Posted on 09/04/2010 6:43:00 AM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
The White House is considering a push for hundreds of billions of dollars in new stimulative spending, focusing on business tax cuts including a temporary cut in payroll taxes. In part, this is good policy. In part, it's necessary policy. Anne Kornblut and Lori Montgomery quote an unnamed Democratic strategist complaining that the White House has let the issues get away from them in advance of November's election. "'We did the mosque, Katrina, Iraq, and now Middle East peace?' said a Democratic strategist who works closely with multiple candidates and spoke on the condition of anonymity. 'And in between you redo the Oval Office? It has become a joke.'"
(Excerpt) Read more at voices.washingtonpost.com ...
Cutting the payroll taxes could be revenue neutral. The company quits paying; just make the employee pay the full amount. Government gets what it was always getting, companies pay less. Most of the democrat voters won’t be smart enough to realize that they’ve just lost spendable income.
LOL no you won’t really it will be Uncle Sammy stash that he borrowed from Wong Lee Chow to pay back Mahommed to pay Peter to pay Paul to pay you with a bankrupt fund.
It will be like the housing credit. You will pay it back and then some.
They need to ALL take pay cuts and give the check book to one adult that is not Obama.
Yes and the unions that are all tied to Obama need dismantled and called to the carpet.
ping
I predict it will work at least as well as the GOP pandering to minority voters.
Let me translate:
We are going to "temporarily" cut payroll taxes until the midterms to try and save our asses, but when you do your 2010 taxes there will be no payroll tax cut rate. You will still owe the same.
The tax cut was temporary until you do your taxes at years end and then you pay it back.
Judging by the comments Obama is fooling no one well except for a few people who is still blaming Bush....
We DID them? No mention of serious policy or success...just "we did them." What a pathetic joke. A serial string of massive failures in a volatile and dangerous world and the incumbents describe it as "we did them" just like playing a round of golf.
Ezra Klein, founder of Journolist:
A columnist for Newsweek !
A blogger for the Washington Post !!!
Good ol' Ezra Klein wrote on Twitter the following about much beloved Tim Russert:
"f*** tim russert. f*** him with a spiky acid-tipped d*ck."
What a great guy, Journolist Founder Ezra !!!
----------------------
----------------------------------- JournoList Members:
(Wiki) Members of JournoList included, among others: Ezra Klein, Jeffrey Toobin, Eric Alterman, Paul Krugman, Joe Klein (no relation to Ezra Klein), Matthew Yglesias, and Jonathan Chait.
--------------
Main article: JournoList
In February 2007 Klein created a Google Groups forum called "JournoList" for discussing politics and the news media. The forum's membership was controlled by Klein and limited to "several hundred left-leaning bloggers, political reporters, magazine writers, policy wonks and academics."[16]
Posts within JournoList were intended only be made and read by its members.[17] Klein defended the forum saying that it "[ensures] that folks feel safe giving off-the-cuff analysis and instant reactions". JournoList member, and
Time magazine columnist, Joe Klein added that the off-the-record nature of the forum was necessary because “candor is essential and can only be guaranteed by keeping these conversations private”.[16]
Ezra Klein (born May 9, 1984) is an American blogger for the Washington Post and a columnist for Newsweek. He was formerly an associate editor for The American Prospect political magazine and an American liberal[1] political blogger at the same publication.[2]
I hope you’re not expecting an argument on that one. ;’D
Somehow I don't think that's the "stimulus" that Obama would have in mind.
$35 billion of tax cuts — which is just over 2 percent of the Obama deficit.
Yes, you are. He can do it simply because he can. And a percentage of Americans (small though it is) will still believe it simply because they can. It has nothing to do with the truth, all to do with the ability to deceive.
Things have been screwed up ever since the dems took control.
I was just wondering if I missed in the news the republicans stopping some jobs bill for whatever reason....pork filled or what not.
It probably gave SEIU and the unions slush money but Obama does not care.
I saw Wanda Sykes last night an LKLIVE and I listened as she truly believed that people were nuts for doubting Obama’s intentions.
Thanks for that informative post. A member of Obama’s private press I see. So we know the intent is twisted and meaningless.
“The problem is ... the overall statist behavior of this Administration, companies and people have NO CONFIDENCE in long-term economic prospects.”
Ya think? Ya think maybe everyone has lost confidence because Trojan Marxists are in charge of the economy? Ya think maybe the natural reaction to redistributionists trying to claw wealth away from earners to “redistribute” it to non-earners would be for the earners to hunker down and try to prevent their wealth from being “redistributed”? You know, hunker down, as in not loaning money, not borrowing money, not spending money, not taking risks, not hiring, and withdrawing and hiding money from the financial system. You know, like simply performing no financial transactions at all, since not transacting is the simplest way to keep your wealth from being subject to taxation and redistribution.
It’s simple, actually. Wealth is extracted by the wealth-takers from the wealth-creators when money flows from one place to another, that is, when a financial transaction occurs. The takers have inserted various money-snatching filters in those flows, but when the money-snatching begins to siphon so much of the money that the flows result in a net loss of wealth instead of a net gain in wealth, then those who initiate the flows simply shut them down.
You can visualize a financial transaction as water flowing in a pipe and taxation as a tap the government installs to steal some of the water. The wealth creators open the spigot and some of their wealth flows down the pipe, say to sprinkle on a field in order to grow some new factories that employ people and produce goods they can buy with their wages. Now, say, a 1000 gallons goes in one end, the government steals 100 gallons from its tap and gives away gallon jugs to buy votes with or whatever, and 900 gallons end up helping the new factories grow. Things still keep on working. The factories grow, people are employed, goods are manufactured, and wealth increases for everyone involved.
Now, suppose the government steals, say 400 gallons to “redistribute”, and only 600 gallons get through to grow the new factories. Well, the factories fail to grow, and the wealth creators say, “This isn’t working, the heck with this”, and they close the spigot. Now there’s no new factories and the government gets nothing either. You know, pretty much like the economy we see today under the helm of the Obammunist redistributionists.
Basically, this is simply a modern version of Aesop’s fable, “The Goose That Laid the Golden Eggs”, and the Trojan Marxists in charge of the economy right now are busily eviscerating the goose to reach those last hard to reach golden eggs in order to slice them up and “redistribute” them. It’s no wonder the golden egg supply has dried up, now is it?
A holiday is a temporary halt in collection. What happens when the bill comes due and people have to come up with the taxes in a lump sum?
Social Security benefits are calculated according to the amount that you contribute. Removing the payroll tax cap would just boost the benefit for higher wage earners.
Unless, of course, you were to put a lower cap on benefits. But, that would make it an even worse deal for high wage earners.
If you calculated the effective rate on return of Social Security benefits (when accounting for contributions), the people at the low end of the income scale get a good deal. As you get up to the middle and upper middle income scale, the effective rate of return gets smaller and smaller, until it is about 1%.
Collecting more taxes from "the rich" without increasing benefits would make their effective rate of return negative. That's a classic Democrat scheme: soak the rich.
There's nothing "smart" about that.
And, the truth is: it wouldn't work. Most people with high salaries (six figures and up) have the ability to negotiate "flexible" compensation schemes. All they would have to do is shift "salary" into other income categories, like stock options. The income would still be taxable, but it wouldn't be subject to the payroll tax.
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.