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

Skip to comments.

The GOP Political Establishment Fiscal Cliff Sellout
Chris Adamo.Com ^ | January 2, 2013 | Chris Adamo

Posted on 01/07/2013 8:36:44 AM PST by IbJensen

Apparently Republican career politicians inside the Beltway have a collective death wish. Faced with what they believed to be political impasse, they opted to completely abandon their conservative base and give their full support to the abhorrent and fiscally reckless policies of Barack Obama and the Democrats. Of course Republicans would argue that since Obama won reelection in November, they must acquiesce to his uncontested leadership. Sadly, they give no thought to the possibility that perhaps it is their constant inexcusable capitulation to the liberal establishment which has, more than any other factor, empowered the left as the dominant political force in Washington.

The grim reality of the nation’s current financial debacle is that each and every year the government spends in excess of a trillion dollars more than it can afford. And while deficits have been a fact of life since the nation’s founding, the current levels are unsustainable, and portend an eventual economic implosion if the situation is not shortly corrected. But rather than addressing the real needs of the nation, and weighing them against its inability to continue operating on the current basis, liberal politicians see an opportunity to bolster their dominance in Washington by promising even larger handouts to favored constituencies.

Such reprehensible behavior by Democrats reveals a complete abandonment of their constitutional responsibilities, and should result in thorough censure from the right. To the ongoing shock and dismay of the conservative grassroots, nobody in the Republican “leadership” appears willing to carry that torch. Hence, liberals continue their devastation of the nation’s finances with total impunity for their corrupt actions. In fact they publicly laud themselves as the saviors of Middle America while they systematically plunder it.

Such blatant and shameless liberal propagandizing, makes it difficult to comprehend the actuality of the “fiscal cliff” situation. Yet for that very reason, the present degree of distortion and misrepresentation needs to be addressed by recalling the original premise of this whole debate, and holding to account everyone on both sides of the aisle who have allowed it to be so flagrantly distorted.

Throughout 2009 and 2010, as Americans grew increasingly concerned with the profligate squandering of the nation’s resources by the Obama Administration, the people demanded that his reins be tightened before he was able to completely bankrupt the country. In 2011, with the nation approaching its $14.3 trillion debt limit, mechanisms were ostensibly put in place to ensure that the criminally irresponsible spending spree would be brought into line. The imaginary “fix” to which Republicans agreed mandated federal spending cuts in exchange for Republican relaxation of the debt limit. This was the essence of naive GOP expectations for good faith Democrat reciprocation when Republicans caved on that occasion.

Now, with the arrival of that deadline, congressional Republicans are amazed to find themselves once again on the defensive, facing an intransigent Obama White House and blind partisanship in the Democrat controlled Senate. Instead of sincerely addressing the raging excesses of government spending, Obama continually upped the ante, imposing tax hikes that will punish the so-called “rich” (his most disfavored constituency) while bolstering his redistributionist schemes for those who worship at the altar of “the state.”

In his latest exhibition of brazen fraud, Obama advances a statist ploy as his “fix,” while challenging his critics to “do the math.” However, even a cursory examination of the numbers inarguably proves that he and his cabal of political supporters are in no way interested in factual accounting. The advancement of their anti-capitalist agenda is simply too important to be bothered with the inconveniences of reality.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the bogusly named “American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012” contains $600 billion in tax increases, while conceding a mere $15 billion in “cuts.” Even if these figures were genuine, they would represent a fiscal atrocity. Yet even the occasional mention of reducing expenditures is once again only a cruel mirage. Liberals regularly “cut” their financial outlays by initially proposing deliberately inflated numbers, and then claiming to do some token “trimming” of those amounts.

With deficits projected to exceed four trillion dollars in the next ten years (a number that will be vastly exceeded), absolutely no effort to reduce the depredation of America’s pocketbooks will be attempted. In short, from both sides of the aisle, Washington disclosed an intention to continue its rapacious spending, with no end in sight.

Not surprisingly, House and Senate Democrats jubilantly supported Obama’s sinister plan, exhibiting callous indifference to the collateral damage it inflicts on our once-great nation. Just as abhorrently however, the Republican acquiescence and compliance that ultimately made it a reality constitutes a wholesale betrayal of the American people. The seditious strategy of the Obama Administration and its leftist collaborators is based on the perpetual expansion of the government and a relentless encroachment on the private citizenry. Yet Republicans abetted this effort. No longer is either side of the political aisle concerned with steering the nation away from the true fiscal pitfall that it faces on account of its inexorable lurch into socialism.

Many among the conservative punditry claim that Obama will enjoy a significant political windfall from this debacle since the Republicans, by abandoning their core principle of opposing tax increases, are once again alienating their conservative base. However, to any who have observed flailing attempts by the philosophically bankrupt GOP Establishment to posture and pander its way into a position of leadership, this latest treachery comes as no surprise. With the exception of a few conservative stalwarts in its midst (many of whom Speaker Boehner vindictively purged from leading positions) the core of the Republican Party inside Washington is made up of morally and ethically rudderless political players.

Real conservatism has too often been squandered, even after such significant grassroots victories as the 2010 mid-term elections, because its key players were persuaded to align themselves with those they believed kindred in the GOP. In the wake of the “fiscal cliff” fiasco, and the needless and cowardly Republican acquiescence to Barack Obama, it has become painfully clear that conservatism must be unabashedly established and advanced as its own force for societal change if it is ever again to be taken seriously in the political world.

The primary stronghold of liberalism lies within the modern Republican Party. Until it is dismantled, attempting to turn the tide on the leftist onslaught will prove an exercise in futility.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 112th; fiscalcliff; nocompetitionforbho; republicrats; wimps
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-79 next last
One can only wonder if the Republicans will grow a backbone? Will they come to realize that you can't deal with a narcissistic, sociopathic, marxist enemy of America!

They have to truly fight to save the nation, not continue 'reaching across the aisle' to grope at the left. Any groping of these sycophantic morons is beyond disgusting. Rather it's belly-wrenching puking to even consider bi-partisanship! It should be removed from their vocabulary and the realization sink in that they're dealing with satan's disciples and their constituent's bitter enemies.

1 posted on 01/07/2013 8:36:55 AM PST by IbJensen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: IbJensen
Conservatives need to quit enabling bad behavior by the GOP. When conservatives vote for GOP liberals, that's enabling.

Take votes away from the GOP.

/johnny

2 posted on 01/07/2013 8:41:58 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Americans want big government and don’t want to cut spending. If you don’t believe me, pick out the most conservative area you can think of and see what happens when you propose cutting some program that would affect them. They, and their representatives, will howl as loudly as any liberal would about losing their pork.


