Bush's trillion dollar tax increase

[Care4all]

Really, Clinton cut social programs, he was President in the 90's right??

Grandfather Federal Government Debt Report - page 1 - by MWHodges
Look closely at that red line on social spending. Note 3 points: (1)the acceleration starting mid-1960s, (2) this stopped rising (and declined) in the 1980s for the first time in 4 decades, (3)only to rise again thereafter to a record high in the 1990s.]

and it will continue to rise if you continue to include social security as a welfare program, WHICH IT IS NOT....

social security will continue to rise each year untill the baby boomers all retire .....

but social security taxes and the social security retirement checks are paid for by ourselves, not welfare and should NOT be in discussion when talking about what income taxes should pay for...

SS has nothing to do with that.... you murkey the waters when including ss taxes and retirement with general expenditures of which income taxes should be paying imho.

care

 

[Chris]

and it will continue to rise if you continue to include social security as a welfare program, WHICH IT IS NOT....

social security will continue to rise each year untill the baby boomers all retire .....

but social security taxes and the social security retirement checks are paid for by ourselves, not welfare and should NOT be in discussion when talking about what income taxes should pay for...

SS has nothing to do with that.... you murkey the waters when including ss taxes and retirement with general expenditures of which income taxes should be paying imho.

care

The only thing that can save social security is that Americans are getting so fat that many of them will never collect. The Twinkie will save America!

 

[jreeves]

and it will continue to rise if you continue to include social security as a welfare program, WHICH IT IS NOT....

social security will continue to rise each year untill the baby boomers all retire .....

but social security taxes and the social security retirement checks are paid for by ourselves, not welfare and should NOT be in discussion when talking about what income taxes should pay for...

SS has nothing to do with that.... you murkey the waters when including ss taxes and retirement with general expenditures of which income taxes should be paying imho.

care

But yet the SS trust fund has and is being used as a general fund to mask debt. So why shouldn't it be included in a spending analysis?

 

[Care4all]

But yet the SS trust fund has and is being used as a general fund to mask debt. So why shouldn't it be included in a spending analysis?

yes, it is being used by congress to fund what General revenues should fund which basically income, corporate and excise taxes etc should be paying for....

President Johnson added SS reporting in to the General Revenue funds to mask how much he was spending on the War in Vietnam and the Military...

By him putting SS in to the general budget, it allowed him to say that the "War" was really only "X" percentage of the total budget....and of course "X" looked and took... a much lower percentage of the federal budget, in a time when there was a huge Anti War movement within the citizenry.

HOWEVER, Johnson was not and did not spend any surplus SS funds as Congress does now BECAUSE there was no SURPLUS SS funds so he purely added SS to the General budget purely to MASK the Vietnam War costs.

When Reagan came in to office he raised our SS taxes so that we would bring in a surplus of ss monies....he SUPPOSEDLY did this so that the Boomers would begin to pay for themselves....their OWN retirement along with paying for their parents, 30 years before they were due to start retiring so to fix the situation where there would only be 3 people paying in to SS for every one person collecting....

Instead Reagan used the SS surpluses to mask his military spending and deficits that he was creating with his tax policies and overspending....so he began to use the SS surpluses that he instituted to SAVE THE BOOMERS from themselves when it came to their future SS retirements, for himself.....in the general revenue fund, issuing it iou's raising our debt more than any other president in recent history other than GEORGE W BUSH....

Every Congress and President, beginning with Reagan, have utilized the SS surplusses in their budget, to try to SUPPOSEDLY balance it, (with the IOU to SS of course, but never mentioned).

care

 

[jreeves]

yes, it is being used by congress to fund what General revenues should fund which basically income, corporate and excise taxes etc should be paying for....

President Johnson added SS reporting in to the General Revenue funds to mask how much he was spending on the War in Vietnam and the Military...

By him putting SS in to the general budget, it allowed him to say that the "War" was really only "X" percentage of the total budget....and of course "X" looked and took... a much lower percentage of the federal budget, in a time when there was a huge Anti War movement within the citizenry.

HOWEVER, Johnson was not and did not spend any surplus SS funds as Congress does now BECAUSE there was no SURPLUS SS funds so he purely added SS to the General budget purely to MASK the Vietnam War costs.

