Posted on 12/21/2011 8:19:29 AM PST by Qbert
Gimme a break, the overwhelming majority of Americans don’t even have a clue about what’s transpiring at this moment in D.C. and the overwhelming majority of Americans won’t remember this “issue” in 6 months anyways, and I can guarantee you much more “important” and spectacular battles lie ahead prior to the election.
Yup. Hard to understand how people don't see how badly the politics of this is working against House Republicans. They are out on a limb with nowhere to go - and now if the payroll tax cut expires it will be blamed squarely on House Republicans. Boehner obviously thought the deal with Reid and McConnell that included Keystone would be enough to win over House Republicans. He was either wrong, or House Republicans balked under constituent pressure. Either way, it is obvious the House GOP is going to have to cave. Amazing how we turned a perceived win (getting Keystone included and removing millionaire surtax) into a giant freaking PR disaster.
SS funding was supposed to be via "contributions" ie payroll taxes. It isn't [anymore] of course - which is one thing that is important to point out. This proposed funding cut deteriorates our ability to pay benefits. Our payments were promised as a retirement safety net - of course we know the payments were absorbed by the general fund and replaced with IOUs - which btw don't by food or medicine.
All funding “for” Social Security goes into the general fund.
No, it doesn't. It goes into the Social Security Trust Fund whereby it is immediately swapped for US debt.
All funds paid out to Social Security recipients go out of the general fund.
Yes, hello... that is the point. The payments should NOT go out of the general fund. Shorting the trust fund even further simply ensures that payments will be made from the income taxes of those who actually pay them. It's another redistribution scheme. Get it?
Do you also think there is a “lockbox”?
Also believe what? And no, there is no lockbox. There is only an "escrow" for SS revenues - and they revenues are immediately [if not sooner] transferred to general fund with a debt swap. Nothing is locked at all.
Separately, who peed in your cheerios this am?
"I kind of agree with them. The Senate Republicans caved and left the House out in the cold. With the Senate gone there are only two options; let the Tax expire or agree to the two month extension. The House and Senate should have been united on this months ago with a planned strategy."
I'll agree with that.
“We all know that in the end, the cut will be extended”
Yep, and we all know it’ll be extended again in January. And that in January, just like now, the Senate Rs will cave to the Dems.
So why not do it now? Fighting for a year’s extension is better than just fighting against a “tax on the rich”.
I can understand it when Democrats support a 60 day tax cut that can't be implemented, but I am very surprised to see that it has vocal supporters on FR. Who'da thunk it.
“In January the Dems will hold all the cards and will get a tax increase “on the rich” to pay for the payroll tax cut.”
Exactly. It’s Lucy and the football all over again.
“Funny how the WSJ always brings out the long knives against Republicans anytime there’s a showdown like this in Washington.”
Well, they know how BHO/Dems will use this against us in the campaigns. It’s true. Alarming how MANY people out there are so ignorant to the facts, don’t do any research and only believe the MSM’s spin about the “do nothing (i.e., Repub) Congress” and “refusal to cooperate” by the Republicans.
There are many sides to this particular issue. On the one hand, a temporary 2-month anything is bad for businesses who need to do long-term planning. And the Dems will continue to pass BS bandaid bills, knowing the Repubs won’t go for them and thus look even worse in the public’s eyes. On the other, WHY do Repubs want a year extension of cuts in the only source (other than borrowing/printing money) of funding for Social Security? (Even Allen West is for this.) Rush was talking some about this yesterday, but I missed most of it.
So, help me out here - who’s right?
BS! The House Republicans need to stand firm on this one. They are in the right and everyone knows it, so why cave?
Any tax cut would thereby be a “funding cut” for Social Security that would deteriorate our ability to pay benefits, using that calculus.
There is not a Social Security “trust fund”. All payroll taxes go directly into the general fund and are then spent - with 3 dollars spent for every 2 dollars going in overall.
How can you “short the trust fund further” when... wait for it.... THERE IS NO TRUST FUND.
Trust fund = lock box. There isn’t either one.
Yeah, I’m convinced that a big part of the WSJ is simply part of the “establishment” GOP. In my mind, the “establishment” GOP is really not a spits worth of difference from the Democrap party. So, what does it really matter if Obama wins 2012 or Romney?
I mean, really, what has the GOP given us since Reagan? Bush Sr. (new world order, read my lips), Dole, W. (some good but overall not most conservative of those running that year), and now they want Romney. In my mind, the GOP left America’s best interests behind a long time ago and the fruits of that may come to bear in 2012.
This is total crap WSJ...Why int he hell should anything be passed when it is clearly being used as a weapon of hate. You should be telling the truth about why the dems want this...so it can appear they lead and they care when clearly they do not give a rat spit about the poor or anyone else for that matter.
The funds do not go into the general fund without a debt swap first being made. The debt and any remaining funds stay in this place that we have different names for... while the dollars then go to the general fund.
Do you see that by shorting the funds that are intended to be used to pay SS benefits requires that an increased amount will be required to be pulled from other source [ie our income taxes]?
Do you see that income taxes are having to be taken from income tax payers at an accelerated pace due to this cut in SS funding?
And for the last time, THERE IS NO LOCK BOX!
“PR disaster”
Made me think: if the Party’s positions were reversed the media would frame this as a battle between a group fighting for a full extension of the cut and a group fighting for a vacation.
Seriously though, what advantage do you see in doing this again in January?
I think Ron Paul is a loon. I mean a total, whackjob loon, and I would vote for him over Obama.
“And why aren’t the Republicans screaming about how Obama is taking funds from social security~!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! with this ‘tax cut’ Geez Boehner is stupid if he can’t bat this one out of the park. Would someone please give him a clue? Or please vote him out of office of Speaker.”
I would agree except then why are the House Repubs wanting an even longer funding cut in SS?
As far as Boehner, he’s damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t. What did everyone here think of his interview on MTP?
“The WSJ is right. Nothing good could possibly come from refusing to pass the extension.”
The WSJ is wrong. Nothing bad could possibly come from refusing to pass the extension.
B.S. The socialists/totalitarians need to have a monkey wrench thrown into all their works at any and every level. About throwing the election to BARACK the TOTALITARIAN. the BIG GOVERNMENT/BIG ELEPHANT in the room is SCOTUS 2012 ruling on Hillarycare, Romneycare, Obamacare, TOTALITARIANcare.
There is no “trust fund” as you would have it, or a “lockbox” as Gore would describe it.
OMG! I might be short on Social Security payments that I never thought would ever come through for me in the first place! Stop the presses! THAT is certainly an inducement to continue paying payroll taxes at a high rate - because otherwise they might stop paying out Social Security that I never wanted, and will almost certainly never receive!
Et Tu WSJ?
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.