3 posted on 01/07/2013 8:43:28 AM PST by Pining_4_TX (All those who were appointed to eternal life believed. Acts 13:48)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen
RE :"According to the Congressional Budget Office, the bogusly named “American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012” contains $600 billion in tax increases, while conceding a mere $15 billion in “cuts.

Another lie, all the tax rates were going up if this wasnt passed (or plan B) as the two year extension ended.

In the case of this latest deal it wasnt just O who painted Bohner in a corner.
The ‘we don’t want nuthin passed into law’ R caucus in the House joined Dems in rejecting plan B, and that plan would would have keep even more of the taxes from going up than the final bill without the added spending.

It didnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that Bohner would not block partial tax cut extensions from being passed into law to keep most voters from getting a income tax increase.

I was posting here in November he would not take the blame for all those taxes going up, and I noticed no one challenged him to be Speaker themselves. Once they killed plan B Bohner said he will put a Senate passed extension up for a vote and he did.

4 posted on 01/07/2013 8:49:11 AM PST by sickoflibs (Fight like Dems, fight to win !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

The FC deal was excellent achievement. Without it, ALL TAX BRACKETS would have lost Bush tax cuts.

When democraps own the WH & Senate, and GOP has a mere 12 member advantage in House, to think that GOP could over power the democraps and get everything they wanted is totally unrealistic.

Now Bush tax rates are permanent which is much better than the deal Bush got which had an expiration date. With an expiration date, the democraps can simply let them expire, and no one in MSM will call it a tax hike.

With a permanent rate, the congress will have to actually produce a TAX HIKE bill. It can’t be hidden from the voters. That is a big difference.

As for the payroll tax, it was a TEMPORARY holiday. It had an expiration date. And it expired.

Even better in the FC deal is the PERMANENT rates of 15% on Dividends and Capital Gains. That is a superior gift to any one who has lead a disciplined spending pattern and accumulated a viable 401-k, and also the seniors who own lion’s share of the stock market.

So my kudos to McConnell for getting the Chicago community organizer to accept increase death tax threshold to $5-10 Million from the $1 Million threshold sans the FC bill.


5 posted on 01/07/2013 8:50:19 AM PST by entropy12 (The republic is doomed when people figure out they can get free stuff by voting democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

I been making similar points, the opposition to the better plan B was all based on a lie : That taxes would not of went up if the House blocked anything from passing.

So the argument was dishonest from the start.

So now they are complaining that this passed Senate bill didnt have enough budget cuts, so Bohner was supposed to block tax cut extensions and ensure all the Bush rates went up because it was missing spending cuts?

Is this the argument?


6 posted on 01/07/2013 9:03:31 AM PST by sickoflibs (Fight like Dems, fight to win !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Many have been bred-conditioned (brain-washed propagandized) into believing “Bush Rates” are a good thing.

With this facade (another government bailout), price on essentials, food, gas, autos, housing, etc., stay high, and thus MORE out of the paycheck comes out.

The market would have down 400> points, and prices would have started down. Now instead of of the paycheck going farther, it continues to go less to where it should due to fed paychecks driving up the prices on everything.

You don’t “save a ton of money”, by the paycheck not going as far. The standard of living continues to fall. along with the “brainwashing” that zero down brings ownership (in reality bank rent) of vehicle. Brainwashing.


7 posted on 01/07/2013 9:09:45 AM PST by Varsity Flight (Extortion-Care is the Government Work-Camp: Arbeitsziehungslager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: entropy12
As for the payroll tax, it was a TEMPORARY holiday. It had an expiration date. And it expired....Even better in the FC deal is the PERMANENT rates of 15% on Dividends and Capital Gains.

There is no such thing a PERMANENT as far as taxes are concerned. Future Congresses are not bound by such agreements. These tax rates have no sunset clause, which doesn't make them PERMANENT.

The dividend and capital gains rates were raised on the so-called rich. Specifically,

Capital gains tax and dividends tax will be 20 percent for taxpayers with income over $400,000 (single) and $450,000 (joint filers). This does not include the new 3.8 percent health care tax on investment income above $200,000 (single) and $250,000 (joint filers) in adjusted gross income, so the top rate for capital gains and dividends will be 23.8 percent. For lower income levels, the tax will be 0 percent, 15 percent, or 18.8 percent.

This "excellent achievement" included:

Raises estate and gift tax to 40 percent, but above the current exemption level (~$5.12 million) and adjusted for inflation in future years.

Extends emergency unemployment compensation (EUC) and extended benefits (EB) unemployment insurance program through January 1, 2014.

Postpones sequester by two months; will now occur on March 27, 2013 (same day as the continuing resolution expires)

Phases out personal exemptions (PEP) for adjusted gross income over $250,000 (single), $275,000 (head of household) and $300,000 (joint filers).

Limits itemized deductions (Pease) for adjusted gross income over $250,000 (single), $275,000 (head of household) and $300,000 (joint filers)

The Reps created this crisis by agreeing to just extending the Bush tax cuts for two years after the 2010 midterms and signing on to the WH sequestration trap in 2011. The Reps are getting outsmarted in every deal. We need to examine the 157 page Fiscal Cliff deal closely. I bet there are other surprises including the pork that was also included in the deal.

8 posted on 01/07/2013 9:16:10 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

I have seen your posts and yes, you have made rational comments. Most criticizers of the FC bill make blanket statements with NOTHING CONCRETE item by item refutation of the bill. So it is just hot air, and nothing substantive or realistic.


9 posted on 01/07/2013 9:19:48 AM PST by entropy12 (The republic is doomed when people figure out they can get free stuff by voting democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen; All
One can only wonder if the Republicans will grow a backbone? Will they come to realize that you can't deal with a narcissistic, sociopathic, marxist enemy of America!

Neither Obama or the Republicans are the main problem with the nation imo. The problem with the country is hypocritical "patriots" who complain that Obama isn't respecting the Constituton, patriots themselves evidently not taking the initiative to learn the Constitution and its history.

In fact, if voters were to get up to speed on about two pages worth of constitutional statutes and case precedents, then they could arguably close down the unconstitutionally big federal government overnight. Patriots need to get up to speed on the Constitution's Section 8 of Article I, Article V, the 10th Amendment and also Justice John Marshall's clarification that Congress is prohibited from laying taxes in the name of state power issues, issues which Congress has no Section 8 authority to address.

