3 ms·

4 million people. How many working people with enough income to pay tax? Half? Less? So maybe ~13K per tax paying person in outstanding pension obligations alo

4 million people. How many working people with enough income to pay tax? Half? Less? So maybe ~13K per tax paying person in outstanding pension obligations alone? That is a big deal.

cma 9y ago
> So maybe ~13K per tax paying person in outstanding pension obligations alone? Then that would be an obligation of about $300 per tax paying worker per year over their working lifetime. The average yearly salary in Oregon is $50,000. The article makes it out through anecdote that this is why they didn't have gas to send trucks out for a road repair. In the last 20 years Oregon has had near 1% per year population growth as well. The article is focused on outlier pensions for a collegiate athletic director paid partly out of sports merchandising and a medical school head who was an eye surgeon.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- mythrwy 9y ago
  If the average person makes 50K a year then the average person in Oregon takes home about 35K per year. So you say it's "only" 300 extra dollars a year they have to pay. In other words, this person now owes nearly 1% of their disposable income for life to cover _currently_ unfunded pensions with no corresponding increase in goods or service levels. To put it another way, this person will work ~1/3 of a year out of their career to pay for unfunded pensions.
  - cma 9y ago
    Why would you look at their after tax income when this comes out of their taxes? (But I can't remember the deductibility rules under the new tax code, maybe they can't deduct state tax payments from federal now). (Also, I made a mistake, that number was household income)
    - mythrwy 9y ago
      Because unless you can figure out how to get the government to count tax twice that's where the money is going to come from... disposable income now going to tax. Otherwise now the government now has less money to spend. Aka the "no fuel for trucks" you mention.
      - cma 9y ago
        >Because unless you can figure out how to get the government to count tax twice that's where the money is going to come from... disposable income now going to tax. State tax is deductible from federal taxes up to $10,000. So you can pay that $300 without it all coming out of after tax income. Most people may not go over standard deduction, but dollar wise state tax is probably paid by high earners who will, since there is a graduated income tax in Oregon.
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
        CryptoPunk 9y ago
        Won't that require the federal government to raise the income tax rate to make up for the revenue lost from the deduction? I don't see how the extra expense won't ultimately result in additional taxes.
        cma 9y ago
        There would be some, but not the full amount because pensioners will pay federal tax on the pensions.
    - humanrebar 9y ago
      > Why would you look at their after tax income when this comes out of their taxes? Every new expense comes out of your savings rate (or your rate in paying off principal if you're in debt). To understand "kitchen table economics", you're always better looking at the wealth growth rates (or lack thereof) when trying to weigh how much of a burden something is.

4 million people. How many working people with enough income to pay tax? Half? Less? So maybe ~13K per tax paying person in outstanding pension obligations alone? That is a big deal.

cma 9y ago

> So maybe ~13K per tax paying person in outstanding pension obligations alone? Then that would be an obligation of about $300 per tax paying worker per year over their working lifetime. The average yearly salary in Oregon is $50,000. The article makes it out through anecdote that this is why they didn't have gas to send trucks out for a road repair. In the last 20 years Oregon has had near 1% per year population growth as well. The article is focused on outlier pensions for a collegiate athletic director paid partly out of sports merchandising and a medical school head who was an eye surgeon.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
mythrwy 9y ago
If the average person makes 50K a year then the average person in Oregon takes home about 35K per year. So you say it's "only" 300 extra dollars a year they have to pay. In other words, this person now owes nearly 1% of their disposable income for life to cover _currently_ unfunded pensions with no corresponding increase in goods or service levels. To put it another way, this person will work ~1/3 of a year out of their career to pay for unfunded pensions.
- cma 9y ago
  Why would you look at their after tax income when this comes out of their taxes? (But I can't remember the deductibility rules under the new tax code, maybe they can't deduct state tax payments from federal now). (Also, I made a mistake, that number was household income)
  - mythrwy 9y ago
    Because unless you can figure out how to get the government to count tax twice that's where the money is going to come from... disposable income now going to tax. Otherwise now the government now has less money to spend. Aka the "no fuel for trucks" you mention.
    - cma 9y ago
      >Because unless you can figure out how to get the government to count tax twice that's where the money is going to come from... disposable income now going to tax. State tax is deductible from federal taxes up to $10,000. So you can pay that $300 without it all coming out of after tax income. Most people may not go over standard deduction, but dollar wise state tax is probably paid by high earners who will, since there is a graduated income tax in Oregon.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - CryptoPunk 9y ago
        Won't that require the federal government to raise the income tax rate to make up for the revenue lost from the deduction? I don't see how the extra expense won't ultimately result in additional taxes.
        cma 9y ago
        There would be some, but not the full amount because pensioners will pay federal tax on the pensions.
  - humanrebar 9y ago
    > Why would you look at their after tax income when this comes out of their taxes? Every new expense comes out of your savings rate (or your rate in paying off principal if you're in debt). To understand "kitchen table economics", you're always better looking at the wealth growth rates (or lack thereof) when trying to weigh how much of a burden something is.