Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Straw Man on December 22, 2011, 09:39:50 AM
-
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204791104577110573867064702.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
The GOP's Payroll Tax Fiasco
How did Republicans manage to lose the tax issue to Obama?.
GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell famously said a year ago that his main task in the 112th Congress was to make sure that President Obama would not be re-elected. Given how he and House Speaker John Boehner have handled the payroll tax debate, we wonder if they might end up re-electing the President before the 2012 campaign even begins in earnest.
The GOP leaders have somehow managed the remarkable feat of being blamed for opposing a one-year extension of a tax holiday that they are surely going to pass. This is no easy double play.
Republicans have also achieved the small miracle of letting Mr. Obama position himself as an election-year tax cutter, although he's spent most of his Presidency promoting tax increases and he would hit the economy with one of the largest tax increases ever in 2013. This should be impossible.
House Republicans yesterday voted down the Senate's two-month extension of the two-percentage-point payroll tax holiday to 4.2% from 6.2%. They say the short extension makes no economic sense, but then neither does a one-year extension. No employer is going to hire a worker based on such a small and temporary decrease in employment costs, as this year's tax holiday has demonstrated. The entire exercise is political, but Republicans have thoroughly botched the politics.
Their first mistake was adopting the President's language that he is proposing a tax cut rather than calling it a temporary tax holiday. People will understand the difference—and discount the benefit.
Republicans also failed to put together a unified House and Senate strategy. The House passed a one-year extension last week that included spending cuts to offset the $120 billion or so in lost revenue, such as a one-year freeze on raises for federal employees. Then Mr. McConnell agreed with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on the two-month extension financed by higher fees on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (meaning on mortgage borrowers), among other things. It passed with 89 votes and all but seven Republicans.
Senate Republicans say Mr. Boehner had signed off on the two-month extension, but House Members revolted over the weekend and so the Speaker flipped within 24 hours. Mr. Boehner is now demanding that Mr. Reid name conferees for a House-Senate conference on the payroll tax bills. But Mr. Reid and the White House are having too much fun blaming Republicans for "raising taxes on the middle class" as of January 1. Don't be surprised if they stretch this out to the State of the Union, when Mr. Obama will have a national audience to capture the tax issue.
If Republicans didn't want to extend the payroll tax cut on the merits, then they should have put together a strategy and the arguments for defeating it and explained why.
But if they knew they would eventually pass it, as most of them surely believed, then they had one of two choices. Either pass it quickly and at least take some political credit for it.
Or agree on a strategy to get something in return for passing it, which would mean focusing on a couple of popular policies that would put Mr. Obama and Democrats on the political spot. They finally did that last week by attaching a provision that requires Mr. Obama to make a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline within 60 days, and the President grumbled but has agreed to sign it.
But now Republicans are drowning out that victory in the sounds of their circular firing squad. Already four GOP Senators have rejected the House position, and the political rout will only get worse.
One reason for the revolt of House backbenchers is the accumulated frustration over a year of political disappointment. Their high point was the Paul Ryan budget in the spring that set the terms of debate and forced Mr. Obama to adopt at least the rhetoric of budget reform and spending cuts.
But then Messrs. Boehner and McConnell were gulled into going behind closed doors with the President, who dragged out negotiations and later emerged to sandbag them with his blame-the-GOP and soak-the-rich re-election strategy. Any difference between the parties on taxes and spending has been blurred in the interim.
After a year of the tea party House, Mr. Obama and Senate Democrats have had to make no major policy concessions beyond extending the Bush tax rates for two years. Mr. Obama is in a stronger re-election position today than he was a year ago, and the chances of Mr. McConnell becoming Majority Leader in 2013 are declining.
***
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.
-
This entire issue is a fiasco. There never should have been a payroll tax cut in the first place with oan offset of benefits.
Additionally - the piece of shits in the congress and obama want to finance this by permanent fees added to home mortgages.
This is another ponzi scheme by Obama.