"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." --Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
And let Judge Andrew Napolitanto read Section 8 of Article I to you.
Judge Napolitano & the Constitution
In their wildest imagination, the drafters of the Constitution evidently didn't foresee that the best idea of the pursuit of happiness for many citizens would be to complain about tyrannical government, today's problems with unconstitutionally big federal government evidence that the part of the Constitution following the happiness clause was not worth the effort to write.
10 posted on 01/07/2013 9:21:14 AM PST by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kabar

Yes, only death and taxes are permanent.

However even a superficial intellect can see the difference between a taxcut which HAS AN EXPIRATION DATE and on which DOES NOT.

With an expiration date, congress has to do NOTHING and it expires. With a permanent taxcut, the congress HAS TO ACTUALLY WRITE A TAX INCREASE BILL and get it passed in both houses and signed by the president.

If one can’t see the difference, there is nothing any one can do to educate them.

However I will accede to you that the FC bill protects only MIDDLE CLASS tax payers (under $400-450k). The richer folks have gone back upto Clinton era tax rates. So I will take 98% of tax payers getting tax relief over none.


11 posted on 01/07/2013 9:25:49 AM PST by entropy12 (The republic is doomed when people figure out they can get free stuff by voting democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kabar

I can’t emphasize enough the benefits of extending the death tax threshold. Without the FC bill, every estate would be taxed at 55% over $1 Million. That was written into law signed by Bush-43.

With the $10 million threshold, innumerable small businesses will not close down when the owner expires.


12 posted on 01/07/2013 9:31:21 AM PST by entropy12 (The republic is doomed when people figure out they can get free stuff by voting democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: entropy12; mike_9958; IbJensen
RE :”I have seen your posts and yes, you have made rational comments. Most criticizers of the FC bill make blanket statements with NOTHING CONCRETE item by item refutation of the bill. So it is just hot air, and nothing substantive or realistic.”

I am no Bohner fan but I don't tolerate dishonesty.

Bohner was put in a completely impossible position on this, one where he nor any other Speaker would have had a chance to win due to how success/failure was defined(success=forcing Reid and O to extend all tax rates by the threat of having no tax cut extensions in law) , and to make it sound rational the lie was repeated that this bill raised taxes.

Keep in mind that O/Dems repeated this, as as Rush and his talk radio lackeys, are and the MSM does it too. Why would they all together set the goal posts for GOP victory completely out of reach, so they are certain to fail?

Rush just now called this bill a tax increase that Rs went along with while throwing away core beliefs(???) in the process, and then he admitted the Bush tax cuts were temporary, all within 3 minutes.

I think no one does not know the truth. Even Rush fans repeating this know.

13 posted on 01/07/2013 9:37:32 AM PST by sickoflibs (Fight like Dems, fight to win !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen
The primary stronghold of liberalism lies within the modern Republican Party. Until it is dismantled, attempting to turn the tide on the leftist onslaught will prove an exercise in futility.

That pretty well sums up our predicament. It will not get better until we recognize that stupidity alone can not account for the GOPe actions.

14 posted on 01/07/2013 9:45:13 AM PST by itsahoot (Any enemy, that is allowed to have a King's X line, is undefeatable. (USS Taluga AO-62))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: entropy12
However even a superficial intellect can see the difference between a taxcut which HAS AN EXPIRATION DATE and on which DOES NOT.

Only a superficial intellect could call any tax rate PERMANENT. I can understand why the Reps would want to point to this as some sort of accomplishment. In point of fact, Obama will get the credit for this since the Reps in the House voted two to one against approval of the bill.

With an expiration date, congress has to do NOTHING and it expires. With a permanent taxcut, the congress HAS TO ACTUALLY WRITE A TAX INCREASE BILL and get it passed in both houses and signed by the president. If one can’t see the difference, there is nothing any one can do to educate them.

If the Dems are successful in winning the House back in 2014 then they will have all they need to readjust the tax rates any way they want in 2015. Obama and the Dems have this in mind as they have successfully divided the Reps and got many of them to agree to vote for an increase in the tax rates for the so-called rich, many of them small businesses. It is just another "Read my lips" moment for the Reps, aka The Stupid Party.,

However I will accede to you that the FC bill protects only MIDDLE CLASS tax payers (under $400-450k). The richer folks have gone back upto Clinton era tax rates. So I will take 98% of tax payers getting tax relief over none.

LOL. So all the BS Romney and the Reps put out about raising the taxes on the rich would hurt small businesses costing over 700,000 jobs is just mere blather? And the taxes did go up on the MIDDLE CLASS with the failure to renew the payroll tax holiday. 80% of American income earners pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes. The Dems are already blaming the Reps for this.

The Dems are not finished with the tax issue. They will be pushing to "close tax loopholes" and other benefit that allow the rich and corporations to escape paying their "fair share." The Reps will still be portrayed as protecting the rich. It is all part of the narrative leading up to the 2014 midterms. Add to this the bad old Reps trying to cut the entitlement programs and you have the very real possibility of the Dems winning the House in 2014.

15 posted on 01/07/2013 10:06:53 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
I think no one does not know the truth. Even Rush fans repeating this know.

is spending now greater than it was?
Is revenue now greater than it was?

Well yes but it would have been much worse. </sarcasm>

Tax rates are all temporary unless it is a temporary tax then it is forever.

16 posted on 01/07/2013 10:13:47 AM PST by itsahoot (Any enemy, that is allowed to have a King's X line, is undefeatable. (USS Taluga AO-62))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot; entropy12; mike_9958
RE :”Is revenue now greater than it was?....Tax rates are all temporary unless it is a temporary tax then it is forever.”

On January 1 all the tax rates went back to Clinton levels and this bill (passed Jan 2) pushed them back down to Bush levels for 99% So they went down not up

Those arguing that the bill raised taxes were lying, it was a tax cut.

RE: "Well yes but it would have been much worse. "

The 'dont pass nuthin into law' crowd got their way for 1 day and yes it was much worse, all taxes were are Clinton rates. That is where blocking this bill would of left them. This bill lowered them.

Rush just wanted all our taxes to go up because his did. So he called up down and down up as Gore would put it,.

17 posted on 01/07/2013 10:33:03 AM PST by sickoflibs (Fight like Dems, fight to win !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot
RE :”is spending now greater than it was?”

Plan B didnt include that spending and it cuts taxes even more than this Senate bill did.

But no, the ‘dont pass nuthin into law’ crowd rejected that plan B (joining Pelosi yet) resulting in a much crappier deal’ So what did they win us?

I noticed none of them ran for Speaker either

18 posted on 01/07/2013 10:41:15 AM PST by sickoflibs (Fight like Dems, fight to win !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Amendment10

There is no “off” switch to the beast on the Potomac.

