GOP holds middle class payroll tax cut hostage with pipeline demand

[LordBrownTrout]

Pipeline showdown escalates payroll tax cut fight - CNN.com

But when it comes to the rich, no rider and no conditions. The GOP has historically shown that their hearts and minds are with the wealthy. They know the Dems want to help the middle class, so they chose what they can pull from thieir goody bag to throw in as a condition.

18k immediate jobs, 120k in the pipeline......pardon the pun, thats the follow on jobs as the project ramps up.Yup the gop are bastards alright

I'd say the taxes on all those jobs and ancillary transactions, the fess and taxes on the refinery's processing that oil, would make up some of the cost for the 2% rebate eh? AND add badly needed jobs. Right?

Way too much logic here. I'm reporting this to attackwatch.

 

[8537]

And the Dem's??? wait not much difference now is there,just wondering who is that insists we roll back the bush tax cuts,and by the way which tax brackets received the largest cut percentages.??

Using pretzel logic again!

Uh, the wealthiest brackets saw the biggest cuts. They get the same cuts as everyone else, plus a 4% reduction their rate for every dollar in the top marginal rate.

Yes indeed, and there are a hell of a lot of VERY wealthy Democratic congress critters. Many of them are worth well over 100 million. So it's not just the Repubs who are screwing us over. The sooner you admit that it's BOTH sides nailing us the sooner we can fix it.

I have nothing against the very wealthy. Like the very wealthy Democrats in congress, I just think they should be required to pay a higher top marginal rate at this moment in time.

 

[Katzndogz]

Pipeline showdown escalates payroll tax cut fight - CNN.com

But when it comes to the rich, no rider and no conditions. The GOP has historically shown that their hearts and minds are with the wealthy. They know the Dems want to help the middle class, so they chose what they can pull from thieir goody bag to throw in as a condition.

18k immediate jobs, 120k in the pipeline......pardon the pun, thats the follow on jobs as the project ramps up.Yup the gop are bastards alright

I'd say the taxes on all those jobs and ancillary transactions, the fess and taxes on the refinery's processing that oil, would make up some of the cost for the 2% rebate eh? AND add badly needed jobs. Right?

Way too much logic here. I'm reporting this to attackwatch.

Attackwatch is dead and gone.

Is @AttackWatch all watched up? | Campaign 2012 | Washington Examiner

 

[SFC Ollie]

The problem with politicians from all parties is that they play politics...........

 

[Dot Com]

lefties are ideological dicks.

righties are ideological dicks.

nope.. you use your your own fucking brain and stop stealing what I say. dick for brains.

You got dick on yer mind Willow? You are STILL frisky

 

[frazzledgear]

Pipeline showdown escalates payroll tax cut fight - CNN.com

But when it comes to the rich, no rider and no conditions. The GOP has historically shown that their hearts and minds are with the wealthy. They know the Dems want to help the middle class, so they chose what they can pull from thieir goody bag to throw in as a condition.

Not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer, are you? What you do best is regurgitate the political talking points of Democrats -which were created for people like you who gladly gave up any attempt to develop critical thinking skills long ago.

Just a couple of questions for you to consider. Do you realize the payroll tax funds Medicare and Social Security? Are you aware of the fact these are both on the fast track to total collapse due to .....wait for it.............a LACK OF FUNDING?

So why would Obama and Democrats support speeding up the timetable for that total collapse with a payroll tax cut that leaves it even MORE underfunded? Hmm oh wise one?

That is the real question you should have been asking all along instead of falling for the oldest trick in the book of class warfare rhetoric -because I'm pretty sure you also don't know that class warfare ALWAYS -as in never results in anything but this -hurts those at the bottom the most. Are you anxious to see that happen so you can blame Republicans -or maybe Bush? I have little patience with people who play the useful idiot for the left. You are being played for the cow you are -so give us a big MOOOO. Obama did it in the first place for two very specific reasons -and I bet you haven't a clue about either. But "helping" the middle class by increasing the rate of underfunding and thereby hasten the demise of these programs -wasn't one of them. But maybe using the fact their demise is rapidly approaching will work on morons like you who think the role of government is to be a Robin Hood crook and steal from those who earned it in order to give it to those who didn't.