-
This entire issue is a fiasco. There never should have been a payroll tax cut in the first place with oan offset of benefits.
Additionally - the piece of shits in the congress and obama want to finance this by permanent fees added to home mortgages.
This is another ponzi scheme by Obama.
all this shows is that Repubs are incapable of governing
they can't even run their own party
-
all this shows is that Repubs are incapable of governing
they can't even run their own party
LOL. and no blame to Obama? LMFAO!!!!
________________________ ________________________ ____
The Social Security tax cut is both stupid and evil. Stupid, because it increases the deficit, while actually retarding economic growth and job creation. Evil, because it turns Social Security into even more of a welfare program than it already is, while pretending that this is not what is happening.
The viability of Social Security depends upon economic growth. Social Security is funded by payroll taxes that reliably capture about 4.6% of GDP. Therefore, looking at Social Security as a retirement program, its “asset” is 4.6% of the present value of future U.S. GDP. It is from the value of this asset that the Social Security System must pay all promised future benefits.
The present value of future U.S. GDP is exquisitely sensitive to our long-term average real rate of economic growth. At the Social Security Trustees’ assumed long-term GDP growth rate (2.11% real), the present value of Social Security’s promised benefits exceeds the value of Social Security’s “asset” by $17.9 trillion.
However, the present value of future U.S. GDP rises very rapidly as the economic growth rate increases. At long-term average GDP growth rates above 2.90% (which is the assumed real interest rate on government debt), the value of Social Security’s “asset” goes to infinity, and all of the system’s financial woes disappear.
Because Social Security benefits are paid out of a fixed share of future GDP, it makes sense to fund Social Security via a tax that does not impact GDP growth. Because it is “capped”, the Social Security payroll tax is exactly such a tax. If the payroll tax is cut, the funding shortfall must be made up with other taxes (e.g., income taxes) that have the side effect of reducing the rate of economic growth.
To propose such a move is evil and to agree with it is stupid. This is probably why the temporary Social Security tax cut passed a year ago with bipartisan majorities in both the House and the Senate.
The “temporary” Social Security tax cut is damaging to job creation, economic growth, federal finances, and the integrity of our Social Security System. If America is to thrive, the Stupid Party must become less stupid. Refusing to extend this ill-conceived tax cut would be a good place for the Republicans to start.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2011/12/21/dont-extend-the-ill-conceived-evil-payroll-tax-cut/2/
-
LOL. and no blame to Obama? LMFAO!!!!
________________________ ________________________ ____
The Social Security tax cut is both stupid and evil. Stupid, because it increases the deficit, while actually retarding economic growth and job creation. Evil, because it turns Social Security into even more of a welfare program than it already is, while pretending that this is not what is happening.
The viability of Social Security depends upon economic growth. Social Security is funded by payroll taxes that reliably capture about 4.6% of GDP. Therefore, looking at Social Security as a retirement program, its “asset” is 4.6% of the present value of future U.S. GDP. It is from the value of this asset that the Social Security System must pay all promised future benefits.
The present value of future U.S. GDP is exquisitely sensitive to our long-term average real rate of economic growth. At the Social Security Trustees’ assumed long-term GDP growth rate (2.11% real), the present value of Social Security’s promised benefits exceeds the value of Social Security’s “asset” by $17.9 trillion.
However, the present value of future U.S. GDP rises very rapidly as the economic growth rate increases. At long-term average GDP growth rates above 2.90% (which is the assumed real interest rate on government debt), the value of Social Security’s “asset” goes to infinity, and all of the system’s financial woes disappear.
Because Social Security benefits are paid out of a fixed share of future GDP, it makes sense to fund Social Security via a tax that does not impact GDP growth. Because it is “capped”, the Social Security payroll tax is exactly such a tax. If the payroll tax is cut, the funding shortfall must be made up with other taxes (e.g., income taxes) that have the side effect of reducing the rate of economic growth.