As Paine pointed out, tyranny is not easily defeated.


19 posted on 01/07/2013 10:46:58 AM PST by Psalm 144 (Capitol to the districts: "May the odds be ever in your favor.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

“It will not get better until we recognize that stupidity alone can not account for the GOPe actions.”

Agreed. Stupidity gets some things right every once in a while if only by accident. To consistently do wrong is complicity.


20 posted on 01/07/2013 10:50:26 AM PST by Psalm 144 (Capitol to the districts: "May the odds be ever in your favor.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot; entropy12; mike_9958

The other way to look at it is, the taxes on income over $400K went up automatically per the extension law passed in late 2010, so this bill did not raise them as it left them as if it was never passed. It did nothing to those rates.


21 posted on 01/07/2013 11:02:02 AM PST by sickoflibs (Fight like Dems, fight to win !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144; All
There is no “off” switch to the beast on the Potomac.

I agree that there is no practical off switch to tyranny. However, I think that we can sill learn from our mistakes with respect to stifling tyranny.

22 posted on 01/07/2013 11:19:10 AM PST by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: kabar

First of all keep at at top of your thinking....WE LOST THE ELECTION. Elections have consequences. GOP numbers went DOWN not up. If all GOP members walked out on the FC bill as you want....guess what happens? WE ALL GO UP TO CLINTON TAX RATES. The Bush tax cuts had an EXPIRATION DATE built in. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

Of course I know no law is permanent. But can you comprehend the simple concept that a tax cut law which has an EXPIRATION date is much easier to get rid of than a tax cut law which has NO EXPIRATION dates as stipulated in the FC bill? If you can’t grasp that simple fact I am afraid there is nothing I can say to you.


23 posted on 01/07/2013 3:15:39 PM PST by entropy12 (The republic is doomed when people figure out they can get free stuff by voting democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: entropy12
First of all keep at at top of your thinking....WE LOST THE ELECTION. Elections have consequences. GOP numbers went DOWN not up.

It was a status quo election. The GOP retained control of the House. Obama won with just 51% of the vote--less than he received in 2008 in terms of both votes and percentage. Romney received more votes than McCain. It was certainly not a mandate for Obama's policies.

If the GOP thinks they lost, then they behave like losers. I can remember when the Reps controlled Congress and the WH. The Dems still acted like they were the majority party. If the GOP is afraid to exercise the power it does have, then what does it matter if we control the House?

WE ALL GO UP TO CLINTON TAX RATES. The Bush tax cuts had an EXPIRATION DATE built in. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

What is hard to understand is why the GOP agreed in 2001 and 2003 to include a sunset provision in the bill. No doubt the Dems influenced that decision by playing hardball even though they were the minority party.

And cut the smarmy, condescending crap. I understand that the law contained a sunset provision--another GOP mistake. The GOP should have just let the taxes go up on everyone. It could have been a teachable momement for the nation, which would have more skin in the game as to why our spending is out of control. When almost 50% of Americans pay no income tax and the top 1% pay 38%, there is an issue of fairness and the inability to make a small segment of our population carry the costs of the welfare state, which is unsustainable.

Right now, the majority of the American people want the rich to pay more if you believe the polls. And Obama is just getting started on increasing taxes on the rich. We are going to have this fight and the sooner the better. If the Clinton tax rates were so great and contributed to increased prosperity, then let's return to them for everyone not just the 1%.

24 posted on 01/07/2013 3:59:32 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Plan B had absolutely no chance of passing the Senate. Reid said he wouldn’t even schedule it for a vote. It was DOA. The House had already passed bills covering the extension of the Bush era tax rates and an alternative to sequestration. The Senate just ignored them.


25 posted on 01/07/2013 4:04:58 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
So they went down not up

Not going up is not the same as going down. Circular logic is no logic at all.

You are beginning to sound like a paid shill for Boehner.

26 posted on 01/07/2013 5:07:39 PM PST by itsahoot (Any enemy, that is allowed to have a King's X line, is undefeatable. (USS Taluga AO-62))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot
RE :” So they went down not up
.....
You are beginning to sound like a paid shill for Boehner. “

The tax bill lowered 99% from the higher Clinton rates to the lower Bush rates. The 1% stayed the same which is why Rush is livid that Bohner didnt make sure all our taxes stayed at the higher Clinton rates, livid because he didnt get the Bush tax cut this time round.

Who-ever programs you forgot to tell you they all went up Jan 1 with no bill signed into law and this cut them Jan 2.

It sounds like you believe everything Rush says even if it makes no sense at all, here is some of his past wisdom predicting that Mccain then Romney would easily beat O.

Talk radio giant Rush Limbaugh says that Sen. John McCain will score a stunning upset over Sen. Barack Obama and win the presidency on Nov. 4
[Rush] Limbaugh Predicts McCain Victory (NewsMax ^ | October 31, 2008 | David A. Patten, FR thread link )

I almost forgot this one :
We Could See a McCain Landslide (Rushlimbaugh.com, August 12, 2008)

“The enthusiasm that got people out in 2010, I'm seeing at every Mitt Romney rally. Romney's drawing crowds of 20,000, 25,000, 30,000, 15,000. “The enthusiasm that we all saw in 2010 is there. The same issues that existed in 2010 exist today. There hasn't been anything that's gotten better.”
Rush: Everything But Polls Say Romney Landslide (Newmake Monday, 05 Nov 2012)

Ignore the polls saying Obama is winning Rush Limbaugh Says, Swing State Polls Are Bogus! (video posted 9/26/2012 )

Don't Doubt me’ LOL

27 posted on 01/07/2013 7:30:44 PM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to O is NOT a principle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: kabar
RE :”Plan B had absolutely no chance of passing the Senate. Reid said he wouldn’t even schedule it for a vote. It was DOA.”

Reid opposed it, Pelosi opposed it and Obama opposed it but more important those on the R side who objects to this final not as good Senate bill opposed it too.

Bohner was smart to bring that bill out, he smoked out those on the R side (the ‘don't pass nuthin into law caucus’) who only wanted all the taxes to go back the Clinton rates because they couldnt get 100% and would later claim it was the additional spending not in plan B, etc, was why the final bill was bad.

It was amazing, they opposed a 99% tax cut and demanded that Bohner hold out for 0% tax cut instead, which of course no Speaker would do.

The repeals of O-care went no where but these same folks voted for 33 of them, its make transparent excuses time with that one too.

