So, not meant necessarily for anyone to post their wages, BUT am I'm the ONLY one who makes no where near that amount here???? I find that hard to believe. And, unless I'm not totally understanding these figures, it does make me somewhat defensive because I just don't think the average "Joe" falls into that category.

As tight as things were for me at one time, I never was considered poverty level. I raised two kids by myself,in a decent area, paid a mortgage (never was late for any payments) and never had any kind of assistance. AND, I live in California to boot, which is not an inexpensive state. All this on much much less than 88K.

Of course, when the housing market boomed a couple years ago, if I just was starting out, I probably wouldn't ever be able to afford a house had I not already had one that I could sell and make a decent profit.

I guess, in my view, I can't feel too sorry for anyone making 88K.

TIS

The formal federal poverty level is $22K for a four person family. If you earn that amount or less then the federal government will "officially" count you as poor and there are certain federal or state programs for which you are eligible.

Of course it's a sliding scale and the family of four that earns $30K may not officially be poor according to the federal gov't but they will still barely be making ends meet and so will have partial or total eligibility for certain programs.

As you state there are plenty of people that earn less than $88K and who are not poor. This is why $88K is 400% of poverty level and is where the Senate/House bills would phase out assistance. It's how they got the cost numbers for the bill to work.

However I would venture to guess that a family of four that brought in $88K (whether it be two people earning $44K or one person making the $88K and the other staying home) would not have the funds to make a required and unsubsidized purchase of health insurance at $15K/year. The number of people that fall into this category may be small -most folks are employed and get insurance through their employer- but it would be a hardship.

The other thing is that the buying power of $88K in 2010 is not the same as the buying power of $88K in 2000 and so on backwards. 10 years ago I thought that if I could just make $X/amount I'd be on easy street. Well I make that now and on easy street I'm not...

Also keep in mind that the guidelines are for household income and that different states and different agencies use before tax income while others use after-tax income.

The December unemployment rate held at 10%, but the underemployed rate jumped to over 17% and the labor force shrank by over 600k meaning that many people have given up looking for work.

Yikes.

Yeah, I just saw that. It's getting scary now.

And what does Florida Power and Light charge in comparison to Con Edison? What about real estate taxes? What does it cost to insure a car in Florida vs. New York? Yes, there are certain things that are going to cost the same no matter where you live, but if the overall cost of living is less, then you can afford to have a nice dinner out once in a while.

What do you mean? He chose to be on vacation when a terrorist boards on a plane?





Why is it not his responsibility to fight these kinds of negative stereotypes? After all, there are 1.5 million citizens of Muslim faith in the US. And of course, one of the responsibilities of every head of the state in the world should be to lay the foundations for a peaceful future with any country. A pre-requisite for a successful fight against Islamist terrorism is that the Muslim world doesn't see the West (especially the US) as an enemy.

That's from a newspaper article, Danito. I posted the author's name and a link to the newspaper in the original post.

Yeah, point taken, Babe. I would bunch up Florida Power and light and my real estate taxes with cost of housing, but I guess that cost of housing does equate to cost of living.

A new sheaf of opinion polls show Americans sharply divided on President Barack Obama's first year in office, as his ratings on key issues like health care and the economy hit new lows.

Polling also suggests independent voters are turning away from Obama as he nears the anniversary of his January 20 inauguration -- though in a sign of hope for his administration, he remains more popular than his policies.

In a new Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday, US voters were split 45-45 on whether Obama's first year was a success or failure.

When voters were asked in a CNN/Opinion Research survey published on Tuesday to rate Obama's performance since taking office, 48 percent judged it a failure, and 47 percent saw a success.

By ERICA WERNER and RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR,– 14 mins ago
WASHINGTON – The White House has reached a tentative agreement with union leaders to tax high-cost medical plans, one of the final obstacles in the way of President Barack Obama's health care remake, officials said Thursday.

Details of the agreement were not immediately available. The tentative deal was expected to be presented to congressional leaders Thursday as negotiators try to wrap up an agreement on core elements of the sweeping legislation as early as Friday.