To propose such a move is evil and to agree with it is stupid. This is probably why the temporary Social Security tax cut passed a year ago with bipartisan majorities in both the House and the Senate.
The “temporary” Social Security tax cut is damaging to job creation, economic growth, federal finances, and the integrity of our Social Security System. If America is to thrive, the Stupid Party must become less stupid. Refusing to extend this ill-conceived tax cut would be a good place for the Republicans to start.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2011/12/21/dont-extend-the-ill-conceived-evil-payroll-tax-cut/2/
if it's so stupid then why did both parties pass it last year and why did the Senate (including Repubs) pass it this year
What we have are tea party morons (such as yourself) in the House fighting with Repubs in the Senate and all they are doing is making Obama look good (maybe you're aware of Obama's rising approval ratings)
-
Because both parties suck shit! This is a ponzi scam intended for the retards like yourself to eat up.
Where do you think the money is coming from for this? They are borrowing it out of the general fund, which is borrowed from China to finance a small amount now.
Its utterly stupid. If they want to do something positive, lower the income tax rate and cut spending by a porportionate amount.
-
if it's so stupid then why did both parties pass it last year and why did the Senate (including Repubs) pass it this year
What we have are tea party morons (such as yourself) in the House fighting with Repubs in the Senate and all they are doing is making Obama look good (maybe you're aware of Obama's rising approval ratings)
Obama is go inasmuch as the media lets him get away with his matrix of lies daily and gullible dupes such as yourself literally hanging off of every word he says as if its gospel.
-
all this shows is that Repubs are incapable of governing
they can't even run their own party
Neither can the Dems. Both sides are beyond incompetent.
So do you agree with the WSJ's argument that this tax cut is pointless or did you only bother reading the headline?
-
Because both parties suck shit!
Both sides are beyond incompetent.
;)
-
;)
::)
-
::)
The biggest problem is that they are going to forver keep extending this and creating a bigger disaster for SS unless they plan on cutting benefits to offset the added deficit.
-
40 bucks.......thanks Barry ur awsome. What a piece of shit. I hope his Christmas sucks....
-
40 bucks.......thanks Barry ur awsome. What a piece of shit. I hope his Christmas sucks....
I hope he gets stuck in the WH with only a few 40's, espn, some ocra and biscuits, and gets to hear the waves crashing from when Mobacca the Hut is doing cannonballs into the pool.
-
::)
::)
-
I hope he gets stuck in the WH with only a few 40's, espn, some ocra and biscuits, and gets to hear the waves crashing from when Mobacca the Hut is doing cannonballs into the pool.
;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Neither can the Dems. Both sides are beyond incompetent.
So do you agree with the WSJ's argument that this tax cut is pointless or did you only bother reading the headline?
poor reading comprehension ..... as usual
article didn't say it was pointlless
it claimed "No employer is going to hire a worker based on such a small and temporary decrease in employment costs, as this year's tax holiday has demonstrated"
I didn't see any proof or additional comment to support their claim and the purpose of the tax holiday was not to directly create jobs but to put more money in the hands of the poor and middle class which not only help those people but could have stimulative effect on the economy
-
poor reading comprehension ..... as usual
article didn't say it was pointlless
it claimed "No employer is going to hire a worker based on such a small and temporary decrease in employment costs, as this year's tax holiday has demonstrated"
I didn't see any proof or additional comment to support their claim and the purpose of the tax holiday was not to directly create jobs but to put more money in the hands of the poor and middle class which not only help those people but could have stimulative effect on the economy
and defund SS!
-
poor reading comprehension ..... as usual
article didn't say it was pointlless
it claimed "No employer is going to hire a worker based on such a small and temporary decrease in employment costs, as this year's tax holiday has demonstrated"
I didn't see any proof or additional comment to support their claim and the purpose of the tax holiday was not to directly create jobs but to put more money in the hands of the poor and middle class which not only help those people but could have stimulative effect on the economy
Why did you leave out the next sentence which concludes that this is nothing more than a political stunt. By arguing that it's nothing more than a political stunt they are also arguing thatbit won't help the economy.
I guess reading comprehension failed you. Not surprising as you're just not very intelligent.
-
Why did you leave out the next sentence which concludes that this is nothing more than a political stunt. By arguing that it's nothing more than a political stunt they are also arguing thatbit won't help the economy.
I guess reading comprehension failed you. Not surprising as you're just not very intelligent.
since when is putting more money in the hands of poor and middle class people a political stunt?
I guess giving millionares a tax break is a political stunt as well
-
since when is putting more money in the hands of poor and middle class people a political stunt?
I guess giving millionares a tax break is a political stunt as well
Because it is defunding the only revenue stream to SS at a time when more and more are going on the system!
Are you so brain dead not to see that?
-
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57346952-503544/karl-rove-piles-on-tells-republicans-to-cut-bait-in-tax-standoff/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57346952-503544/karl-rove-piles-on-tells-republicans-to-cut-bait-in-tax-standoff/)
Karl Rove piles on, tells Republicans to cut bait in tax standoff
You know it's bad for Republicans when Karl Rove says it's time to cave and move on.
The former political adviser to President George W. Bush said Wednesday that the famously conservative Wall Street Journal editorial page was right when it said House Republicans should cut their losses and agree with a bipartisan Senate plan to extend for just two months the payroll tax cut enacted last year.
Republicans "have lost the optics on it," Rove told Fox News, "the question now is how do the Republicans get out of it."
Speaker John Boehner and House Republicans on Tuesday blocked a Senate proposal to extend the popular tax cut for two months in an effort to allow lawmaker from both parties more time to hash out a larger compromise on a host of issues that were holding up the payroll tax extension.
Boehner had reportedly backed the plan at first, but many of the most conservative members of parties revolted on Saturday and said they would not accept the Senate plan, vowing to kill it when it came to the House of Representatives.
But that may have been easier said than done. So Boehner came up with a plan to block the Senate bill without actually voting on the extension. Using a procedural move, the House voted to "disagree" with the Senate plan and set up a committee of members from both parties from both the House and Senate to work out a new compromise on legislation.
But most senators had already left Washington for the holidays and the Senate proposal was itself a compromise between Democrats and Republicans, who overwhelmingly supported the short-term legislative option to avoid the most contentious issues and pass the popular tax cut for two months. The Senate bill, which also includes an extension of unemployment benefits and a measure to make sure doctors do not have their Medicare payments cut, passed 89-10. All but seven Republicans voted for it.
The mastermind of Mr. Bush's 2004 re-election effort said the only thing Republicans can do now is "use it for political theater and then vote the two month extension and get out of town."
"The only way to win it is to just stick there and ruin their own Christmases and wait until the president heads off to Hawaii for his, and then lambaste the Democrats for having abdicated their responsibilities to pass a year-long tax cut," Rove said.
The payroll tax affects about 160 million Americans and it was cut a year ago in an effort to stimulate the economy with a little extra cash in people's pockets. Many conservative Republicans are skeptical of the macroeconomic benefits of the payroll tax cut.
Mark Zandi, an influential economist who served as an adviser to the 2008 presidential campaign of Sen. John McCain, has said the economy could fall back into recession if the payroll tax cut is not extended.
-
So the issue is that the House Republicans want spending cuts to offset the cost of a one-year tax cut while the Senate wants a temporary tax holiday paid for by mortgage owners? Seems like the House Republicans are right on this one. BTW, a one-year payroll tax cut makes sense, but a 2-month one doesn't.
A two-month tax cut is too transient to accomplish anything. However, a one-year tax cut might be just enough for a business that relies on unskilled workers.
-
Why did you leave out the next sentence which concludes that this is nothing more than a political stunt. By arguing that it's nothing more than a political stunt they are also arguing thatbit won't help the economy.