28 posted on 01/07/2013 7:42:13 PM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to O is NOT a principle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
Bohner was smart to bring that bill out, he smoked out those on the R side (the ‘don't pass nuthin into law caucus’) who only wanted all the taxes to go back the Clinton rates because they couldnt get 100% and would later claim it was the additional spending not in plan B, etc, was why the final bill was bad.

Boehner is incompetent. He squandered his negotiating position after the historic 2010 mid terms and allowed the extension of the Bush tax cuts for just two years instead of making them permanent. And the agreement with the WH on the sequestration bill was just another example of being outsmarted by the WH.

Obama pushed on the raising of the rates on the rich as a means to divide and destroy the GOP. He was successful. What came out of the senate and passed by the House had more Dem votes than Reps. In the House, almost twice as many Reps voted against it as for it.

It was amazing, they opposed a 99% tax cut and demanded that Bohner hold out for 0% tax cut instead, which of course no Speaker would do.

No speaker would bring a bill up for a vote when the overwhelming majority of his party was against it. This 156 page monstrosity filled with pork is just another example of Reps surrendering when the rubber hits the road. It was a bad bill that could wind up costing hundreds of thousands of jobs and it will add to our debt and deficit.

Oh, and by the way, 77 million Americans will see their tax bills go up as the payroll tax holiday was ended after two years. Since 80% of Americans pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes, this is significant, and the Reps will be blamed.

Next up are the battles over the debt ceiling, sequestration, and the CR. The Reps will lose everyone and they will be blamed by Obama and the Dems for trying to cut SS and Medicare benefits. This will set the stage for the 2014 midterms with the Reps having voting for increased taxes, cutting the military, and surrendering on the CR so as not to shut down the government. And the GOP base will question why it is even desireable to have the Reps in control of the House. I can assure you that the Tea Party has noted who voted for the fiscal cliff monstrosity and will go after them in the primaries. We have failed to cut spending by one cent and instead, have increased spending.

The repeals of O-care went no where but these same folks voted for 33 of them, its make transparent excuses time with that one too.

What is wrong with getting your opponents on record on Obamacare? The majority of voters are still against it and now that the taxes and penalties are kicking in, some of the pain will now be felt. And the costs of Obamacare will soar as the Dems passed the Doc fix again in the fiscal cliff bill. The so-called savings of $716 billion in Medicare will never happen, which means that they will not be able to offset the trillion plus costs of Obamacare.

So when do you want the GOP to fight against Obama and his trillion dollar a year annual deficits that will bankrupt and destroy this country? We have been told it was useless to fight the fiscal cliff deal since the GOP would be blamed for raising taxes. We are now told that fighting against the increase in the debt ceiling is the wrong fight and will hurt the country with disastrous consequences. Will the Reps come up with a deal on sequestration to avoid military cuts that includes increased taxes/revenue? And will the GOP risk shutting down the government by not passing a CR?

29 posted on 01/07/2013 9:33:54 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: kabar
What is hard to understand is why the GOP agreed in 2001 and 2003 to include a sunset provision in the bill. No doubt the Dems influenced that decision by playing hardball even though they were the minority party.

On that I have no argument. GOP needs to play more hardball, that is for sure. But can't go back and change history. I am surprised the democrats did not just let the Bush tax cuts expire. Because the MSM would not have held them accountable for the resulting tax increases in any shape or form.

I still think the FC deal was as good as could be negotiated at this time. The GOP had no leverage to extract any more. It is a big f...ing deal for investors and savers to get the 15% tax rate good until changed by congress, for all middle class and upper middle class. The rich got screwed but as you said, that is what is polling as popular.

On the issue of tax increases on rich, I am firmly convinced any tax increase on any one is never good for the economy. Now if only we can convince the under-informed voters... On a final note, no offense of any kind intended. We are fighting for the same cause. My hope is our next nominee in 2016 will be the best communicator there is, because by golly we need one.

30 posted on 01/07/2013 10:23:29 PM PST by entropy12 (The republic is doomed when people figure out they can get free stuff by voting democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: kabar
RE :”Boehner is incompetent. He squandered his negotiating position after the historic 2010 mid terms and allowed the extension of the Bush tax cuts for just two years instead of making them permanent”

Bohner is weak no doubt but I couldnt help notice that none of fwightened Wabbits in the ‘nont pass nuthin crowd’ would stand up and run against him. For weeks before the vote I challenged freepers to call their favorite fwightened wabbit and plead with him to run

The idea that Obama was going to give in and get Reid to extend all the tax cuts, when he ran against that and won, and he knew Bohner would get the blame for everyones taxes going up , is ridiculus. This is why none of the fwightened wabbits who opposed plan B ran for Speaker.

The path you demanded he take was a GOP death wish, raising everyones taxes just out of spite because a few were going up.

31 posted on 01/08/2013 4:55:47 AM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to O is NOT a principle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: kabar
RE :”No speaker would bring a bill up for a vote when the overwhelming majority of his party was against it. This 156 page monstrosity filled with pork is just another example of Reps surrendering when the rubber hits the road.”

That was a direct result of rejecting plan B which had no such pork. And plan B showed it was not about the pork, the fwightened wabbit caucus was against a partial extension of our tax cuts even with no pork, they were told to hold out till all taxes go up.
Who could be so delusional to believe that Bohner was just going to walk away after plan B and let himself be bplamed for all taxes going up??

Bohner is weak for sure.
Pelosi would have called in the fwightened wabbits one by one and told them they work for her and better get on ‘the team’ (against Rs) or they would be using crutches.
That is how she got bills through. Sheer terror.
Bohner is weak, he wants to be Mr Nice guy and you see how that pays off.

Pelosi is a real fighter and is there for one purpose, to win and beat Rs and she doesnt tolerate personal agendas that help the other side beat her, as Bohner does.

But as I said, the fwightened wabbit caucus wouldnt run against him to be speaker themselves, they vote their symbolic Nos and then go on FNC and brag about their meaningless votes.

32 posted on 01/08/2013 5:09:57 AM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to O is NOT a principle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: entropy12
I still think the FC deal was as good as could be negotiated at this time.

Sometimes no deal is better than a bad deal. That was the case in this instance. The bill will increase our debt and deficit and lose jobs. The Reps signaled from the very beginning that it did not want to jump off the fiscal cliff. It was their bottomline.

On the other hand, Obama gave every indication he would if he did not get what he wanted, i.e., increased taxes on the "rich." The objective was not increased revenue, but rather to humiliate and divide the GOP base. Obama was successful and it will pay dividends in 2014.

If the Reps had been true to its principles and committed to the long term fiscal well-being of the country, it should have gone off the cliff or at least expressed a willingness to do so if they got a bad deal. They chose the 156 page bad deal that will damage this nation even further while increasing spending and rewarding with pork Obama's allies whether it was in Hollywood or in the corporate world.