And do us all another favor -tell us all you aren't really dumb enough to believe that waging war on the wealthy and demanding government punish the successful in this country will somehow make you richer. We don't tax the wealth of people in this country for the most part -we tax INCOME. We tax people on the fruits of their LABOR, not what they already have. So are you really silly enough to believe that people who earn a lot more than you were only able to do so because they were STEALING it from YOU instead of busting their asses to earn it? The average work week of those at the top is 70 hours a week -but I bet YOU made another decision about how hard YOU want to work for YOUR money. But still believe you are justified to inflict punitive rates and levels of confiscation on OTHERS for what they earned, right? If it isn't YOUR money on the line, why should anyone believe YOUR opinion about it should even count? Pretty easy to demand government confiscate money from OTHER people when YOURS won't be affected, isn't it? At least not yet -because when people are denied the use of that money they worked to earn, they simply stop earning it. But government doesn't stop SPENDING it. So who do you think government is going to look to in order to make up that shortfall when those at the top stop bothering to earn it? And they can afford it -after all they work 70 hour work weeks. What happens when they go back to working 32-40 hours since there is absolutely no benefit from working any more than that? That is one thing liberals never get, convinced people will continue busting their asses to earn that money even after they are denied the use of it. ROFL

 

[8537]

Just a couple of questions for you to consider. Do you realize the payroll tax funds Medicare and Social Security? Are you aware of the fact these are both on the fast track to total collapse due to .....wait for it.............a LACK OF FUNDING?

Nonsense. The two trusts will be funded out of general revenues indefinitely. Reducing contributions to them doesn't change that.

 

[oreo]

Pipeline showdown escalates payroll tax cut fight - CNN.com

But when it comes to the rich, no rider and no conditions. The GOP has historically shown that their hearts and minds are with the wealthy. They know the Dems want to help the middle class, so they chose what they can pull from thieir goody bag to throw in as a condition.

Tens of thousands of new American jobs can be created with this pipeline. I really don't know how you tie that into the "evil rich"--LOL.

Even UNIONS are very upset with Obama on the pipeline--because it would create jobs for THEM.

It's just unfortunate--that we have a President that would prefer to campaign on class warfare--and then completely kick to the curb--the prospect of creating 10's of thousand of new American private sector jobs--and then have to have Republicans break his will over by adding to the extension of the payroll tax cut.

If Obama veto's this bill--you can put the final nail into his reelection campaign--because Republicans will send out 10 zillion advertisements letting Americans know how Obama killed private sector job growth in this country.

 

[NYcarbineer]

How dare those mean republicans want people to have jobs.

The GOP doesn't care about jobs.

The first thing they wanted to tie to the payroll tax cut extension was a spending cut deal that would have cost 100,000 jobs.

 

[rdean]

Sigh.

A pipeline within the United States is relatively easy. An "international" pipeline between countries takes more time and is much more difficult to get built.

We know, it's much too damn difficult and complex for an idiot demoncrat to deal with. that's why we need a Republican at the helm.

Yea, because Republicans were so good with:

rebuilding Iraq

and

rebuilding New Orleans

Puh leaze!

There is nothing the Republican Party is good at except starting war, conflict, and tearing things down.

 

[theunbubba]

I see there's a bunch of dumbasses that generally whine about losing Social security that are whining about not paying for it so they can cut their premiums. That's what this is. Look moron. The "Payroll Tax" is in reality your social security premium. If it gets cut they don't have to pay you as much when you retire.
Feel like a usefull dumbass now?

 

[JimH52]

The last thing in the world that the GOP wants is more jobs before November 2012. They have stated that their number one goal is to get Obama out of the White House. The audasicity of a black man to think he could be President!

Jobs from that pipeline will appear sometime in 2015. That is okay with them. Until then, their plan is to pump more money into the pockets of wealthy Americans.

GO NEWT!​

 

[initforme]

More evidence of a plutocracy.

 

[Trajan]

Just a couple of questions for you to consider. Do you realize the payroll tax funds Medicare and Social Security? Are you aware of the fact these are both on the fast track to total collapse due to .....wait for it.............a LACK OF FUNDING?

