Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (140040)	6/30/2010 2:17:32 PM
From: Katelew	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542019

OK, that's pretty much how I see it so I'd say we're in agreement. Just wanted you to know that I was NOT defending it when I questioned what monetary benefits would be realized by ending it. It's an offensive, piggy tactic and keeps dead weight on the payroll blocking the path of the next generation. I found something for you to peruse re taxation levels state by state. Don't know how old the data is, but it provides some comparisons that are interesting. Neither one of our states comes out very well when total taxation is summed up. :( Since the article deals with what kind of tax levels retirees would face, the most interesting column to me was the one on how pensions are taxed in each state. Some states virtually exclude pensions from state taxation. One even exempts IRAs along with pensions. Taxing pensions differently might be something some states could do to help close their deficits. Your NJ property taxes, btw, are stunning...yikes.