My hope is our next nominee in 2016 will be the best communicator there is, because by golly we need one.

The GOP is deluded if they think the problem was a failure to communicate our message. The majority of voters just isn't buying the message. The fact is that we have reached a tipping point demographically and politically. The Dems proved in 2012 election with the reelection of a failed President that the laws of normal political gravity no longer work. A culture of dependency and a growing minority vote guarantees that the Dems will keep the WH in 2016, no doubt with Hillary who will be our first woman President in another "historic" election. Demography is destiny.

33 posted on 01/08/2013 7:42:07 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
The idea that Obama was going to give in and get Reid to extend all the tax cuts, when he ran against that and won, and he knew Bohner[sic] would get the blame for everyones taxes going up , is ridiculus [sic].

No one had that idea that I am aware of. The problem was that Boehner indicated from the very start that his primary and virtually sole objective was not to go over the fiscal cliff. Obama, on the other hand, had no such compunction or limitation. Anyone who negotiates like Boehner is sure to lose. The Reps should have said that they would go over the fiscal cliff if they were offered a bad deal that increased taxes and the deficit and hurt the economy.

Going over the cliff was not an option for Boehner because he was afraid that the GOP would be blamed. He should have used it as an opportunity to start a national dialogue on our long term fiscal problems. With the Clinton tax rates reinstalled for everyone, the public's attention would be more focussed. Instead, we have a 156 page monstrosity that makes our fiscal problems worse and still damages the GOP who will be blamed for allowing the payroll tax holiday to lapse and for seeking cuts to SS and Medicare.

The path you demanded he take was a GOP death wish, raising everyones taxes just out of spite because a few were going up.

Out of spite? First taxes went up on virtually everyone with the end of the payroll tax holiday. Yes there were cuts in taxes for Hollywood, wind energy producers, algae growers, etc., but this was a bad deal that will hurt the economy, increase the debt and deficit, and lose jobs.

Two out of every three Reps in the House voted AGAINST this bill. It was a bad deal for anyone who understands what was in this pork laden 156 page bill. It will be an albatross around the necks of the Reps in 2014.

With the fiscal cliff deal and many Obamacare taxes taking effect, Americans will be slammed with an estimated $264 billion in new taxes this year alone — making 2013 memorable for delivering one of the largest one-year tax increases in American history.

"Moody’s chief economist Mark Zandi issued a projection that the tax burden will cut GDP growth by three-quarters of 1 percent, causing the creation of 600,000 fewer jobs in 2013. But the general consensus among economists is that the impact will be much worse – about a 1.5 percent loss of GDP growth. Such a serious dip could push an already lackluster economy close to the brink of actual contraction.

Question: Why do continuously misspell Boehner's name? Is it on purpose?

34 posted on 01/08/2013 8:02:14 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: kabar
RE :”First taxes went up on virtually everyone with the end of the payroll tax holiday. “

Are you joking using this as an example?
You actually wanted Boner (Is that better?) to extend the FICA/SS tax cut or make it forever?

Dec 2010/Feb 2011 House Rs were forced to extend it an additional year by O demanding they do it on TV, now you argue now NOT doing the same was a Bohner cave?

35 posted on 01/08/2013 8:10:58 AM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to O is NOT a principle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
Are you joking using this as an example? You actually wanted Boner (Is that better?) to extend the FICA/SS tax cut or make it forever?

So why did the Reps agree to it in the first place?

You are positing a false choice. There is no way that any tax cut can be made "forever," including the Bush tax cuts, which are now the Obama tax cuts. Supposedly, the rationale of implementing and extending both the Bush tax cuts and the payroll tax holiday was to not increase taxes during a period of economic weakness.

So do you favor extending the payroll tax holiday for another year or ending it?

Dec 2010/Feb 2011 House Rs were forced to extend it an additional year by O demanding they do it on TV, now you argue now NOT doing the same was a Bohner cave?

Most Reps were on-board with the payroll tax holiday, which was just another stimulus using SS as a vehicle. It costs over $130 billion a year. I was against it then and against it now. And yes, Boehner caved on both SS and extending unemployment benefits. The FC deal also extended unemployment benefits again.

On Friday, Gallup released a poll gauging Americans' views of the Senate deal passed last week to avert the "fiscal cliff." Overall, Americans are mixed on the deal, with 45% disapproving and 43% approving. Among Republican voters, though, the verdict is overwhelmingly negative. 65% of Republican voters disapprove of the plan, against just 27% who support it. It's the opening salvo in the 2014 primaries.

The GOP would be well advised not to kick its base in the teeth and help the Dems pass their bills in House, which is on paper controlled by the Reps. It will be a disaster for the Reps in 2014.

36 posted on 01/08/2013 9:04:57 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: kabar
RE :”Most Reps were on-board with the payroll tax holiday, which was just another stimulus using SS as a vehicle. It costs over $130 billion a year. I was against it then and against it now. And yes, Boehner caved on both SS and extending unemployment benefits. The FC deal also extended unemployment benefits again”

Dec 2011 House Rs tried to hold out and not pass it, Reid sent the Senate Home and O got on TV accusing Rs of being for increasing middle class taxes (sound familiar.)

First House Rs (the ones that opposed plan B) claimed they would stay for Christmas till the Senate came back and agreed to some budget cuts to 'pay for it' (ironic since Rush says that talk is Marxist) then they realized it was hopeless.
Republicans gave in for the same reason they always give in, public opinion was against them.
In this case O didnt demand it anymore so it just went away by itself.

You shouldn't be using stuff Bohner did that you support like not extending this tax ‘holiday’ against him.
If you want this to go up dont list it in you grievances when Bohner wins one for you/.

37 posted on 01/08/2013 9:16:52 AM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to O is NO principle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: kabar
I found this :

Understanding Congress' payroll tax cut fight(December 22, 2011 AP/fox News)

38 posted on 01/08/2013 9:29:34 AM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to O is NO principle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
Republicans gave in for the same reason they always give in, public opinion was against them.

Which is one reason why the GOP is well on its way to being the permanent minority party. It is willing to compromise its basic principles in a futile and misguided attempt to curry public favor.

You shouldn't be using stuff Bohner did that you support like not extending this tax ‘holiday’ against him. If you want this to go up dont list it in you grievances when Bohner wins one for you/.

Boehner didn't win anything for me. Both parties didn't want to extend the payroll tax holiday. They understand what the real fiscal condition of SS is and how the tax holiday didn't do anything except increase the deficit and debt. The payroll tax holiday increased the deficit by twice the amount of the revenue raised by taxing the rich.