Nonsense. The two trusts will be funded out of general revenues indefinitely. Reducing contributions to them doesn't change that.

The two trusts will be funded out of general revenues indefinitely

that changes the equation? how? exactly?

 

[initforme]

Lets do the pipeline and give the winey ultra wealthy(both parties) all the money. I will walk in today and give all my money to those at the very top. Then I have nothing that I have worked hard all my life for. Then they have it just the way they WANT it. Give the rich their tax breaks, increase the taxes on the middle class by 150 percent. Boy would the billionaires and millionaires smile from ear to ear.

 

[Avatar4321]

The last thing in the world that the GOP wants is more jobs before November 2012. They have stated that their number one goal is to get Obama out of the White House. The audasicity of a black man to think he could be President!

Jobs from that pipeline will appear sometime in 2015. That is okay with them. Until then, their plan is to pump more money into the pockets of wealthy Americans.

GO NEWT!​

So the Republicans want to prevent new jobs, so they are supporting the authorization of a huge pipeline that will bring thousands of much needed jobs to the nation while the Democrats are opposing it?

Sounds to me like the Democrats don't want their to be new jobs, they just want to be able to blame Republicans for their bad policies.

 

[Avatar4321]

Lets do the pipeline and give the winey ultra wealthy(both parties) all the money. I will walk in today and give all my money to those at the very top. Then I have nothing that I have worked hard all my life for. Then they have it just the way they WANT it. Give the rich their tax breaks, increase the taxes on the middle class by 150 percent. Boy would the billionaires and millionaires smile from ear to ear.

How exactly do wealthy people benefit from taxing the so called "middle class"? How exactly do any of the so called "classes" benefit from taxing others?

This isn't an us vs them exercise. I know that for some reason you want to divide Americans, but when we are all treated equally, we all prosper.

 

[Cuyo]

no, not really, first its a rebate, second it was sold by obama as a 1 year rebate. third what happened to all the hoopla over taxes crashing the deficit? Oh wait; a 10 year tax for a (another) 1 year rebate. seriously.....?

So you point out budgetary issues related to a tax cut for the first time in history, as soon as Dems propose one.....?

Shouldn't your same logic apply to Bush II tax cuts? But it doesn't, does it?

that wasn't may argument thats yours amigo.and not all tax 'cuts' are equal, we both know this.
correct me of I am wrong but raising taxes in this economy is bad, so said Obama....no?

So you're employing 'My argument' now, but any other time you beat the typical Republican 'Tax cuts are always good' drum. You've made my point exactly, but you perceive somehow that by explaining that to me you've dismantled my argument.


...Huh?

 

[frazzledgear]

Just a couple of questions for you to consider. Do you realize the payroll tax funds Medicare and Social Security? Are you aware of the fact these are both on the fast track to total collapse due to .....wait for it.............a LACK OF FUNDING?

Nonsense. The two trusts will be funded out of general revenues indefinitely. Reducing contributions to them doesn't change that.

Oh of course -so reducing revenue that was imposed for a specific purpose can't possibly have any impact on any of the multitude of entitlement programs created in the last decade which, not coincidentally is also what accounts for the bulk of government spending -of money it doesn't have and must already borrow 42 cents of every dollar it spends. And it is now more than 15 trillion dollars in debt and continues spending nearly $4 billion a day of money it doesn't have. Did you know that more than 43% of all government handouts actually go to the middle class -at the expense of those at the bottom? (I wonder how many people would support knowing the middle class takes nearly half of all government handouts as if they couldn't possibly be expected to provide it for themselves -if they really understood it means they are paying even more for it by having government as a middleman. Government always increases the cost and waste and inserts a level of fraud that didn't exist before. When it comes to these things, we really get a bang for our bucks there.)

