Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Could Win if GOP Blocks Payroll Tax Cut
The Fiscal Times ^ | 12/2/11 | Bruce Bartlett

Posted on 12/02/2011 8:14:22 AM PST by Retro Llama

A year ago, the Bush tax cuts were set to expire. Barack Obama insisted that only those for people making less than $250,000 per year should be extended. Even though Democrats still controlled both the House and Senate, Republicans had enough clout to delay action until the last minute. At that point, they held all the high cards because they knew that Obama couldn't risk a large de facto tax increase on every taxpayer at a time when the economy was weak. He caved and agreed to extension of all the Bush tax cuts, including those for the rich.

Today the situation is largely reversed. The temporary cut in the Social Security payroll tax is due to expire at year's end, but this time Obama holds the better hand. Republicans are lukewarm to extending the payroll tax cut, but are caving to public pressure to extend it. Also, Republicans have never articulated a coherent reason for opposing extension of the payroll tax cut. But they insist that the tax cut be paid for—something they have never demanded for any Republican-sponsored tax cut that I am aware of....

Republicans respond that it would be folly to raise taxes on the "job creators." But the idea that all rich people are job creators merely by virtue of being rich is complete nonsense. According to the Tax Policy Center, only about 3 percent of people reporting business income are in the top two tax brackets, and according to the Treasury Department, only one fifth of small businesses have any employees at all.

....Moreover, there is no evidence that the tax cuts of the George W. Bush administration created any jobs, so even if they were fully repealed there is no reason to think any jobs would be lost....

(Excerpt) Read more at thefiscaltimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012; 2012election; payrolltax; taxes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-75 next last

1 posted on 12/02/2011 8:14:31 AM PST by Retro Llama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama

Obama could win, just by looking at his potential opponents.


2 posted on 12/02/2011 8:16:00 AM PST by stuartcr ("Everything happens as God wants it to...otherwise, things would be different.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama

Is this really a payroll tax cut?


3 posted on 12/02/2011 8:18:00 AM PST by frogjerk (OBAMA NOV 2012 = HORSEMEAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama
It is always possible that he could win but it would have little to nothing to do with this.

I put his chances of reelection at less than 25%.

Reelections of incumbents are all about the incumbent. His record will be a difficult thing to run on.

4 posted on 12/02/2011 8:18:28 AM PST by NeilGus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama

Obama could win, just by looking at his potential opponents.


5 posted on 12/02/2011 8:20:16 AM PST by stuartcr ("Everything happens as God wants it to...otherwise, things would be different.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama
Republicans respond that it would be folly to raise taxes on the "job creators." But the idea that all rich people are job creators merely by virtue of being rich is complete nonsense.

The ignorance of some people knows no bounds.

Does capital in the hands of the public, or taxes in the hands of the government produce more self-sustaining jobs? It's one or the other brain-trusts.

At what point would taxes be enough? Was it enough when payroll deductions were created for the first time, at roughly 2%? Was it enough at 5%? Was it enough at 10, 15, 20, 25, or 30%? Is it enough today? The Left says no.

I state right here and now that the federal government and the Left will never be happy until they get all all capital, and dole it out to us as they see fit.

I say, draw the line in the sand now. Enough is enough. Not one red cent more you Lefty assholes.

I'm not buying off on them dividing us by income level, and attack us separately. We stand together!

6 posted on 12/02/2011 8:26:14 AM PST by DoughtyOne (Romney, Newt, any chance whatsoever you might sometime pander to U.S. Citizens vs the illegals?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama

Tax the currently untaxed.


7 posted on 12/02/2011 8:28:01 AM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

LOL. You can’t get money from people who don’t have it.


8 posted on 12/02/2011 8:29:05 AM PST by Retro Llama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama
Obummer gonna win no matter what takes place. America has tipped over starting in earnest in 2006.
9 posted on 12/02/2011 8:29:40 AM PST by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NeilGus

Reelections of incumbents are all about the incumbent. His record will be a difficult thing to run on.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________He’s not running on his record. He might win becase:

#1. He will have a $Billion warchest and

#2. The backing of:

A. The Chicago Thug-style politcal machine.
B. 95 percent of the Black vote
C. The Unions
D. The Gays
E. The Media
F. Hollywood
G. Environmentalist wackos and
H. Every American who has the IQ of a can of Spam

It will be a very nasty and close election.


10 posted on 12/02/2011 8:29:40 AM PST by no dems (Why do you never see "Obama" bumper stickers on cars going to work in the morning?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; stephenjohnbanker; DoughtyOne; calcowgirl; Gilbo_3; ...
I saw this at yahoo:

But to many conservatives, the president’s proposed new payroll tax holiday is not a net tax cut, because it requires the US Treasury to make up for the shortfall in payroll tax revenue to the Social Security Trust funds by transferring general funds there. Those general funds would have to be supplied by borrowing or, in the president's plan, tax hikes on the rich.
“It’s not a tax cut, and it threatens the integrity of Social Security,” says Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee.
He notes that, by the Democrats’ own figures, it will take 10 years for the surtax on the wealthy to recoup lost revenues from Obama’s one-year extension and expansion of the payroll tax holiday. That means borrowing to cover the shortfall in the meantime.

