Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Let's get this straight. It's not a general "payroll tax" cut. It's a Social Security tax cut!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:42 PM
Original message
Let's get this straight. It's not a general "payroll tax" cut. It's a Social Security tax cut!

Right when we need an increase in the Social Security tax by taking the CAP off it it! Make the well to do and rich pay more into the Social Security trust fund that will make it solvent for a century.

If Social Security taxes are cut now, does anyone really think a Republican controlled House will support an increase in Social Security taxes in 2012 much less taking the CAP off?

Republican leaders have already said they will oppose restoring the Social Security tax rate as a budget buster when "tough choices" will be made to ct government deficits next year.
Refresh | +31 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Angry Dragon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. I have told both of my Senators that the SS cut
is more dangerous than the tax cuts
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Nite Owl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
2. The White House needs a course
in negotiating 101. Or---this is what they intended in the first place and it's all a big show when he starts campaigning on not giving tax breaks to the wealthy, restoring the estate tax and having the SS payroll tax back. What excuse will their be if he is 'forced' to cave the next time?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. You might also throw in a History course
because their lack of knowledge in History is astounding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Nite Owl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #11
16. It sure is!
or they are counting on people not knowing theirs and their version of FDR and LBJ are so much more convenient.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NaturalHigh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
3. A big K & R.
If I may, I would like to add one more suggestion. Raising the retirement age makes no sense. It just forces younger workers to compete with older workers who want to retire but need to keep their jobs. It would be much more beneficial to the economy to strengthen the funding for social security and lower the retirement age.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:53 PM
Response to Original message
4. Recommend
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
5. I wonder if this wasn't dreamed up in the cat food commission
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
subterranean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. It was. Simpson and Bowles proposed it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/03/AR2010120306669.html

Obama said he liked some of the commission's ideas. Maybe this was one of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. holy shit. thanks for the link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Still a Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:56 PM
Response to Original message
6. The money is coming from the general fund
The SS fund will be reimbursed
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. "The money is coming from the general fund" That's the problem.

"The SS fund will be reimbursed"

That's not the issue.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
xxqqqzme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Senator Bernie Sanders
Edited on Fri Dec-10-10 05:07 PM by xxqqqzme
"...One of the most underreported parts of this deal is a cut to the Social Security payroll tax. In just one year, over $120 billion of revenue will be cut from Social Security under the President's compromise plan, weakening the program and virtually guaranteeing benefit cuts in the future.

Make no mistake about it. Social Security has not added one dime to the national debt and this cut will only embolden Republican attempts to privatize the program and increase the age of retirement. Social Security is a vital safety net for all Americans and a cornerstone of our commitment to protect the middle class...."

Nice try. By law, Social Security gets no money from the general fund. If the cap was raised to $140,000, there would be no need for a 2% 'reduction'. Flim flam.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. I think BBI has a point about what may happen in 2012, though
It seems very possible Republicans will then say "we don't want to put the FICA rates back up; but we can't afford to carry on lending money from the general fund to cover what the old rates would have brought in, so we'll cut future Social Security benefits instead". And then, effectively, they'll have privatised that 2% slice of FICA - if people want to get they retirement income back up to what they had been expecting, they'll have to invest 2% of their income privately (which will hurt lower incomes more, since Social Security is mildly redistributive, which is why Republicans hate it so much).

Or this would force Obama/the Democratic senators to block that Republican proposal, and they'll go into the election saying "Democrats want to raise taxes on the working person". And, since the Republicans are so much better at misleading propaganda, that may hurt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Faryn Balyncd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 05:55 PM
Response to Original message
9. K&R....This is the POISON PILL the GOP has been peddling for years.



:hi:




:kick:




Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bozita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. They never found a buyer ... until now!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. Exactly!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 03:23 PM
Response to Original message
17. All part of the right wing plan.
Edited on Sat Dec-11-10 03:30 PM by Enthusiast
Their plan: The wealthy just don't have enough. We need to privatize social security so the engine of enterprise will be ramped up.

That's their plan and Obama is implementing it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 08:26 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC