Originally Posted by Baradium

I just have to say something here because the bad math bothers me.

Let's use a 30% tax rate just for ease of numbers.

If you make $200,000 a year you are paying $60,000 in taxes, giving you a take home of $140,000. If you have a pay increase to account for inflation taking you to $206,000 (a 3% increase), you are now paying 61,800 in taxes giving you a $144,200 take home, which is 3% more than the previous take home. The only time adjusting your pay at the inflation rate results in "losing out" is if you change tax brackets.

The idea of larger increases doesn't bother me, but your reasoning is not correct.

I'll also add that only pay rates don't automatically fix QOL issues. If someone just cares about time at home, pay rates do nothing if they can't drop trips or bid for more days off. If they want better deadhead rules, they lose out if they have to pay for them each time since (as already mentioned) it's after tax.

Originally Posted by Baradium

I just have to say something here because the bad math bothers me.

Let's use a 30% tax rate just for ease of numbers.

If you make $200,000 a year you are paying $60,000 in taxes, giving you a take home of $140,000. If you have a pay increase to account for inflation taking you to $206,000 (a 3% increase), you are now paying 61,800 in taxes giving you a $144,200 take home, which is 3% more than the previous take home. The only time adjusting your pay at the inflation rate results in "losing out" is if you change tax brackets.

The idea of larger increases doesn't bother me, but your reasoning is not correct.

I'll also add that only pay rates don't automatically fix QOL issues. If someone just cares about time at home, pay rates do nothing if they can't drop trips or bid for more days off. If they want better deadhead rules, they lose out if they have to pay for them each time since (as already mentioned) it's after tax.

Originally Posted by DWC CAP10 USAF

A person that makes $200K and is married filing jointly will pay about $36.5K for federal taxes, not $60K

Originally Posted by DWC CAP10 USAF

A person that makes $200K and is married filing jointly will pay about $36.5K for federal taxes, not $60K

Originally Posted by contrails

I don't think you understand tax brackets.

If you're a dollar under the next bracket, you aren't paying several percent less in your bracket than that one. That's not how it works.

Originally Posted by Han Solo

No, but my guess is not too many of those voted against the tax break if any are currently serving. Of course I am biased on this subject, but I thought it was ridiculous to deny the tax break based off DAL's elimination of the NRA discount, and I'm a solid supporter of 2A. If they just didn't want to offer a tax break that's one thing, but punishing a company that provides 10s of thousands of jobs in the state (#5 employer by volume https://www.newsmax.com/fastfeatures.../18/id/645208/), over a discount that roughly 10 people took advantage of is stupid at best.

Originally Posted by BobZ

I think its even money the politicians didnt want to lose the revrnue. And all the hubub was simply convenient cover.

Just because their idgits doesnt mean their dumb.

Originally Posted by Sputnik

**Wait........are you all talking about this fuel tax break that the GA governor quietly put thru.....unless I missed something?**


That was a temp punt back to the legislature, that wasn't in session at the time. Was kinda brilliant, he reinstated the tax break, then left office before the legislature came back in session to deal with it.

It had to be reinstated, the bill was in committee up to last minute, along with many others. They run till midnight on last day.

Seems to have died more by neglect than malice. Unlike last year no one is loudly claiming credit. I would imagine Delta will quietly and politely fire some shots (new routes not in ATL?) and lawmakers will reconsider poking the states largest employer in the eye.