The proposed tax has been a major sticking point because early versions from the Senate would have hit union members, who have negotiated generous health benefits, sacrificing higher wages. House Democrats were strongly opposed, and did not include the tax in their bill. But Obama favored the tax, citing the consensus opinion of economists that it would help hold down costs by nudging workers into less pricey coverage.

Union and Democratic officials spoke about the tentative deal on condition of anonymity because the talks were private.

I think, every government tries to make the toughest and controversial choices within the first one or two years.
So probably most presidents lose in the opinion polls within their first year.

The other Obama problem is that he is trying to do too much and sustaining wars (although anti-Taliban sentiment is high)is hurting him. With unemployment at 10%, bitterness over the bailouts and the Healthcare thing....well, the public is just not too confident in what O is doing.

Next Tuesday is the special election for Senate in Massachusetts.
MSNBC is currently saying the race is a toss up. It would seem difficult to believe that Massachusetts could elect a Republican but if Brown beats Coakley and is certified and sworn in before the health care bill passes, he would be the vote the Republicans need to prevent it from passing in its current form.

A lot of if's....

I have to say, as someone who was a Teamster for 25 years, and a two term Business Agent, I'm very happy about this.

Ya gotta organize, people!

Unions will dodge O's health tax

Big Labor got some big love from President Obama and congressional Democrats yesterday after they agreed to exempt union workers from the whopping “Cadillac tax” on high-cost health-care plans until 2018.

The sweetheart deal, hammered out behind closed doors, will save union employees at least $60 billion over the years involved, while others won't be as lucky -- they'll have to cough up almost $90 billion.

The 40 percent excise tax on what have come to be called "Cadillac" health-care plans would exempt collective-bargaining contracts covering government employees and other union members until Jan. 1, 2018.

In another major concession to labor, the value of dental and vision plans would be exempt from the tax even after the deal expires in eight years, negotiators said.

Under the plan to help fund health-care reform, the tax would kick in for plans valued at $8,900 or more for individuals and $24,000 or more for families.

That's slightly higher than the $8,500 and $23,000 thresholds in the bill passed by the Senate last month.

The threshold will be even higher for certain plans with many older workers and women -- a move to benefit unions with a high proportion of female membership, sources said.

New York labor leaders -- who had initially campaigned against the Cadillac tax, favoring instead a surcharge on the wealthy -- said they are thrilled.

"We can live with it. We have an agreement that nothing will be taxed until 2018," crowed George Boncoraglio, regional president of the Civil Service Employees Association.

Officials said the deal was thrashed out over more than 15 hours of negotiating at the White House that ended after midnight Wednesday.

Powerful unions were well-represented around the bargaining table.

Participants included AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and Andy Stern, head of Service Employees International Union; Anna Burger, head of Change to Win; and the leaders of unions representing teachers, government workers, food and commercial workers, and electricians.

Stern has been among the most frequent visitors to the White House over the last year, showing up more than 20 times, according to logs.

Originally, the Cadillac tax included in the Senate bill was estimated to raise $149 billion through 2019.

But Trumka said the exemption would reduce that amount by $60 billion -- money that negotiators will now have to find elsewhere, or reduce the coverage in the legislation.

Boncoraglio said CSEA leaders were meeting in Albany -- preparing to wage a major offensive against the tax -- when their Washington lobbyist called and briefed them on the changes.

Obama backs the Cadillac excise tax, citing economists who say it would drive down costs by encouraging insurance companies to offer employers and workers a chance to buy lower-cost health plans to avoid the levy.

carl.campanile@nypost.com

This sounds fishy to me. Maybe it's because he will need their votes come November? Who will have to pay the tax now since the unions don't?

If Coakley loses, the Dems would have to pass the Health Care bill either by the house accepting the senate version or before Coakley is certified and seated. If they do not get this done and Coakley loses, Obama may be in danger of being a one term president unless the GOP is dumb enough to nominate Palin.

