Category: News and Opinion

As we all recall, the attacks of September 11, 2001 happened on what was supposed to be Primary Day here in New York.

Since the election law still says that primaries are to be held on the first Tuesday in the week after Labor Day, this year, for the first time since that year, Primary Day is scheduled to be on September 11th.

I see a problem with that.

While this is an “off-year” in New York City, with not many election contests to be held, there are some. And outside of the City, some major positions are up for election this year (suburban & upstate County Executives, Mayors & County Legislators).

One more post on my analysis that shows that a hypothetical young couple in New York City would owe nearly three times the federal, state and local taxes as a senior citizen couple with the exact same income, and would have just half the money left over after taxes and housing expenses. How can this be justified, other than as a matter of political power? The accumulating list of special breaks for seniors is often justified on the grounds that seniors are worse off than the young. They may also be justified on the grounds that the seniors had to pay more when they were young, and the young will get the same breaks when they are old, so it all evens out if one takes a “whole life view.” Considering these points for what they are worth, I find myself agreeing with the Concord Coalition whose analysis (for Northern Virginia) I have essentially duplicated here (with the same results): “Such vast discrepancies are impossible to defend.”

The Daily News reported today that a child walking home from school with his aunt was hit and killed by a vehicle making a right hand turn on Third Avenue in Brooklyn. That is the second time in recent memory that a child has been killed by a vehicle making a right turn on that very street. Such a tragedy is every parent’s worst nightmare, and when my children were younger, it was one of my greatest fears. Not child abduction. Not sexual predators. Not terror attacks. Right turns, and left turns from narrow one-way streets.

People need to realize that it is turning cars that are most likely to run over pedestrians and cyclists. The streetscape of New York City makes it difficult for drivers to see pedestrians coming out from the corners — especially if an SUV or other large vehicle is parked there. The risk of running over a child is something I often think about when getting behind the wheel. And many drivers are more concerned about being hit themselves by other vehicles — a threat to them — than running over children. Particularly if they are driving a sedan and could be hit by an SUV — with a bumper designed to crash through the driver-side window. They are looking left — for another vehicle — not right — for a pedestrian as they move around the corner. And if they do it too slowly, they might get the horn from a vehicle behind them.

As shown in my prior post and the spreadsheet attached to it (now downloadable, my bad), a hypothetical couple age 67 and earning $75,000 per year would pay little more than one-third the federal, state and local taxes as a young working couple with the exact same income. Even though, to the extent the two couple’s non-money situations differ, the senior citizens were better off. Based on the percentage difference, senior citizens in New York City do even better relative to young people on New York’s state and local taxes than on federal taxes. I’ll discuss state and local taxes in my next post. For federal taxes, my hypothetical older couple, the Senior Voters, would owe $6,104, or 8.1% of their income. And my hypothetical young couple, Young and Younger Hopeful, would owe $16,409 in federal taxes, or 21.9% of income. Adding a one-year-old “Baby Hopeful” would cut the federal bill only slightly, to $14,914 or 19.9% of income. Eliminating Ms. Hopeful’s job and cutting the couple’s income to $50,000 per year would reduce the federal tax burden to $9,251 (18.5% of that reduced income), still more than the Senior Voters at $75,000 in income. The rest of the post shows how this is so.

With all that has been going on lately (Spitzer wins in Nassau. Spitzer loses in Albany, Spitzer goes nuts, Anna Nichole Smith dies, etc), it’s likely most political junkies missed the news that the proposed Jeanine Pirro TV show died.

The part of the story I most appreciated was the description of the show that the former District Attorney, former Judge who at one point was considered a serious candidate for Governor of New York or US Senator or Attorney General would star in –

“The show would have featured celebrities including musician and comedienne Charo and actor Corbin Bernsen ruling on real-life, small-claims lawsuits” 

For the middle 60 percent of the U.S. income distribution — the middle class and working class — the 25 years after World War II were the most prosperous in history. Those leaving high school or college, a level of education their parents worked to provide but could never have aspired to themselves, often ended up earning more than their fathers their first day on the job. Many obtained secure jobs with employer-provided pensions and health insurance, both of which had been developed during the war. As people moved on to the suburbs and Sunbelt and up the economic ladder, the extended family frayed and America’s seniors were often left behind and forgotten. Their suicide rates were high, and many were poor. America realized its mistake, and toward the end of this period a huge number of programs, tax breaks, subsidies and other benefits were created for senior citizens. Most of these were provided to anyone age 65 or over, regardless of income: senior citizens were simply assumed to be in need. Over the next 40 years, however, as the fortunate generation that came of age after the war became seniors themselves, the old ceased being the worst off people in America and in many ways became the best off. Even so, benefits for seniors continue to accumulate, making the current situation just as inequitable as in the 1950s — but in the other direction. This, and my next few posts, will demonstrate this for one aspect of public policy — taxes.