I guess reading comprehension failed you. Not surprising as you're just not very intelligent.
btw - the (WSJ) never used the word "stunt"
they said the "The entire exercise is political"
what exercise are they talking about?
Since the article is about how fucked up the GOP leadership it is more likely they are talking about the "excerise" of the House Republican blocking the legislation when they know they will eventually pass it
-
Obama , in all his marxism and communism, is adding $17 a month to new mortgages to pay for this.
This kenyan muslim neo-terrorist one man sleeper cell needs to be defeated.
-
since when is putting more money in the hands of poor and middle class people a political stunt?
I guess giving millionares a tax break is a political stunt as well
Wait a minute, are you now arguing that tax cuts are beneficial to an economy? Haha, you can't even keep your story straight.
By the way, Americans won't see a dime from a two-month extension as it has already been shown that it will take longer than that to implement it. Not that the left was really interested in helping anyone as much as they were interested in scoring political points.
-
Wait a minute, are you now arguing that tax cuts are beneficial to an economy? Haha, you can't even keep your story straight.
By the way, Americans won't see a dime from a two-month extension as it has already been shown that it will take longer than that to implement it. Not that the left was really interested in helping anyone as much as they were interested in scoring political points.
dddduuhhhh!!!!!
-
Wait a minute, are you now arguing that tax cuts are beneficial to an economy? Haha, you can't even keep your story straight.
By the way, Americans won't see a dime from a two-month extension as it has already been shown that it will take longer than that to implement it. Not that the left was really interested in helping anyone as much as they were interested in scoring political points.
how many times have we been over this before
tax cuts on people who are poor and middle class will SPEND THE MONEY and it will benefit the economy
the same thing with unemployment benefit, food stamps etc..
tax cuts on millionaires doesn't help the economy because they don't go out and spend any more than they did before.
When poor and middle class people have more money in their pocket they tend to SPEND it which has a stimulative effect on the economy
-
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57346952-503544/karl-rove-piles-on-tells-republicans-to-cut-bait-in-tax-standoff/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57346952-503544/karl-rove-piles-on-tells-republicans-to-cut-bait-in-tax-standoff/)
Karl Rove piles on, tells Republicans to cut bait in tax standoff
You know it's bad for Republicans when Karl Rove says it's time to cave and move on.
The former political adviser to President George W. Bush said Wednesday that the famously conservative Wall Street Journal editorial page was right when it said House Republicans should cut their losses and agree with a bipartisan Senate plan to extend for just two months the payroll tax cut enacted last year.
Republicans "have lost the optics on it," Rove told Fox News, "the question now is how do the Republicans get out of it."
Speaker John Boehner and House Republicans on Tuesday blocked a Senate proposal to extend the popular tax cut for two months in an effort to allow lawmaker from both parties more time to hash out a larger compromise on a host of issues that were holding up the payroll tax extension.
Boehner had reportedly backed the plan at first, but many of the most conservative members of parties revolted on Saturday and said they would not accept the Senate plan, vowing to kill it when it came to the House of Representatives.
But that may have been easier said than done. So Boehner came up with a plan to block the Senate bill without actually voting on the extension. Using a procedural move, the House voted to "disagree" with the Senate plan and set up a committee of members from both parties from both the House and Senate to work out a new compromise on legislation.
But most senators had already left Washington for the holidays and the Senate proposal was itself a compromise between Democrats and Republicans, who overwhelmingly supported the short-term legislative option to avoid the most contentious issues and pass the popular tax cut for two months. The Senate bill, which also includes an extension of unemployment benefits and a measure to make sure doctors do not have their Medicare payments cut, passed 89-10. All but seven Republicans voted for it.
The mastermind of Mr. Bush's 2004 re-election effort said the only thing Republicans can do now is "use it for political theater and then vote the two month extension and get out of town."
"The only way to win it is to just stick there and ruin their own Christmases and wait until the president heads off to Hawaii for his, and then lambaste the Democrats for having abdicated their responsibilities to pass a year-long tax cut," Rove said.
