healthcare.gov website, are fixed.

People are signing up for health insurance now in large numbers. That's a good thing for our country.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... s/4239197/

Well, let's not get ahead of ourselves. Yes, the website is working "better", but there are still issues. One of these has to do with how the government is counting these cases. As recent reports have shown, the government is counting uncompleted applications in the process thus bolstering the numbers. In fact, many people still cite issues with their applications - one issue why the deadline was extended.

Another issue is the sticker shock, as was evidenced on NBC Nightly News where a segment on an auto dealership highlighted the huge costs now expected to be borne by those being insured - even after receiving financial assistance.

I also question your contention that "this is a good thing for our contry". Maybe not. The issue of "universal coverage" being a good thing is certainly lauable and should occur - I don't think anyone doubts that. Where the issues exist is in how that care is funded. If the federal government is providing "subsidies" to a large number of people, why not just come out and say that these funds come through higher taxes? The impact that the higher taxes - coming from multiple revenue streams is expected by some to have a potentially devastating effect on the country's economy. So, the results remain to be seen on whether "this" (Obamacare) and its methods of funding are any better than other plans since the results aren't in yet.

[kbot]

Our culture has no work ethic. The larger percentage of the population feels, (perhaps learned), someone will always take care of their needs, and there is always money from somewhere so they don't have to provide for themselves.

The best thing that those with a work ethic, (and assets), can do is to hide what you have. When we do start sliding toward a society like Greece, I think our population will be more violent and justified in seizing what someone else has. We've gone too long without financial responsibility, putting our trust in people who use us, and it's going to be hard to get out of the mindset that we're "owed" something.

At some point you have to wonder how much of this - the Great Society and the welfare state and its many "programs" - has been purposely contrived and executed with a goal (perhaps not the only goal) of creating a permanent class in society that is totally dependent on the government.

Recent history shows us that - as in Greece and Argentina, that when the spiggot gets shut off that those receiving aid get angry and hostile. Conversely, those who are providing the aid - such as with countries such as Germany and Sweden that were being told by the IMF to work more/ work harder so that the younger "retired" Greeks could continue to live off their labor - get upset because they're tired of supporting not only themselves but a whole class of society that is perfectly willing to let another group support them.

I think that you're right - if what happened in Greece and Argentina is repeated here, it will be far worse because while "survival acts" such as looting are common throughout the world, unlike Europe and Argentina, here, people are armed - on both sides. I think it will get really ugly, really fast.....

And then we have The Fed announcing that they'll be raising interest rates. Wonder what kind of combined effect THAT and Obamacare and it's taxes and regulatory requirements (and costs) will have on the economy.........

[strindl]

Strindl - You do not seem to comprehend what I am talking about.

You have money that you have paid taxes on. You invest the money into a retirement account. At the end of the year you get a statement of interest. You put that interest on Part B on your income tax form under "interest earned". You pay taxes on that with your income tax for the year.



.

I understand completely what you said. I don't think you do though. You said this:

Another thing as a baby-boomer and senior citizen - over the years putting monies into IRA - PRE-taxed monies, plus putting any yearly interest in the part B interest earned, I did look ahead - as far as being taxed on when withdrawing monies. I am wondering if they plan to still try to tax those - when I pull some per year. Technically - well at one time, when you reach age 70 - no taxes?? who knows if they have changed that too?

If you have money that you have paid taxes on, and invest it, then why is that any different than any other brokerage or investment account? Again, unless it's a ROTH IRA, where you do invest After tax money and then the earnings of that money over the years become tax free, you ALWAYS pay taxes on the money earned. If it's a QUALIFIED retirement acct, and again, I don't know why anyone would put after tax money in a qualified retirement account unless it's that Roth IRA, you owe the taxes only when you take money out as a distribution.

if what you are talking about is not a qualified retirement account, then you owe taxes on any income produced by that investment in the year it was earned, just like any other investment or savings account. If it's not a qualified retirement account you should not refer to it as a retirement account, because it's no different than any other investment account.

[Cherry Kelly]

strindl
1 - Roth IRA is not the ONLY IRA that is a "qualified" IRA.

2 - and You totally MISSED the part about putting interest earning in part B of your IRS forms - that you DO pay taxes on over the years.

3. SO in simple ENGLISH
PRE-TAXED monies
PRE-TAXED interest

NOW answer again - why should anyone pay ADDITIONAL taxes on PRE-Taxed monies?

[Cherry Kelly]

k-bot - we are already seeing higher "looting" and thefts going on. TWO very disgusting ones in news in the last week.

1. Was the home of a woman who was dead (lying in her bedroom). The place was looted not just once but several times. Neighbors just thought she was selling off stuff and planning to go into a senior's home.

2. Convenience store where the worker was lying dead in the doorway. People just stepped over him. (caught on hidden camera) Thieves there did not steal large quantities, but just stepped over the body.

Even the pawn shops don't know if something is stolen until after they have paid out on pawned goods. At times it is due to police reports not received to be on 'look out' for certain items until several days after thefts were reported. Some items were stolen when occupants were on vacations and thefts not discovered until they returned. Pawn shops were also in adjoining states from the thefts. (news report over the Thanksgiving weekend.)

[strindl]

strindl
1 - Roth IRA is not the ONLY IRA that is a "qualified" IRA.

2 - and You totally MISSED the part about putting interest earning in part B of your IRS forms - that you DO pay taxes on over the years.

3. SO in simple ENGLISH
PRE-TAXED monies
PRE-TAXED interest

NOW answer again - why should anyone pay ADDITIONAL taxes on PRE-Taxed monies?

Geez...you are tough to explain things to. I know full well of the various types of qualified retirement accounts..including roth ira and regular IRA. The ONLY qualified retirement acct any sane person would put after tax money in..pre taxed in your vocabulary..is a roth ira. There would be no advantage, and great disadvantage to putting after tax income in a regular IRA..or a 401K, sar sep, etc, for that matter.

So, lets get rid of the way you are using the term "retirement account", since you are not talking about a qualified retirement account . Why you brought up IRA's at all baffles me.


So...you used these terms:

3. SO in simple ENGLISH
PRE-TAXED monies
PRE-TAXED interest

Let me define what those terms should mean. "pre-taxed" means you have already taken this income and paid normal taxes on it. That means you did not place it in a qualified retirement account, roth excluded.

Now "pre-taxed interest" is an odd term to use. Unless you have that principle invested in a qualified retirement account, you always pay normal taxes on any interest or dividends that principle earns in the year it was earned.

Once you have paid normal taxes on any income, it moves over to the after tax money side of the equation. Then you don't pay taxes on it again.