Payroll tax cut: why Republicans might back Obama’s plan (VIDEO)yahoo News

Obama is proposing paying for a one year FICA/SS taxcut with a 10 year surcharge on the rich. You dont hear them talking about that minor detail.

11 posted on 12/02/2011 8:30:26 AM PST by sickoflibs (Cain :"My parents didn't raise me to beg the government for other peoples money")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

See my tag-line


12 posted on 12/02/2011 8:31:37 AM PST by Ingtar (Newt (four more for Obama) & Mitt (Obamacare) - what wonderful choices!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama

Rich people are job creators every time they invest in a business directly or via buying stock. They need not be directly hiring people in order to be creating jobs.


13 posted on 12/02/2011 8:33:18 AM PST by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama

This payroll “tax cut” is a joke ...as if a business would just go out an hire someone for a $1500 break in the payroll tax. For a laugh go to the White House web site for an explanation of how this will create jobs. The idiots in the White House do not understand that in hiring someone you are expecting that their work will generate new revenues that more than cover the cost of their salary, benefits, their part of the business overhead as well as a portion of your profit. The GOP is right to say this is nonsense, but just go along with it so Obama doesn’t have new ammunition to say Republicans are anti-tax cuts for workers. Barry’s tax cut won’t create any jobs and will just cause Social Security to go bankrupt a little quicker.


14 posted on 12/02/2011 8:34:32 AM PST by The Great RJ ("The problem with socialism is that pretty soon you run out of other people's money" M. Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Great RJ

Ultimately, all job creation is based on demand — businesses hire people to create the goods and services people buy. Putting more money in people’s pockets to spend is the root pump-primer.


15 posted on 12/02/2011 8:37:29 AM PST by Retro Llama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: no dems

I certainly understand that the election is not over but...

1. Money does not win elections. In O’s case, he will use the money to attack his opponent but he is still stuck with his record.

2. Dems have had the backing of all of those groups for my lifetime and in the last election (their high water mark since 1964) they only received 52-53% of the vote. Clinton never exceeded 50%.

Even those with the intelligence of a can of spam understand that they cannot get a job.


16 posted on 12/02/2011 8:37:29 AM PST by NeilGus (He ha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

GOP come next November “As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly!”.


17 posted on 12/02/2011 8:40:21 AM PST by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama
In defense of the republicans in the Senate, abc reported this morning that the republicans put a bill forward that would have cut spending to cover this social security tax cut... but instead of keeping it at 4.5% it would have dropped it to 2%. Of course... only wanting to block any legislation from passing...so that they can run against the stupid ass republicans that are too dumb to see this tactic and too stupid to go out in front of cameras and mics to inform Americans what these rat bastard evilcrats are doing... the dims voted it down and the republicans remain mute... crickets nada... zero! Someone tell me when this nightmare ends please!?

LLS

18 posted on 12/02/2011 8:40:21 AM PST by LibLieSlayer ("Americans are hungry to feel once again a sense of mission and greatness." Ronaldo Magnus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama

You can get labor. The rest of us are effectively slaves working part time for the gov’t.


19 posted on 12/02/2011 8:41:17 AM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2; Retro Llama

Tax welfare, food stamps, etc


20 posted on 12/02/2011 8:43:36 AM PST by goodnesswins (Bad planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
it requires the US Treasury to make up for the shortfall in payroll tax revenue

Which assumes that this tax cut doesn't generate enough additional economic activity to pay for itself. Is this assumption also applied to an extension of the cut to the top income tax bracket?

21 posted on 12/02/2011 8:44:20 AM PST by JustSayNoToNannies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama

People need to realize that every dime the employee does not pay into SS is money they will never get paid to them when they retire.

Keep in mind, also, that if you pay into SS from the age of 16 or so & you die at age 60, you get $255 for funeral expenses only—you get NONE of the money you paid into SS for all those years.


22 posted on 12/02/2011 8:44:20 AM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama

Fact One: We, the “Taxed Enough Already” folks, have supported and continue to support cutting federal income taxes (along with spending cuts). As far as I know, no one in this group called for a cut in FICA taxes (payroll taxes earmarked for the Social Security program).

Fact Two: The Social Security “Trust Fund” is on a path of unsustainability, with more going out than coming in.

So what did we do with the above facts in mind?
Did we cut income taxes? Did we cut spending? Did we address the problem with the inevitable bankruptcy of the social security system (overall reform)?