The payroll tax affects about 160 million Americans and it was cut a year ago in an effort to stimulate the economy with a little extra cash in people's pockets. Many conservative Republicans are skeptical of the macroeconomic benefits of the payroll tax cut.
Mark Zandi, an influential economist who served as an adviser to the 2008 presidential campaign of Sen. John McCain, has said the economy could fall back into recession if the payroll tax cut is not extended.
Rove is smart enough to know that opposing this (and fighting amongst themselves while doing it) will ONLY make them look bad. There is no upside for them from the clusterfuck they have created for themselves in their own party
-
Nice meltdown devoid of fact.
If that's the case then why isn't Obama jumping all over the GOP offer to extend it for a year instead of two months?
-
how many times have we been over this before
tax cuts on people who are poor and middle class will SPEND THE MONEY and it will benefit the economy
the same thing with unemployment benefit, food stamps etc..
tax cuts on millionaires doesn't help the economy because they don't go out and spend any more than they did before.
When poor and middle class people have more money in their pocket they tend to SPEND it which has a stimulative effect on the economy
LOL. So why not write each of them a check for 100K
-
LOL. So why not write each of them a check for 100K
Why not get rid of taxes entirely then?
-
Nice meltdown devoid of fact.
If that's the case then why isn't Obama jumping all over the GOP offer to extend it for a year instead of two months?
so now you don't even know what a meltdown is?
-
LOL. So why not write each of them a check for 100K
BUMP
-
how many times have we been over this before
tax cuts on people who are poor and middle class will SPEND THE MONEY and it will benefit the economy
the same thing with unemployment benefit, food stamps etc..
tax cuts on millionaires doesn't help the economy because they don't go out and spend any more than they did before.
When poor and middle class people have more money in their pocket they tend to SPEND it which has a stimulative effect on the economy
Consumption doesn't stimulate economic growth. Investment does. And if the government borrows money in order to fund greater consumption, it'll necessarily reduce investment.
-
Consumption doesn't stimulate economic growth. Investment does. And if the government borrows money in order to fund greater consumption, it'll necessarily reduce investment.
Straw is a big govt kenysian who though the biggest issue with the stim bill was that it was too small.
BTW Straw - if $40 a week is good for the economy - why not write each person a check for 100k?
-
Consumption doesn't stimulate economic growth. Investment does. And if the government borrows money in order to fund greater consumption, it'll necessarily reduce investment.
Good post.
Poor people spending change on milk from the corner store doesn't stimulate the economy. This whole thing is a terrible idea and will never, ever be a good one.
Typical D.C. bullshit at its best.
-
The Payroll-Tax Cut, the Stimulus plans (all of them) and every other broken and discredited idea that has been spoken about or used in the last few years has proven that the the politicians have no clue about anything vaguely related to a solution or even a workable positive idea.
They don't. They are lawyers, narcissists and power hungry simpletons. There is no understanding of the problem, no understanding of long term implications of anything and zero intellectual ability to form a workable solution. Either they are ill-informed, moronic phonies (yes), or anti-American power hungry brainless robots who only care about getting theirs and getting re-elected...unfortunately I think it's all of the above.
The politics of the issue are meaningless, they really are. The Payroll Tax Cut is a terrible, awful and idiotic idea. Just fucking terrible. The very fact that both sides are playing a game with an awful idea that will cripple an already comatose S.S. system should tell you all you need to know. The idea of the Payroll Tax Cut doesn't even make sense, it doesn't even touch the employers side of the equation.....and guess what, I DIDN'T FUCKING WORK AND WON'T WORK.
All of this tit for tat garbage over an idea that is a proven failure and harmful to the nation. 160 billion dollars? Out of a 16 trillion dollar economy? Jesus, my fellow students in my H.S. basic econ. class could have told us this wouldn't work.