Technically yes, entitlement programs do not have set aside bank accounts and money to pay for them is allocated from general revenues but that doesn't mean it doesn't have an impact on entitlements like Social Security and Medicare. A payroll tax cut alters on PAPER how much money is technically available for those programs when going through the budget process. Any shortfall on PAPER requires shifting those numbers away from other areas in the budget in order to allocate necessary funds for fixed spending. HERE is the reason Obama and Democrats support a payroll tax cut instead of an INCOME tax rate reduction that would put the IDENTICAL amount of money in people's pockets. It reduces discretionary spending, the amount on PAPER that Congress has some leeway in deciding where it will be spent OR CUT -and thereby making it more difficult for Congress to make any cuts to spending. It is being done to justify the REFUSAL to make spending cuts in the face of massive debt that has already downgraded our credit -with more warnings of future downgrades being made again. Shifting the money on PAPER from "discretionary" to "non-discretionary fixed spending" is absolutely necessary in order to set up the phony argument that unless you don't want to see these programs fail, we MUST raise income taxes or see them collapse. But unlike the payroll tax, an INCOME tax hike shows up as general revenue on PAPER which keeps the door wide open on their discretionary spending. And continue using Medicare and Social Security as weapons in the future as well. Anyone who demands Congress cut its out of control spending spree -would instantly become a political foil accused of "hating" the middle class and elderly they want to make eat dog food. It is all to keep their unsustainable level of out of control spending intact, justify their refusal to cut a dime in actual spending and still manipulate people into believing their only options are to allow the total collapse of entitlement programs -or fork over more money to Congress because politicians are oh so wise and caring and all and know how to spend your money better than you possibly could -after all, you are just a dumb, stupid middle class person easily convinced you can't possibly get along in life unless government becomes your parental replacement. Thus fulfilling your adolescent need to avoid adulthood and that of Congress which believes what you earn actually belongs to government first, not you. EVERYTHING has consequences and EVERYTHING is being done for a REASON and there is NEVER a free lunch at the end of it! We are being manipulated and being manipulated for a REASON -even as people are demanding Congress make REAL spending cuts instead of pretending cutting the rate of future planned INCREASES in spending amounts to "cuts" when in reality it is spending even MORE money it doesn't have.

Obama favors payroll tax cut instead of crafting an INCOME tax rate cut that would put the IDENTICAL dollar amount in the hands of those who earned it. One is denounced as a tax cut for the rich -almost an obligatory thing now from Democrats. While the other is held out as "helping" the middle class when it is doing no such thing. There is NO free lunch in here. The payroll tax cut was implemented and now one side in particular wants it renewed because they want what happens on PAPER with the payroll tax cut that doesn't happen on PAPER with an income tax rate reduction of identical dollar amount. We are all being played for the fools it turns out a lot of us really are and sadly, some want to be.

 

[8537]

Just a couple of questions for you to consider. Do you realize the payroll tax funds Medicare and Social Security? Are you aware of the fact these are both on the fast track to total collapse due to .....wait for it.............a LACK OF FUNDING?

Nonsense. The two trusts will be funded out of general revenues indefinitely. Reducing contributions to them doesn't change that.

Oh of course -so reducing revenue that was imposed for a specific purpose can't possibly have any impact on any of the multitude of entitlement programs created in the last decade which, not coincidentally is also what accounts for the bulk of government spending -of money it doesn't have and must already borrow 42 cents of every dollar it spends.

You have a nice knack for making shit up about what other people said. Please go back and read what I wrote again, then comment.

Cutting the payroll tax is no different than cutting any other tax. Payroll contributions become part of the general fund.

Technically yes, entitlement programs do not have set aside bank accounts and money to pay for them is allocated from general revenues but that doesn't mean it doesn't have an impact on entitlements like Social Security and Medicare.

It has an impact on budget revenues like anything else. it only impacts SS or Medicare of congress choses to cut SS or Medicare.

Any shortfall on PAPER requires shifting those numbers away from other areas in the budget in order to allocate necessary funds for fixed spending. HERE is the reason Obama and Democrats support a payroll tax cut instead of an INCOME tax rate reduction that would put the IDENTICAL amount of money in people's pockets. It reduces discretionary spending, the amount on PAPER that Congress has some leeway in deciding where it will be spent OR CUT -and thereby making it more difficult for Congress to make any cuts to spending.

You're easily duped. All congressional spending is discretionary. Next year's congress could decide to cut SS and Medicare completely if they wished to do so. There's nothing mandatory about including it in next year's budget.

The reason they chose to cut the payroll tax is because it gets money into the hands of the broadest base of people most likely to consume, and does it every two weeks instead of waiting for tax adjustments.