No, some of our congressional representatives forced Obama and Congress to not INCREASE taxes by leaving the current tax rates in place, and then Obama pushed for, and Congress went along with, a cut in the amount of money going into the “trust fund”.

That’s right..we continued spending at historical levels, increasing both the annual budget deficits and the national debt and cut the amount of money going into the social security program.

And now we’re told that if we don’t go along with a plan to accelerate the time frame for the Social Security system going bust, Obama will win re-election.

What a fine state of affairs we have here.


23 posted on 12/02/2011 8:47:15 AM PST by Let_It_Be_So (Once you see the Truth, you cannot "unsee" it, no matter how hard you may try.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NeilGus

I don’t know. A year and a half ago, I didn’t think Obama had a chance in hell. Now looking at the two probable front-runners, I’m skeptical. Judging from FR, not even republicans/conservatives want Romney, and they don’t really care that much for Newt. I think it’s going to be a close one.


24 posted on 12/02/2011 8:47:43 AM PST by stuartcr ("Everything happens as God wants it to...otherwise, things would be different.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

???


25 posted on 12/02/2011 8:48:47 AM PST by stuartcr ("Everything happens as God wants it to...otherwise, things would be different.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ingtar

Mr. Paul may be strange, but he is consistent. We pretty much know what he stands for, and some of his more radical ideas would be known and could be planned for.


26 posted on 12/02/2011 8:51:33 AM PST by stuartcr ("Everything happens as God wants it to...otherwise, things would be different.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: no dems
B. 95 percent of the Black vote

95% of the Black vote could be counteracted tenfold by 70% of the White vote.

27 posted on 12/02/2011 8:51:57 AM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (Attacking Wall Street because you're jobless is like burning down Whole Foods because you're hungry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

Tax the looters.


28 posted on 12/02/2011 8:52:23 AM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Does capital in the hands of the public, or taxes in the hands of the government produce more self-sustaining jobs?

The former, of course - which is why supporting the payroll tax cut is the conservative thing to do.

29 posted on 12/02/2011 8:56:45 AM PST by JustSayNoToNannies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

???


30 posted on 12/02/2011 8:57:32 AM PST by stuartcr ("Everything happens as God wants it to...otherwise, things would be different.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

??? ?


31 posted on 12/02/2011 8:59:27 AM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

I agree. The GOP will lose if they keep fumbling the political ball like this. Conservative policy always WINS if it is communicated correctly. Unfortunately Mitch and the rest of the Senate R’s don’t seem to understand this concept.


32 posted on 12/02/2011 9:00:37 AM PST by VictoryGal (Never give up, never surrender! REMEMBER NEDA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ridesthemiles
You said...."every dime the employee does not pay into SS is money they will never get paid to them when they retire."

Not paying into SS at this stage is, I believe, a GOOD THING....it's just funding the looters.... I withdrew myself from paying into SS in 1992....quit working to go where my husband worked (projects)....there were/are BETTER things to do with my time than work to pay SS, Medicare, etc.

33 posted on 12/02/2011 9:00:47 AM PST by goodnesswins (Bad planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

How do you tax and collect from people that either don’t pay or can’t pay taxes?


34 posted on 12/02/2011 9:01:12 AM PST by stuartcr ("Everything happens as God wants it to...otherwise, things would be different.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
Force them into direct slave labor rather than the indirect way we enslave 1/2 the population now.

Or just cut off their benefits.

35 posted on 12/02/2011 9:03:38 AM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

The paroll tax “cut” is smoke and mirrors, further bankrupting a Ponzi Scheme that is going broke anyway. Effective only for the employee, and not the employer, and probably does not for the self-employed at all.

What has been the most regressive income tax ever imposed on the people who work for a paycheck in this country, has only escalated up to now. Rolling it back by some 2% of gross annual wages, then making the maximum income on which it may be imposed increase to levels that start to make some effect on practically every small business owner filing under corporation S rules, means this “rollback” was essentially revenue neutral.


36 posted on 12/02/2011 9:09:07 AM PST by alloysteel (Are Democrats truly "better angels"? They are lousy stewards for America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JustSayNoToNannies; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; dools0007world; Marine_Uncle; marstegreg
RE :”it requires the US Treasury to make up for the shortfall in payroll tax revenue.....
Which assumes that this tax cut doesn't generate enough additional economic activity to pay for itself. Is this assumption also applied to an extension of the cut to the top income tax bracket?

Keep in mind the Bush tax cuts expired because the budget reconciliation rules that allowed them to be passed with a simple Senate majority requiring that any provision that adds to the deficit must expire within something like 8 years. The CBO makes that determination based on static budget analysis.

In addition the SS entitlement is supposed to be directly tied to the FICA tax. You know the saying “I paid in..” or “they paid in..” ?