If Boehner had any smarts, he could have used the extension of the payroll tax against Obama and the Dems.

39 posted on 01/08/2013 9:44:54 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
Read this: The Stealth Tax Hike Why the new $450,000 income threshold is a political fiction.

"Anyone still need a reason to abandon "grand bargains" and deals negotiated between this President and GOP Congressional leaders? Here it is: The revival of two dormant provisions of the tax code means the much ballyhooed $450,000 income threshold for the highest tax rate is largely fake.

The two provisions are the infamous PEP and Pease, which aficionados of stealth tax increases will recognize immediately as relics of the 1990 tax increase. Those measures, which limit deductions and exemptions for higher-income taxpayers, expired in 2010. The Obama tax bill revived them this week. It isn't going to be pretty.

Under the new law, some of the steepest tax increases may fall on upper-middle class earners with incomes just above $250,000. Here's why:

During the negotiations, the White House won a concession from Republicans to allow phaseouts for personal exemptions and limitations on itemized deductions, starting at an income of $250,000 for individuals and $300,000 for joint filers.

The Senate Finance Committee informs us that in effect the loss of the personal exemptions, currently $3,800 per family member, can mean a 4.4 percentage point rise in the marginal tax rate for a married couple with two kids and incomes above $250,000. A family with four kids in that income range faces about a six percentage point marginal rate hike. The restored limitations on itemized deductions can raise the tax rate by another one percentage point.

40 posted on 01/08/2013 9:58:07 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
The tax bill lowered 99% from the higher Clinton rates to the lower Bush rates.

Stop it. Taxes did not go down and posting whatever you want about Rush will not change that fact.

Spending went up and so did taxes. Just because they would have went up more if they had not acted, does not equal a Tax Cut. Propaganda works better over at DU, not so well here.

Your specious argument that taxes actually went up on Jan 1, therefore the bill to keep rates in place was actually a cut.

41 posted on 01/08/2013 10:10:38 AM PST by itsahoot (Any enemy, that is allowed to have a King's X line, is undefeatable. (USS Taluga AO-62))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

The two year extension paased by the 2010 lame duck raised the taxes to Clinton rates Jan 1 2013, as did FICA from a different bill in 2011.

The Senate Bill the House passed lowered them on Jan 2 for 99% of Americans except the 1% so if Bohner listened to you we would be paying more in taxes now than we are,.

Then Republicans would be truly hated for raising everyones taxes, it would have been a lose-lose.


42 posted on 01/08/2013 10:47:10 AM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to O is NO principle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
$160 Billion Hike in Payroll Taxes. This is due to the expiration of the payroll tax “holiday,” which increases the payroll tax that helps fund Social Security from 4.2 percent to 6.2 percent. According to the Tax Policy Center, this increase will actually hit lower- and middle-income taxpayers harder, in percentage terms, than the wealthy. Commentators often say “it’s just a 2 percent increase” — it’s actually a 48 percent increase over the tax rate wage earners paid for each of the past two years.

$39.5 Billion in Income-Tax Rate Hikes. President Obama and the Democratic Senate insisted on letting the Bush tax cuts lapse on high-income earners. Such earners making more than $400,000 ($450,000 for married couples) will see their marginal income-tax rates rise from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. That shift is projected to garner $395 billion in taxes over the next 10 years. The tax affects less than 1 percent of American households — but also impacts many high-spending professionals and successful small business owners who pay taxes on the personal returns.

$15 Billion from Limiting Deductions. The new law calls for a “personal exemption phase out,” or PEP, affecting the exemptions and deductions that wealthier families can claim. It affects individual filers at $250,000, and $300,000 for joint filers. The tax bill for a couple earning $400,000 averaging about $50,000 in deductions each year will rise by about $1,000 according to a Wall Street Journal calculation.

43 posted on 01/08/2013 11:43:51 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

The cost of the new Obamacare tax hikes coming in 2013:

$21 Billion in Medicare Taxes. The healthcare law calls for a nine-tenths of 1 percent increase in the hospital-insurance (Medicare) payroll tax paid by couples earning more than $250,000 a year, or $200,000 per year for single filers.

$11 Billion from Surcharge on Capital Gains and Dividends. Married couples earning more than $250,000 per year, or single filers earning $200,000 will be slapped with a 3.8 percent surcharge in the tax rate for capital gains and dividends — in addition to the “fiscal cliff” compromise that hiked taxes on capital gains and dividends from 15 to 20 percent.

$4.5 Billion in Limiting Deductions. Obamacare eliminates corporate deductions for retirees’ prescriptions, raising tax costs to employers.

$2 Billion in Excise Fees. A 2.3 percent excise tax on manufacturers and importers of medical devices, which is expected to be passed along in higher costs to consumers.

$2 Billion in Limiting Healthcare Itemized Deductions. This reflects a reduction in the amount that middle-class families facing high medical expenses can deduct from their income taxes if they incur high medical expenses.

$1.3 Billion from Limiting Flexible Savings Accounts. A $2,500 limit will go into effect on tax-free flexible spending accounts, which employees use to help defray medical expenses.


44 posted on 01/08/2013 11:47:16 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: kabar
RE :’$160 Billion Hike in Payroll Taxes. This is due to the expiration of the payroll tax “holiday,” which increases the payroll tax that helps fund Social Security from 4.2 percent to 6.2 percent. According to the Tax Policy Center, this increase will actually hit lower- and middle-income taxpayers harder, in percentage terms, than the wealthy. Commentators often say “it’s just a 2 percent increase” — it’s actually a 48 percent increase over the tax rate wage earners paid for each of the past two years. “

For the past two years of this tax cut much of this was the SS admin was redeeming the ‘trust fund’ IOUs to the treasury at a much faster rate than before/without it. Of course the Treasury buys back the IOUs by borrowing money from the Fedearl Reserve.(Medicare does the same thing)

So the path was Federal Reserve(loans) to US Treasury to SS Admin to retired voter so Grandpa doesnt figure out his $$ is long gone.

All the while both parties been saying SS adds nothing to the national debt even though it $$$ has to be borrowed to get to pay the seniors , they do this by calling the SS IOUs it holds (it got from itself) both part of the national debt and an gov asset at the same time.

Loan yourself some money that you borrowed from elsewhere (depending how you see the Federal Reserve) and call it an asset. Cool huh??

45 posted on 01/08/2013 12:58:59 PM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to O is NO principle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: kabar
So when does the economy shut down??

If it doesnt Republicans will never be believed again.

