- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Mike Edmondson to get $128K retirement--state tax free--age 58
Posted on 3/28/17 at 4:50 pm to I B Freeman
Posted on 3/28/17 at 4:50 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
It is not a contract anymore than my daily decision to live here and subject myself to the taxes is a contract
From a pure contract aspect , if true, and I have not read he contract, it's valid on its face. I guess , the question would be is whether or not the state under statute has the right to make such an offer? If not, then it's an invalid contact...or rather a valid, but illegal contract. The state made an offer in contravention of an already existing statute. The problem comes in on Edmondson's side in that he makes the acceptance in good faith relying on the pretense that the state is making a legal legitimate offer.
It could be that the state using some sort of accounting machination is treating all monies into his pension as after tax contributions ...I would have to look at it.
0
Posted on 3/28/17 at 5:10 pm to RobbBobb
I am an idiot? but you posted a list of top ten retirement spots and none of them are in Louisiana where government retirements are not taxed.
Why is that? How does that add to your argument everyone in Louisiana should be taxed on their retirements except government retirees??
Why is that? How does that add to your argument everyone in Louisiana should be taxed on their retirements except government retirees??
This post was edited on 3/28/17 at 5:11 pm
Posted on 3/28/17 at 7:22 pm to I B Freeman
Do you not realize he was showing you folks would be moving away to locales in TX? You're incredibly dumb.
How much change have you affected in all of your raging against all these machines of tyranny and oppression in your time here?
You're a sad, hapless little boob.
How much change have you affected in all of your raging against all these machines of tyranny and oppression in your time here?
You're a sad, hapless little boob.
Posted on 3/28/17 at 7:27 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
I am an idiot?
Clearly
You saw a list of 10 areas where retirees were seeking to move. 3 of those WERE IN TEXAS. Yet your argument is that if LA started taking more money out of retirees pockets, those people WOULD NOT move to an area (right next door) that is clearly providing retirees a break from the higher taxes that they are paying in OTHER states
How do you not get that?
Posted on 3/28/17 at 7:28 pm to I B Freeman
Must be nice.
(ETA - Right now, I could project about $70k(ish) at 59, so not too shabby - that's all in, though, minus social security.)
(ETA - Right now, I could project about $70k(ish) at 59, so not too shabby - that's all in, though, minus social security.)
This post was edited on 3/28/17 at 7:30 pm
Posted on 3/28/17 at 8:54 pm to GFunk
I'd bet that La. retirees move away from La. to follow their kids who previously left the state because they want to be near their grand kids.
The perk that state retirees get isn't keeping them here if grandkids are calling.
The state uses the tax code to play favorites. That is our biggest problem.
The perk that state retirees get isn't keeping them here if grandkids are calling.
The state uses the tax code to play favorites. That is our biggest problem.
Posted on 3/29/17 at 11:47 am to League Champs
I wonder why if the small amount of taxes government retirees would pay if their pensions were taxed is such a big deal there are not government retirees flocking to Louisiana now since we do not tax any government pensions?
Does anyone really care if we lose a few retired government workers if we made them subject to the taxes the commoners are????
Does anyone really care if we lose a few retired government workers if we made them subject to the taxes the commoners are????
This post was edited on 3/29/17 at 11:48 am
Posted on 3/29/17 at 11:52 am to League Champs
Clearly you can not read the link and certainly it is not a list of places people are seeking to move for retirement--the move there for their career---
The article makes my point not yours. You guys should quit posting if this is the best you got.
We all understand your point---you want government retirees to be treated different that the rest of the population, the commoners.
quote:
The proportion of those age 65 and older in Raleigh-Cary, N.C., has increased by 60 percent since 2000, the largest uptick of any metro area in the United States. And three Texas cities, Austin, Houston, and Dallas, are among the places with the fastest-growing senior citizen populations. Many cities out West are also home to rapidly growing retiree populations, including Las Vegas, Nev., Boise, Idaho, Provo, Utah, and Colorado Springs, Colo. Only five metro areas registered declines in their numbers of senior citizens: Scranton, Pittsburgh, New Orleans, Buffalo, and Youngstown.
Often, people are choosing to spend their retirement years in places where they spent the final years of their career. "Most of the country is increasing its over-age-45 population simply because people are aging in place," says William Frey, a Brookings Institution senior fellow and author of the report. While some people move to designated retirement communities once they leave their jobs, most people don't. "There is some movement among the retired population, but it's not that huge and people who move typically move locally," says Frey. "Florida is the outlier. In the rest of these places the migration is occurring among people under age 45."
The article makes my point not yours. You guys should quit posting if this is the best you got.
We all understand your point---you want government retirees to be treated different that the rest of the population, the commoners.
This post was edited on 3/29/17 at 11:56 am
Posted on 3/29/17 at 9:29 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
We all understand your point-
I'm not sure that you do.
quote:
you want government retirees to be treated different that the rest of the population, the commoners.
I'm not going to argue against you on the fact that Edmondson got a sweet deal. But, retirees are in demand.
Why? They have disposable income, they're relatively more affluent than the average citizen, they're not associated with crime, and they tend to wilfully concentrate as they age (downsize/condo/retirement centers). Anything you can do to attract them is going to give you an advantage. Anything you do (intentionally or not) that increases their financial burden of living in your area will push them elsewhere.
This is basic economics. This is why I always rail at Marxism/Progressivism - if you want more of something, subsidize it (they want to subsidize poverty and sloth). If you want less of something, tax and regulate it (they want to do that to producers, achievers and employers).
Bass ackwards.
This post was edited on 3/29/17 at 9:30 pm
Posted on 3/29/17 at 10:08 pm to Ace Midnight
A major reason LA is in the shape it is in is the very lucrative state retirement system.
Posted on 3/29/17 at 10:12 pm to I B Freeman
Let's just see if he stays out of federal prison
Posted on 3/29/17 at 10:25 pm to Strannix
LA has one of the most lucrative state retirement systems in the U.S. Why is this not being addressed?
Posted on 3/29/17 at 10:48 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
There is nothing at all right about state and federal employees getting state tax free treatment of their pensions above the amount they would have received from SS. LINK
Edmondson--only 58--gets his pension for life. The rationale for the tax free treatment of the political servant's pension is that they do not pay into social security and social security is state tax free. Well about the most you can get from SS is $36000 and you have to wait to age 67 to get that much. This man is going to get paid over $1 million tax free before he reaches the age of 67.
It is unfair and JBE and his cronies in the legislature do not care.
State retirees and federal retirees in Louisiana should pay income taxes just like the rest of us.
(Edmondson, BTW, had a deal hatched with Jindal to dramatically raise his pension but that fell through.)
And I have zero problems with any of it all. He earned it as far as i'm concerned. I hope he goes and enjoys his retirement,
Page 9 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News