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is no evidence that the tax cuts of the George W. Bush administration created any jobs, so even if they were fully repealed there is no reason to think any jobs would be lost....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 ...
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?
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.
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.
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.
???
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.
95% of the Black vote could be counteracted tenfold by 70% of the White vote.
Tax the looters.
The former, of course - which is why supporting the payroll tax cut is the conservative thing to do.
???
??? ?
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.
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.
How do you tax and collect from people that either don’t pay or can’t pay taxes?
Or just cut off their benefits.
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.
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.
The Pubbies aren’t blocking it. What they are blocking is tax increases that the Dems are trying to tie to the “extension.”
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
Nothing that haoppens in December 2011 is going to cause a win or lose for anyone.
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.