When Reagan came in to office he raised our SS taxes so that we would bring in a surplus of ss monies....he SUPPOSEDLY did this so that the Boomers would begin to pay for themselves....their OWN retirement along with paying for their parents, 30 years before they were due to start retiring so to fix the situation where there would only be 3 people paying in to SS for every one person collecting....

Instead Reagan used the SS surpluses to mask his military spending and deficits that he was creating with his tax policies and overspending....so he began to use the SS surpluses that he instituted to SAVE THE BOOMERS from themselves when it came to their future SS retirements, for himself.....in the general revenue fund, issuing it iou's raising our debt more than any other president in recent history other than GEORGE W BUSH....

Every Congress and President, beginning with Reagan, have utilized the SS surplusses in their budget, to try to SUPPOSEDLY balance it, (with the IOU to SS of course, but never mentioned).

care

Clinton was actually the "King" of masking budget defecits while he robbed SS under the table. Then he claimed there were budget surpluses, amazing. What really tops the cake though, is that he claimed we needed to save SS.
Both parties have robbed SS, that's my point, this is why charity should be left to the private sector instead of crooked, self serving politicians.
Grandfather Federal Government Debt Report - page 1 - by MWHodges
After bragging in the late 1990s about budget surpluses, when in fact the general government was in deficit (not surplus) despite the highest tax revenue share of the economy in peace-time history, we know they were claiming trust fund surpluses as their own. They were understating their claimed deficits by mixing in surpluses of trust funds.

According to the above chart, 4 trillion of the general federal government government's $9 trillion debt is owed to the group of trust funds.. As we will see below, $2 trillion (of that $4 trillion) is owed just to the social security trust fund. The government never budgets paying back its $4 trillion debt to trust funds with its own money. Why should we allow FICA and trust surpluses to be siphoned-off to pay for programs of the general government for other stuff, like welfare, military, education, etc. - instead of retained in marketable assets for the purposes intended? Its smoke and mirrors. The general government should run its own surpluses for that purpose, not siphon from others.

 

[DeadCanDance]

I guess spending 680 billion dollars a year on social programs is cutting the defecit in half huh?

Convince your party to run on a platform to eliminate social security, medicare, veterans benefits, food stamps, and medicaid.

Go for it.

 

[Care4all]

Clinton was actually the "King" of masking budget defecits while he robbed SS under the table. Then he claimed there were budget surpluses, amazing. What really tops the cake though, is that he claimed we needed to save SS.
Both parties have robbed SS, that's my point, this is why charity should be left to the private sector instead of crooked, self serving politicians.
Grandfather Federal Government Debt Report - page 1 - by MWHodges
After bragging in the late 1990s about budget surpluses, when in fact the general government was in deficit (not surplus) despite the highest tax revenue share of the economy in peace-time history, we know they were claiming trust fund surpluses as their own. They were understating their claimed deficits by mixing in surpluses of trust funds.

According to the above chart, 4 trillion of the general federal government government's $9 trillion debt is owed to the group of trust funds.. As we will see below, $2 trillion (of that $4 trillion) is owed just to the social security trust fund. The government never budgets paying back its $4 trillion debt to trust funds with its own money. Why should we allow FICA and trust surpluses to be siphoned-off to pay for programs of the general government for other stuff, like welfare, military, education, etc. - instead of retained in marketable assets for the purposes intended? Its smoke and mirrors. The general government should run its own surpluses for that purpose, not siphon from others.

You really are not thinking at all or using any kind of information that you personally looked up regarding your Clinton comments....

There is no president in our history that used up more SS surplus monies than GWBush and his congresses.

SS surplusses are put in to the general treasury BY LAW....a "lock box" had been talked about by both sides of the aisle and if Gore had won, that was one of his promisses...

But what Clinton and his congresses did was the best thing anyone could do to save social security, and that is to get the budget in line, which they did....THEY went from hiuge deficits down to no deficits of the budget, and yes with SS surplusses in there being used except for 1 or 2 years where his Congress did not use all of the SS surplus funds, but still some of them, I admit...

president Bush reports 300 billion to 500 billion dollar yearly deficits and THEY DON'T EVEN INCLUDE THE borrowing of the SS surplus funds, which ADDS to the deficit....

