Don’t confuse caring with awareness: According to another Pew survey from July of 2012, nearly two-thirds of Americans know that income inequality has grown worse over the last decade. But despite having a measure of income inequality three to four times wider than most developed democracies, only 47% of the population thinks it’s a problem.
Two-thirds of Americans who are over the age of 65 depend on an average annual Social Security benefit of $15,168.36 for at least half of their income.

Currently, earned income in excess of $113,700 is entirely exempt from the 6.2 percent payroll tax that funds Social Security benefits (employers pay a matching 6.2 percent). 5.2 percent of working Americans make more than $113,700 a year. Simply by eliminating the payroll tax earnings cap — and thus ending this regressive exemption for the top 5.2 percent of earners — would, according to the Congressional Budget Office, solve the financial crisis facing the Social Security system.

So why don’t we talk about raising or eliminating the cap – a measure that has strong popular, though not elite, support?
liberalsarecool

The Classic Krugman Pushback

liberalsarecool:

CNBC’s Joe Kernen: “It goes back to our forefathers, who said limited government, low taxes,”

NYT’s Paul Krugman: “I don’t remember actually hearing about that. I don’t think that’s in there.”

Federal income tax was created in 1913.

Krugman added: “People getting their news from sources like that are probably getting terrible advice about any kind of investment that depends on macroeconomics.”

good
good:

Visit the website for TED, the conference for creative techies and do-gooding hipsters that vaulted the 18-minute lecture into an art form, and you’ll find speakers discussing everything from “Sculpting Waves in Wood and Time” to “Building U.S.-China relations … by Banjo.”
What you won’t find is a recent TED talk by Michael Hanauer, a wealthy venture capitalist, that argues income inequality is a problem that threatens the economy, and that higher taxes on the wealthy are part of the solution. 
Read more on GOOD.is →

good:

Visit the website for TED, the conference for creative techies and do-gooding hipsters that vaulted the 18-minute lecture into an art form, and you’ll find speakers discussing everything from “Sculpting Waves in Wood and Time” to “Building U.S.-China relations … by Banjo.”

What you won’t find is a recent TED talk by Michael Hanauer, a wealthy venture capitalist, that argues income inequality is a problem that threatens the economy, and that higher taxes on the wealthy are part of the solution. 

Read more on GOOD.is →

huffingtonpost
Beware of perfect wording. If the phrasing flows like ad copy, it probably is, warns Jeff Blyskal, a senior editor for Consumer Reports. Review factories are offering $10 for every 5-star review on the e-commerce giant Amazon, the New York Times reported. On that note, Blyskal figures someone waxing poetic about $5 socks should not be taken seriously. “It’s just out of proportion to what it is.”
huffingtonpost
During the three weeks I traveled in Australia, I was often asked, with genuine bafflement and considerable sympathy, how the world’s greatest nation had become captive to a band of ideologues and fundamentalists, how the American dream — a beacon to people everywhere — had become so powerless to deliver on its promise of opportunity for all.
Arghh!!!!!!!! Don’t you have to know anything to write for a major newspaper these days? USA Today told readers that:

“That raise actually might not be as good as it looks. The extra money is nice, but it could very well bump you into the next tax bracket, possibly leaving you with less money than you had before the raise.”

No, no and 286,000 times no! The tax system brackets give marginal rates. This means that if the raise bumps you into a higher bracket then you pay more taxes only on the income in the higher bracket. Suppose that the tax bracket for income under $200k is 25 percent, and for income over $200k is 33 percent. If you get a raise that pushes your income from $195,000 to $205,000 then you only pay the higher 33 percent tax rate on the $5,000 that is above the $200k threshold not your whole income. Therefore, there is no (as in none, nada, not any) way that getting more money, and being pushed into a higher tax bracket will leave you with less money after taxes.

Don’t the writers and editors at USA Today know this? - cepr.net
USA Today, in an article called “Math tips for the rest of us,” gets the math completely wrong - @MichaelSLinden