Guess what hasn't been argued or discusses or even mentioned by anyone except a few people.................. .an actual solution.
Congress needs to kill themselves.
-
The Payroll-Tax Cut, the Stimulus plans (all of them) and every other broken and discredited idea that has been spoken about or used in the last few years has proven that the the politicians have no clue about anything vaguely related to a solution or even a workable positive idea.
They don't. They are lawyers, narcissists and power hungry simpletons. There is no understanding of the problem, no understanding of long term implications of anything and zero intellectual ability to form a workable solution. Either they are ill-informed, moronic phonies (yes), or anti-American power hungry brainless robots who only care about getting theirs and getting re-elected...unfortunately I think it's all of the above.
The politics of the issue are meaningless, they really are. The Payroll Tax Cut is a terrible, awful and idiotic idea. Just fucking terrible. The very fact that both sides are playing a game with an awful idea that will cripple an already comatose S.S. system should tell you all you need to know. The idea of the Payroll Tax Cut doesn't even make sense, it doesn't even touch the employers side of the equation.....and guess what, I DIDN'T FUCKING WORK AND WON'T WORK.
All of this tit for tat garbage over an idea that is a proven failure and harmful to the nation. 160 billion dollars? Out of a 16 trillion dollar economy? Jesus, my fellow students in my H.S. basic econ. class could have told us this wouldn't work.
Guess what hasn't been argued or discusses or even mentioned by anyone except a few people.................. .an actual solution.
Congress needs to kill themselves.
didn't "work" how?
didnt' put spendable cash in peoples pockets?
-
didn't "work" how?
didnt' put spendable cash in peoples pockets?
Straw - get this through your thick head - between energy, health, food, and monetary inflation in the last few years, 40 dollars is nothing and will not do a damn thing. The problem is the cost of govt and contingent obligations we have no way to pay for as well as raging inflation in areas people have no control over.
-
Straw - get this through your thick head - between energy, health, food, and monetary inflation in the last few years, 40 dollars is nothing and will not do a damn thing. The problem is the cost of govt and contingent obligations we have no way to pay for as well as raging inflation in areas people have no control over.
$40 per week makes not difference to me
$40 per week to a family of four with a household income of 35k will make a difference that they will feel
$40 a week to a family of four with a household income of 100k won't make any difference
-
$40 per week makes not difference to me
$40 per week to a family of four with a household income of 35k will make a difference that they will feel
$40 a week to a family of four with a household income of 100k won't make any difference
You just don't get it. The 40 dollars is not the issue. It's WHY they need it, and where it is coming from, and what is the impact on SS considering contingent liabilities. e should have cut the income tax and offset it w spending cuts in the govt, not raid SS.
-
You just don't get it. The 40 dollars is not the issue. It's WHY they need it, and where it is coming from, and what is the impact on SS considering contingent liabilities. e should have cut the income tax and offset it w spending cuts in the govt, not raid SS.
if it's not the issue then why do you keep bringing it up
-
if it's not the issue then why do you keep bringing it up
Because the pofs potus you support is out there. Lying about it daily. The issue is where is the money coming from and what is the impact on SS considering millions are going on the system.
-
Because the pofs potus you support is out there. Lying about it daily. The issue is where is the money coming from and what is the impact on SS considering millions are going on the system.
dude, Obama is going to collapse the nation and turn us into Communist China as soon as he wins re-election
or
he's going not even going to be running
remember?
-
Gas Prices Hit Record High Averages in 2011 (Costs average family $4,155 more! Way to go Hussein!)
kcrg.com ^ | 12/21/11 | Addison Speck
...this years average cost of fuel sets a new record. For 2011, the national average price for fuel is about $3.50 a gallon. That accounts for about 8.4% of the average American family’s income, the highest percentage in 30 years.
The average American household will have spent, a record, $4,155 filling up this year. Though it’s not what some Eastern Iowans wanted to hear, for many it wasn’t a surprise.
(Excerpt) Read more at kcrg.com ...