If Bush could have gotten his budgets to balance, including the SS surpluses being used it would have been a major accomplishment....like it was a major accomplishment for Clinton and his congress....

Cutting SS as a program does NOTHING for overspending of congress, nothing....

Cutting the SS program would make our federal deficits larger because they would no longer be collecting SS surplus taxes from us and no longer have our SS surplus monies to help mask the deficits, unless congress can cut their spending on OTHER PROGRAMS like Defense....

Cutting Social security does NOTHING to reduce the budget deficits of our government.............Social security IS THE ONLY gvt program that is bringing in taxes MORE than what the program costs them to pay out in retirement....(for now at least)

this is why i keep telling you that SS has to be taken out of the equation so we can get to the real wastes and pork in our gvt imo

 

[Chris]

Clinton was actually the "King" of masking budget defecits while he robbed SS under the table. Then he claimed there were budget surpluses, amazing. What really tops the cake though, is that he claimed we needed to save SS.
Both parties have robbed SS, that's my point, this is why charity should be left to the private sector instead of crooked, self serving politicians.
Grandfather Federal Government Debt Report - page 1 - by MWHodges
After bragging in the late 1990s about budget surpluses, when in fact the general government was in deficit (not surplus) despite the highest tax revenue share of the economy in peace-time history, we know they were claiming trust fund surpluses as their own. They were understating their claimed deficits by mixing in surpluses of trust funds.

According to the above chart, 4 trillion of the general federal government government's $9 trillion debt is owed to the group of trust funds.. As we will see below, $2 trillion (of that $4 trillion) is owed just to the social security trust fund. The government never budgets paying back its $4 trillion debt to trust funds with its own money. Why should we allow FICA and trust surpluses to be siphoned-off to pay for programs of the general government for other stuff, like welfare, military, education, etc. - instead of retained in marketable assets for the purposes intended? Its smoke and mirrors. The general government should run its own surpluses for that purpose, not siphon from others.

Reagan and Bush built the debt by cutting taxes and increasing spending. Click on this link for the facts...

U.S. National Debt Graph

 

[jreeves]

Reagan and Bush built the debt by cutting taxes and increasing spending. Click on this link for the facts...

U.S. National Debt Graph

Clinton had debt too, it was just masked by the stolen money from Social Security.

 

[jreeves]

You really are not thinking at all or using any kind of information that you personally looked up regarding your Clinton comments....

There is no president in our history that used up more SS surplus monies than GWBush and his congresses.

SS surplusses are put in to the general treasury BY LAW....a "lock box" had been talked about by both sides of the aisle and if Gore had won, that was one of his promisses...

But what Clinton and his congresses did was the best thing anyone could do to save social security, and that is to get the budget in line, which they did....THEY went from hiuge deficits down to no deficits of the budget, and yes with SS surplusses in there being used except for 1 or 2 years where his Congress did not use all of the SS surplus funds, but still some of them, I admit...

president Bush reports 300 billion to 500 billion dollar yearly deficits and THEY DON'T EVEN INCLUDE THE borrowing of the SS surplus funds, which ADDS to the deficit....

If Bush could have gotten his budgets to balance, including the SS surpluses being used it would have been a major accomplishment....like it was a major accomplishment for Clinton and his congress....

Cutting SS as a program does NOTHING for overspending of congress, nothing....

Cutting the SS program would make our federal deficits larger because they would no longer be collecting SS surplus taxes from us and no longer have our SS surplus monies to help mask the deficits, unless congress can cut their spending on OTHER PROGRAMS like Defense....

Cutting Social security does NOTHING to reduce the budget deficits of our government.............Social security IS THE ONLY gvt program that is bringing in taxes MORE than what the program costs them to pay out in retirement....(for now at least)

this is why i keep telling you that SS has to be taken out of the equation so we can get to the real wastes and pork in our gvt imo

If you think this is sustainable then you are mistaken.