If it does they will have an argument against Dems for a change.

2009 to 2012 the Rs trapped themselves with help from Obama who knew what he was doing, unlike them

This economy is doing terrible because of the crushing Bush era taxes” was not working, as we saw in November (2012).

46 posted on 01/08/2013 1:06:10 PM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to O is NO principle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
For the past two years of this tax cut much of this was the SS admin was redeeming the ‘trust fund’ IOUs to the treasury at a much faster rate than before/without it.

No, that is not the way things work. SS is a pay as you go program, i.e., today's workers pay for today's retirees. SS has been running in the red, i.e., benefits paid out exceed revenue, since 2010. In order to make up the shortfall, non-market, interest bearing T-bills are redeemed by the General Fund so benefits can be paid.

The SSTF will continue to run in the red until all of the T-bills in the SSTF are exhausted. After that, SS, by law, can only pay benefits equal to the revenue taken in. 2033 is the date that starts happening. It is estimated that SS will only be able to 80% of the benefits at that point.

The SSTF is included in the $16.4 trillion national debt under "Intragovernmental Holdings" as distinct from the publicly held debt.

Source: CBO “Combined OASDI Trust Funds; January 2011 Baseline” 26 Jan 2011. Note: See “Primary Surplus” line (which is negative, indicating a deficit)

Matters are even worse than this chart shows. In December, Congress passed a Social Security tax reduction. Workers are temporarily paying 2 percentage points less, from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent, in Social Security payroll taxes this calendar year. Since the government is making up the shortfall out of general revenues, CBO’s deficit projections for the trust funds do not include that. But CBO’s figures predict that the “payroll tax holiday” will cost the government’s general fund $85 billion in this fiscal year and $29 billion in fiscal year 2012 (which starts Oct.1, 2011.) Since every dollar of that will have to be borrowed, the combined effect of the ” tax holiday” and the annual deficits will amount to a $130 billion addition to the federal deficit in the current fiscal year, and $59 billion in fiscal 2012.

Social Security has passed a tipping point. For years it generated more revenue than it consumed, holding down the overall federal deficit and allowing Congress to spend more freely for other things. But those days are gone. Rather than lessening the federal deficit, Social Security has at last — as long predicted — become a drag on the government’s overall finances.

As recently as October, CBO was projecting that it would be 2016 before outlays regularly exceed revenues. But Social Security’s fiscal troubles are more severe than was thought, and the latest projections show the permanent deficits started several years ahead of earlier predictions.

Don’t be confused by the fact that the trust funds are projected to continue growing for several more years. That’s because Treasury must still credit interest payments to the funds on the borrowings from earlier years. But unless taxes are increased or other spending is cut severely, the government will have to borrow from the public to pay the interest that it owes to the trust funds.

And don’t be misled by those who say the system can pay full benefits until about 2033 without making any changes to the law. That’s true, but does not change the fact that Social Security taxes no longer cover those benefits. The government is now borrowing money to pay them, and will do so every year for the foreseeable future. And keep in mind, if nothing is done, when those trust funds are exhausted, benefits would have to be cut by 22 percent in 2033, and more each year after that, according to the most recent report of the system’s trustees. By 2084, the system will generate only enough revenue to pay for 75 percent of promised benefit levels.

Of course the Treasury buys back the IOUs by borrowing money from the Federal Reserve.(Medicare does the same thing)

Nonsense. Our publicly held debt, about $11.4 trillion, has many holders. They include foreign and domestic investors and the Federal Reserve, which buys up treasuries in order to drag down interest rates through quantitative easing. Fully two-thirds of the national debt is owed to the U.S. government, American investors and future retirees, through the Social Security Trust Fund and pension plans for civil service workers and military personnel. $5.4 trillion of the $11.4 trillion is foreign owned with China and Japan holding about a trillion each. The Feds hold about $2 trillion of the national debt.

The idea that we can continue to pay out money we don't have because the Fed can print money is insane. FYI: Medicare is far worse than SS. Medicare Part A has been running in the red since 2008. And by law, the premiums for Medicare Parts B and D pay for only 25% of the costs of the programs. The other 75% comes from the General Fund. In FY 2011, the cost was $222 billion from the General Fund and those costs will continue to skyrocket as the baby boomer generation retires at 10,000 a day for the next 20 years. If Medicare is not reformed, it will consume the entire federal budget.

Loan yourself some money that you borrowed from elsewhere (depending how you see the Federal Reserve) and call it an asset. Cool huh??

How can it be called an asset when it is included in the national debt? The T-bills held by the SSTF, the HI trust fund, the federal pension fund, etc. are just as valid as those held by the Chinese. They are debts, not assets.

47 posted on 01/08/2013 2:34:17 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
So when does the economy shut down??

What are you talking about? The economy will never "shut down." It will either get better or worse, but as long as man engages in the trade of goods and services, there will be an economy.

48 posted on 01/08/2013 2:37:23 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: kabar
For the past two years of this tax cut much of this was the SS admin was redeeming the ‘trust fund’ IOUs to the treasury at a much faster rate than before/without it.
.....
No, that is not the way things work. SS is a pay as you go program, i.e., today's workers pay for today's retirees. SS has been running in the red, i.e., benefits paid out exceed revenue, since 2010. In order to make up the shortfall, non-market, interest bearing T-bills are redeemed by the General Fund so benefits can be paid.

Except the SS trust fund T-bills are not really T-bills, they are just IOUs the SS dept got from the treasury dept when they transferred FICA taxes to general revenue to spend back when FICA collected more than benefits.

In contrast T-bills are those bills that the Treasury sells to get the money, they can be bought and sold.

Actually one congressman on Cavuto today played up the joke like he was serious. He said that SS and medicare benefits can be paid without increasing the debt limit. They can be paid out of the ‘trust fund’. I loved it, I suggested that line in 2011.

let Dems argue against that one.

49 posted on 01/08/2013 7:04:55 PM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to O is NO principle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: kabar
RE :” So when does the economy shut down??
....
What are you talking about? The economy will never “shut down.” It will either get better or worse, but as long as man engages in the trade of goods and services, there will be an economy.”

you and I are on different frequencies as you always see past my points.

When does the economy appear (to voters) that it got substantially worse than it was last year 2012 to we can convince them it was caused by the taxes on income over $400K?
It really doesnt matter what really causes it, but it has to happen or all those warnings that it will from Rs the past ~ 4 years will appear to be just another WMD argument to general voters dooming Rs again.

50 posted on 01/08/2013 7:12:11 PM PST by sickoflibs (Losing to O is NO principle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-79 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