Yea, the news media is all over this story. I am hesitant to totally believe what the media is spinning though. Some polls, I understand, show Coakley ahead but others virtually a dead heat. Then again, two things that indicate trouble, Obama is going to go there to help out; and I'm guessing many of the Republicans, teapartiers, and wingnuts will be out in full force this time so they must be worried.

All that considered, I'm just not trusting the media that much, as they've been right leaning for quite some time now.

TIS

Well, if a Republican wins a special election in Massachusetts, less than a year after Ted Kennedy passed away, you might as well fold up the tent on the Dems .

Besides Fox News what news media are you talking about?

I actually have to agree with Mig on this, Tis. Except for Fox (who gets TONS of attention), the media is now, always has been, and always will be heavily liberal.

I think your misconception comes from the fact that Fox News is so adamant about their contempt for the liberal way of life, that they kind of drown out their lefty media counterparts (The Huffington Post, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, etc.).

As a whole, the left has more media outlets than the right.

I would have to agree with PB on this.

I'm talking main street media news, even the local news (which is less bias than the cable IMHO)tends to lean right. Fox, well that's not even really credible since ALL it's programming is right. MSN has it's lefties but not 24/7. They too jumped on the Tea Party stories (although granted not as much as Fox);They all thrive on some of the more ridiculous stories, sadly giving air time to the likes of Limbaugh & Beck as though they are the last word.

How many days news was the fact that our President won the Nobel Peace Prize given critical news by all? My God, you'd think it was such a horrible thing. ALL of networks aired all negative stories on this.

However, the "One" story that really really made me take notice was a few years ago (not sure of the year 05 or 06 maybe) there was a war protest at or near the White House with 500,000 people. 500,000!!!! I know because I really really wanted to go but couldn't get off work. I'd read on-line to follow it. I turned on the news and that story was covered very very briefly. I thought for sure that with a half million people, the media would surely give it a lot of air time (hell Woodstock was a half Mil and that was covered more). They did NOT. But hey the rightie tea parties, they get covered.

Do I even need to get into the past eight years that the media never bothered to investigate, oh let me see???????? Hmmm Maybe the fact that we were lied to about the fuckin' Iraq war? They covered the ass of the previous President to the max NEVER daring to question anything he did. Has the current President received the same??? NO not at all.

TIS

Well today is the big election in Massachusetts. If Brown wins, that could negatively impact the Administration's agenda. Polls close at 8 PM. The last surveys I saw showed a statistical dead heat between Brown and Coakley or with Brown slightly ahead. This will be interesting.

Lets see if for mysterious reasons Boston holds back its returns until the more rural and suburban (read Brown) votes are tabulated, and then a sudden "surge" for Coakley appears and she carries the day.

Just to be contrary I bet my brother that Brown would win but I have no idea as to which way it will go. My understanding is that Coakley comes across as not the most likable candidate and didn't do all that she needed to do to close the deal-the gaffe about Schilling wasn't good.

But it seems surreal that a state which elected Ted Kennedy to the Senate God knows how many times is now torn between Coakely and Brown.

If Coakley loses there will be some recriminations, I know that.
If it's really close -like the Franken/Coleman election- maybe no one gets certified as Senator until much, much later and the health bill passes by the skin of its teeth.

Jon Stewart's take

Jon Stewart gets fed up

Honestly, I don't know what to think. It's hard to believe after 40 some years, the area would go Republican? The media is all over this and there are polls galore, showing a huge gap in many cases. They'll (media) have egg all over their faces if Brown doesn't win by a large margin (it seems that's what the media is hoping for). Then again, it's true (from what I hear) that Coakley isn't as well like and did run a lackluster campaign. I will be watching for the results as well.

TIS

She doesn't seem very likable and she has gone out of her way to insult the city of Boston on more than one occasion. Still, the idea of a Republican winning Teddy's seat seems almost blasphemous.

And I know Jon Stewart is just trying to be funny and put his own (liberal) spin on things, but if she loses, and the healthcare bill dies on the table, it's going to spell a one term Presidency for Obama.