As of Jan 2008 the present value of un-funded Social Security and Medicare spending has risen to $99.2 Trillion

 

[Chris]

Clinton had debt too, it was just masked by the stolen money from Social Security.

Nice try, but Reagan and the Bushes have bankrupted America.

 

[jreeves]

Nice try, but Reagan and the Bushes have bankrupted America.

Do you have any facts or just more declarative sentences?

 

[Chris]

If you think this is sustainable then you are mistaken.


As of Jan 2008 the present value of un-funded Social Security and Medicare spending has risen to $99.2 Trillion


View attachment 5675


View attachment 5676

Nice post. Social Security and Medicare are the elephants in the room that no on will talk about. Universal healthcare would help, since it reduces the cost of healthcare to half of what we are paying now, but we need to stop raiding the system and taxes need to be raised.

 

[editec]

How partisan does one have to be to claim that there was no welfare reform under Clinton?

Damned right there was.

Read the law and stop making such damned fools of yourselves, boys:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=104_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ193.104

Clinton drasticly changed the welfare laws.

Most notably, this laws means that welfare is NOT an entitlement.

If you do not understand how significant that change is, educate yourselves.

 

[jreeves]

How partisan does one have to be to claim that there was no welfare reform under Clinton?

Damned right there was.

Read the law and stop making such damned fools of yourselves, boys:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=104_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ193.104

Clinton drasticly changed the welfare laws.

Most notably, this laws means that welfare is NOT an entitlement.

If you do not understand how significant that change is, educate yourselves.

You must of missed this from the Clinton legislation that you give him credit for, how partisan must you be?

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress <<NOTE: Personal Responsibility and
Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996.>> assembled,

While this did help, entitlements specifically must be changed or they will bankrupt this country.

Every economist will tell you that, hell even the CBO will tell you that.

 

[editec]

The only thing that can save social security is that Americans are getting so fat that many of them will never collect. The Twinkie will save America!

Excellent observation.

One wonder why our goverment doesn't ENCOURAGE ALL AMERICANS to smoke as many cigarettes as possible every day to help deal with the looming crises of baby boomers and social security

I know I'm doing my share to limit their potential liabilies to me.

And what thansk do I get for that?

I'm forced to go outside FROM A BAR to have a smoke.

 

[jreeves]

Excellent observation.

One wonder why our goverment doesn't ENCOURAGE ALL AMERICANS to smoke as many cigarettes as possible every day to help deal with the looming crises of baby boomers and social security

I know I'm doing my share to limit their potential liabilies to me.

And what thansk do I get for that?

I'm forced to go outside FROM A BAR to have a smoke.

Those cigarettes actually cost more because of the cancer treatments.....

 

[editec]

Convince your party to run on a platform to eliminate social security, medicare, veterans benefits, food stamps, and medicaid.

Go for it.

You've got about as much chance of getting any party to do that as you have convincing them to end corporate welfare.

But we're on the road to eliminting all social spending anyway since the neo-cons have pulled the wool over enoughAmericans eyes to think that all social spending (except the military) is a violation of the constitution and a form of creeping communism.

We're well into the final days of their plan to "starve the beast" already.

Just look at the national debt.

 

[Chris]

Excellent observation.

One wonder why our goverment doesn't ENCOURAGE ALL AMERICANS to smoke as many cigarettes as possible every day to help deal with the looming crises of baby boomers and social security

I know I'm doing my share to limit their potential liabilies to me.

And what thansk do I get for that?

I'm forced to go outside FROM A BAR to have a smoke.

I like it!!! I can see the commercial now.

Save America....

Smoke filterless Camels....

 

[jreeves]

You've got about as much chance of getting any party to do that as you have convincing them to end corporate welfare.

But we're on the road to eliminting all social spending anyway since the neo-cons have pulled the wool over enoughAmericans eyes to think that all social spending (except the military) is a violation of the constitution and a form of creeping communism.

We're well into the final days of their plan to "starve the beast" already.

Just look at the national debt.

Sure I have showed you that social spending has grown by leaps and bounds above military spending. So the only beast being starved is the middle class. I agree though no politician would be able to run on that type of platform, that's the whole reason they are spending this country into bankruptcy is because of votes.