Skip to comments.The Tax Increases Required for Obama to Fulfill his Spending Promises
Posted on 08/21/2008 1:34:54 PM PDT by obamatookmydollars.com
Professor Hubbard explains that Obama's claim that he will increase the payroll tax by only 4% cannot be correct. This amount will not generate the revenue necessary to maintain even current levels of entitlement spending:
"The new payroll tax hike is more modest than the one Mr. Obama hinted at last fall, which might have uncapped the payroll tax entirely. But it would also do very little to shore up Social Security, since it means that no more than 15% of Social Security's long-term funding gap would be closed. Thus, if Mr. Obama is indeed opposed to reductions in Social Security spending growth, he is necessarily committed to large future payroll-tax or general income-tax increases."
Professor Hubbard estimates that meeting existing shortfalls in Medicare and Medicaid would require raising all existing taxes by 50%:
"The spending shortfalls in Social Security and Medicare are large. According to the Congressional Budget Office, Social Security and Medicare spending left unchecked would, after a generation, consume about 10 percentage points more of GDP than it does today. Simple arithmetic suggests that with this much more of GDP eaten up by the two programs, all federal taxes on average would have to be raised by more than 50% to make up the shortfall."
-Display the bumper sticker that exposes Obama's economic agenda:
"I'll take your dollars and give you change." www.obamatookmydollars.com
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
This tax-crazy radical socialist has no connection with the reality of his obscene taxation plans. A teetering economy, the taxpaying part of the public that is losing 50% of THEIR income already, and a very weak dollar.
And this moron liberal socialist wants to INCREASE TAXATION? How stupid can he get? And how stupid are those that support this madness?
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Do people understand what “Social Security” is? It isn’t just for older Americans over 62.5 years old, it is a whole gamut of entitlements including SSI and disability.
The problem is that a fund intended for those who paid into it is being pilfered by non-workers.
No one wants to address the real issue, welfare for able-bodied people.
Let it begin in California.
There is a problem- for the time being, we’re stuck with this system. There’s no getting out of it in the short term. So anything to keep it from going insolvent will have to include some tax increases. Even more important, we have to continue raising the retirememt age and phase out early retirement. Also, we should increase the earnings limit on social security and medicare. Once that is in place, we can look at ways to slowly dismantle the system and find a market and individual-based retirement system to replace it.
love those pics......
the disability windfall is a disgrace....I am sure we all know someone who needs disability, and I am sure we all know several who are lazy arses cheating their way to an easy early retirement....
I agree that the system should be phased out, but understand please that there are many of us out here who do not have the benefit of defined pensions or retirement health benefits so we NEED SS and Medicare to be available to us at a reasonable age....and I think if you work for 40 yrs you should be able to “take”it at age 62....
“... we should increase the earnings limit on social security and medicare”
There is no earnings limit on the medicare portion. Only the SS portion is earnings capped.
And tax increases are not necessary to keep it from going insolvent. Reducing the growth of benefits to match CPI rather than WAGE inflation, together with allowing the SSTF to invest in the open market rather the the special purpose Treasury notes, plus a crackdown on the fraud in SS Disability, etc. would keep SS solvent without any increase in the mandatory contribution rates.
I see where you’re coming from. Problem is, there is no easy answer.
I did and I just tell my kids that I appreciate their "taking care of Mom n Dad "
Fortunately, barring a "cat's ass trophy", they have done well enuf to not need it themselves....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.