I don't see how a FICA tax cut could possibly pay for itself, especially the one on the employee side. If it did then Obama's Making Work Pay tax credits would have payed for themselves also too. The keynesian 'they will spend it' creating 'jobs' arguments are almost identical for both.

37 posted on 12/02/2011 9:11:23 AM PST by sickoflibs (Cain :"My parents didn't raise me to beg the government for other peoples money")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama

The Pubbies aren’t blocking it. What they are blocking is tax increases that the Dems are trying to tie to the “extension.”


38 posted on 12/02/2011 9:14:19 AM PST by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

Obama has distributed 3 trillion dollars WORLDWIDE since his election; there WILL BE unprecedented foreign interference in the critical swing states and counties as the benficiaries of all that aren’t idly going to stand aside and let the peons and peasants in Flyover Country get in the way of their gravy train.

Watch as the individual swing counties become publicized...and the “border patrol” is now basically on vacation...as this is what that’s about.

Track foreign influx into those counties come late October...where they will be met with “appropriate” ID papers to facilitate their voting.

http://colorlines.com/archives/2011/04/twenty-two_senators_ask_obama_to_stop_deporting_dreamers.html


39 posted on 12/02/2011 9:15:30 AM PST by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama

Nothing that haoppens in December 2011 is going to cause a win or lose for anyone.


40 posted on 12/02/2011 9:17:21 AM PST by Chandalier (You say Obama, I say O-blame-o!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VictoryGal
The republican leadership does not believe in Conservatism so they refuse to promote it or explain it... and I... like you... believe they do not even understand what Conservatism means.

LLS

41 posted on 12/02/2011 9:18:02 AM PST by LibLieSlayer ("Americans are hungry to feel once again a sense of mission and greatness." Ronaldo Magnus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
But the idea that all rich people are job creators merely by virtue of being rich is complete nonsense.

Actually, there is an element of truth in this statement, just not the way the left wing thinks. Consider all the trust fund brats and other sources of wealth and manpower for the left. Consider George Soros, Goldman Sachs and all the other big money people manipulating the puppet strings of their government servants and engaging in insider trading against all of us.

While the Koch Brothers, the favorite whipping boys of the left, actually grew rich honestly by creating goods, services and jobs which people needed, the rich of the left are mostly parasitic-- destroying jobs to amass power and seize wealth for themselves.

42 posted on 12/02/2011 9:18:02 AM PST by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama
You can’t get money from people who don’t have it.

Um, it's called an income tax for a reason. If one makes an income, one should pay income taxes.

43 posted on 12/02/2011 9:19:15 AM PST by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
Nope. They also blocked their own party's proposal to balance it with spending cuts.

This is why some people call them "The Stupid Party".

44 posted on 12/02/2011 9:42:47 AM PST by Retro Llama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
The Pubbies aren’t blocking it. What they are blocking is tax increases that the Dems are trying to tie to the “extension.”

Tying spending cuts to the extension is not a winning strategy; they should just say "we believe in people keeping what they earn" and put an un"tied" extension up for a vote.

45 posted on 12/02/2011 9:43:42 AM PST by JustSayNoToNannies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama

obama is going to win anyway.There are now more parasites than there are producers and to ensure his win, the Republican Party will see that the weakest canidate they can field will get the nomination. Either Newt or Rommney.


46 posted on 12/02/2011 9:51:38 AM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts

Most white voters will only vote once. Cannot say the same for the black voters & ACORN followers.


47 posted on 12/02/2011 9:54:04 AM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Retro Llama

Question:

If the payroll tax is cut and replaced by a millionaire’s tax, doesn’t that officially make the whole thing a welfare program and not insurance type program?

Yes, I know in truth it is a Ponzie scheme but people have screamed about their SS benefits for years because they “paid for it”.

In this case, it would truely be welfare and could fall under means testing. It won’t be too many years before you have to spend down all of your other assets before becoming elegible for SS benefits.


48 posted on 12/02/2011 10:37:31 AM PST by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NeilGus

Obozo’s best assets are Boehner and McConnell - fathers of the Supercommittee.

If Obozo’s record was the only factor, he would loose hands down. But most of his opponents are poor chess players.

Only Gingrich can checkmate him.


49 posted on 12/02/2011 11:12:11 AM PST by ZULU (Anybody but Romney or Huntsman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JustSayNoToNannies

The the Conservative thing, and also the only wise thing to do.

Private sector jobs sustain themselves, at no expense to the taxpayer. In fact those folks pay taxes. Government jobs can’t sustain themselves. They will require taxes for them to even exist. They will never be net pluses to the economy.

You know that, but you can’t say it often enough.


50 posted on 12/02/2011 11:42:16 AM PST by DoughtyOne (Romney, Newt, any chance whatsoever you might sometime pander to U.S. Citizens vs the illegals?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-75 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson