Posted on 12/21/2011 8:19:29 AM PST by Qbert
The conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board is slamming House Republicans today for their hard-line position on the payroll tax cut, writing that GOP lawmakers are throwing the 2012 election to President Barack Obama before it even begins.
House Republicans are refusing to pass the bipartisan two-month extension of the tax cut that passed the Senate on Saturday, demanding a year-long increase. But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says he'll only reopen negotiations on a longer deal once the House passes the Senate bill — and removes the immediate threat of a tax increase for most Americans.
[Snip]
The Journal's advice: Pass the tax cut — and fast:
At this stage, Republicans would do best to cut their losses and find a way to extend the payroll holiday quickly. Then go home and return in January with a united House-Senate strategy that forces Democrats to make specific policy choices that highlight the differences between the parties on spending, taxes and regulation. Wisconsin freshman Senator Ron Johnson has been floating a useful agenda for such a strategy. The alternative is more chaotic retreat and the return of all-Democratic rule.The Journal's criticism of Boehner will only strengthen the Democratic position, and is sure to be trotted out by Democrats and even some Republicans to pressure the Speaker to pass the bill — and put an end to the legislative nightmare. That said, Boehner hasn't caved to Democrats yet, and is likely to take these negotiations up to the brink.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
"It should have been attacked at the start as gutting the social security trust fund. The dumb party lives up to their name yet again."
I honestly wonder sometimes if the GOP leaders have consultants (who are actually Democrat moles) advising them and coming up with phony polls on these issues in order to sabotage them. No way they could be this stupid all of the time.
"Nothing can be changed if you lose the election standing stubbornly on your principles..."
President McCain is full agreement with you...
Also the threshold for payroll tax deductions is $106,800. After that your earnings aren’t subject to any further with-holdings and your income isn’t further subject to the payroll tax.
The lower earners don’t have this “luxury”, so Obama is simply “leveling the field” in a PR fashion by referring to it as a middle class tax cut. Republicans have to do a far better job in explaining this to the public.
Nothing can be changed if you lose the election standing stubbornly on your principles when you have already lost the battle you are fighting.
My response was to your post when you said the election will be lost, now you and dingy harry change your tune, kinda, sorta, maybe...
I'm again pointing out you live up to your screen name,
"Surrender before they shoot and we will have peace in our time".
Amen.
It may just be too much for you.
If payroll tax is cut by appx 14% [2/15] and
If SS payments are to be made
then the 14% money will have to come from income tax revenues b/c there isn't enough payroll tax revenue to pay the SS checks.
So cutting payroll taxes does not benefit those of us who pay income tax. We pay back our payroll tax cut in income tax plus we pay back the payroll tax cut for the 47% of people who don't pay anything but payroll tax.
It's a plan by obama to transfer wealth... as I said LONG ago. Again, I would prefer an INCOME TAX cut.
Rove says Boehner should wait until Obama flies to Hawaii (but before Jan. 1) and then pass the 2 month extension, while complaining that it's stupid and expensive. When he got back to the teleprompter, Obama would reply that Boehner and McConnell should have communicated better, or should have read the bill before agreeing to it, something like that.
Meanwhile, spending goes up, up, up, and the GOP is afraid that if they block the spending voters will throw them out.
Yes, that tap dance WAS too much for any logical person to follow.
Cutting payroll taxes DOES benefit me, and I do pay income taxes. You are saying that hypothetically if this situation continues - income taxes will have to be raised - so the tax cut is just a temporary relief in light of the necessity of raising OTHER taxes some OTHER time.
But your statement that this was not a tax cut for those of us who pay income taxes is absolutely not true.
That is like someone saying Reagan didn’t actually cut taxes because that ‘shortfall’ in revenue will have to be made up for later by tax increases.
I would prefer an Income tax reduction as well.
I am philosophically for lower taxes in every category and I reject the formulation used by our opponents that every tax cut must be made up for by a tax increase elsewhere.
The reason I say it will have to be made up by income taxes is because a) how short we are and b) obama is a redistributionist
I’m for lower taxes too but because I believe it will have to be made up double, i don’t see it as a cut. I see it as an increase on me.
If you don’t think obama will come back soon and crow about Soc Sec being in need of more funding then I disagree. “I can’t guarantee checks will go out”... remember that?
I've been thinking of doing the same thing. The WSJ used to be a good paper except on illegal immigration. The current editorial leaves me disgusted.
The identical argument can be, and is, made - in regards to any tax cut of any type ever.
I am for an elimination of payroll taxes entirely. They are paid by working people. The money isn’t treated any differently so why the pretense that it is? Social Security is the most regressive tax out there and it should be eliminated.
Sooner or later we will come to the point where the checks will no longer go out. Payroll taxes cannot be increased enough to cover the shortfall when the boomers all retire.
The sooner we eliminate Social Security as it exists the better.
I am philosophically for tax cuts.
The message to working people if Republicans are ideologically in favor of tax cuts, but not for working people, is not one conducive to electoral success.
No, it can't. There are obvious and fundamental differences between this tax cut and others.
Go argue with some other kid.
“they had Democrat after Democrat ,all on script blaming the Republicans”
Yes.
Movies are good.
We have no reason to trust any ‘news’ person of any stripe anymore. They are actors and wordsmiths looking for a kitschy headline. Their emotion and looks and words are just scripts.
“Because I say SO!” you patiently explain! ;)
There are no obvious and fundamental differences between that tax and any other - other than that it is the most regressive tax out there - one paid by working people.
And yes Virginia, the identical argument you are making can be, and is, made - in regards to any tax cut of any type ever - I hear Democrats making that argument in regards to every proposed tax cut.
I’d lay money Murdoch’s troubles over in English are traceable to Soros.
Why we have not arrested this man and his sons and confiscated his assets is beyond me. They’re NAZIs, glad to finger Jews and any Whites who agree with Jews.
Payroll taxes contain both Medicare and Social Security payments. The Social Security portion is used to pay current retirees. Any excess is “invested” in special nonnegotiable US Treasuries and becomes part of the National Debt. This amount is tracked and has been referred to as the “Trust Fund”.
Whenever the amounts paid out are more than what is paid in, the Treasuries are “transferred/cashed” to cover the shortfall thus reducing the debt, as well as the amount of money left in these treasuries to cover the baby-boom retirees.
Social Security is totally financed from the current and past payroll deductions period, not from the general fund.
The Pubbies got suckered into agreeing to this payroll cut last year. They should have taken a page from the Dems playbook:
After stripping billions from Medicare to award to the Insurance Companies through millions of new customers thereby hurting the elderly, The Democrats are now trying to help those earning $100,000 at the expense of the elderly who depend entirely on Social Security and are practically living in poverty.
Payroll taxes will not be enough to cover all the checks that need to be sent out(Oh the Horror). When Granny starves it will all be the fault of the Democrats throwing the elderly under the bus.
Or simply OH MY GOD, the Democrats are trying to make sure that the elderly don't get their Social Security checks. The are trying to starve Granny in an effort to make sure that she doesn't live to see those last 5 years of life(they are the most expensive you know).
Surely sarcasm tag is not needed?
Anyway they lost the opportunity to steal the title of protector of Social Security from the Dems. The elderly vote - and they are a rapidly growing segment of the population as the baby boomers retire.
Many payroll systems already had the expiration programmed in for Jan. 2012, now they have to roll that change back, and potentially either roll it forward again, or roll it back depending on what the House & Senate do or don't do.
The BEST thing that could happen here is to change the systems ONCE, which is what the House Republican's are trying to force. All this bullshit from the Democrats are costing business' money in constantly changing their payroll systems because of these stupid political games.
And here Washington DC and that stupid sock monkey in the White House wonder why business' aren't hiring. Dumbasses.
It is a regressive tax, but then low income people get much greater benefits per dollar of FICA tax paid than people with higher income. My wife paid about a tenth of the FICA tax that I paid, but her Social Security benefits payments are about a third of mine. When benefits are considered, the Social Security system as a whole is progressive.
Google the words: social security benefits progressive. Look at the chart in the first PDF document (Is Social Security Progressive) that comes up in the search.
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.