Poisoned Xmas ‘gift’

WillowTree

Diamond Member
Sep 15, 2008
84,532
16,091
2,180
It’s getting to look a lot like Christmas. President Obama is parading around in his Santa outfit as a “tax cutter” and champion of the middle class, and the seasonably spirited Senate on Saturday passed a package of goodies, including a two-month extension of the so-called payroll-tax holiday.
It’s a poisoned gift. This unreturnable little holiday bauble — a truncated version of a measure already passed by the House — comes with a very steep hidden price tag: the complete exposure of the Social Security “retirement system” as nothing more than a welfare program.
In other words, no pain and as much as a thousand-bucks-a -year gain in the paycheck. Only a Grinch could object to that. Or to the $105 billion in borrowed money to “pay for” this year’s “holiday.”
It was a clever move by the Democrats. Smarting from their well-deserved reputation as tax-and-spend liberals, they turned the tables on the Republicans and dared them to “raise taxes” on the middle class by letting the “temporary” measure expire come Jan. 1.



Read more: President Obama & the payroll tax—Michael A. Walsh - NYPOST.com
 
Merry Christmas future retirees.. Your stocking is going to come up "empty"













:badgrin:







bend over.
 
It’s getting to look a lot like Christmas. President Obama is parading around in his Santa outfit as a “tax cutter” and champion of the middle class, and the seasonably spirited Senate on Saturday passed a package of goodies, including a two-month extension of the so-called payroll-tax holiday.
It’s a poisoned gift. This unreturnable little holiday bauble — a truncated version of a measure already passed by the House — comes with a very steep hidden price tag: the complete exposure of the Social Security “retirement system” as nothing more than a welfare program.
In other words, no pain and as much as a thousand-bucks-a -year gain in the paycheck. Only a Grinch could object to that. Or to the $105 billion in borrowed money to “pay for” this year’s “holiday.”
It was a clever move by the Democrats. Smarting from their well-deserved reputation as tax-and-spend liberals, they turned the tables on the Republicans and dared them to “raise taxes” on the middle class by letting the “temporary” measure expire come Jan. 1.



Read more: President Obama & the payroll tax—Michael A. Walsh - NYPOST.com

Yes Stupid low life democrats are cheering the further demise of SS because the greedy fucks want that 6 bucks a week.
 
Poor, poor, 'Conservatives'. You got your asses royally kicked on this one. It showed your true colors. Tax cuts great for the very wealthy, too expensive for the working and middle class. LOL.

Ten thousand baby boomers will retire every single day for the next twenty years. do the math asshole. then come back and tell us who gets their asses kicked.
 
The two-month payroll tax holiday isn't coming out of the Social Security trust fund, but out of the general fund. When our elected representatives return from their holiday break, they will have to figure out a way to pay for it for a year.
 
when these people show up at the social security office and find out what's happened to them there will be a lot of people switching from the demoncrap party over to the Republican party.
 
The two-month payroll tax holiday isn't coming out of the Social Security trust fund, but out of the general fund. When our elected representatives return from their holiday break, they will have to figure out a way to pay for it for a year.

110 billion from social security last year and 110 billion from social security this year, and there is no way to pay for it.. it just sinks us furthur into debt and it's going to hurt a lot of people in the next two decades.. they only thing they can do now is make you work til you're 80 and hope you croak before you ask them for a check..











bend over.
 
The two-month payroll tax holiday isn't coming out of the Social Security trust fund, but out of the general fund. When our elected representatives return from their holiday break, they will have to figure out a way to pay for it for a year.

Are you really that stupid to not believe they are the same.

Schools in need a lesson?
 
The two-month payroll tax holiday isn't coming out of the Social Security trust fund, but out of the general fund. When our elected representatives return from their holiday break, they will have to figure out a way to pay for it for a year.

Are you really that stupid to not believe they are the same.

Schools in need a lesson?

The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been "put into the general fund of the government."

Most likely this myth comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the "unified budget." This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are "on-budget." This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken "off-budget." This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are "on-budget" or "off-budget" is primarily a question of accounting practices--it has no affect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself.


Debunking Some Internet Myths
 
The two-month payroll tax holiday isn't coming out of the Social Security trust fund, but out of the general fund. When our elected representatives return from their holiday break, they will have to figure out a way to pay for it for a year.

Are you really that stupid to not believe they are the same.

Schools in need a lesson?

The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been "put into the general fund of the government."

Most likely this myth comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the "unified budget." This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are "on-budget." This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken "off-budget." This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are "on-budget" or "off-budget" is primarily a question of accounting practices--it has no affect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself.


Debunking Some Internet Myths








are you bickering to save face or what?/ Even if you want to insist it's the "general fund" the US is 15 trillion dollars in debt. the demoncraps just increased that debt by decreasing revenue.. I hope you're healthy and can work for a long time. ten thousand baby boomer per day for the next twenty years and we're 15 trillion dollars in debt and they just voted to increase that debt.. go figure it out. oh...... and bend over.
 
The two-month payroll tax holiday isn't coming out of the Social Security trust fund, but out of the general fund. When our elected representatives return from their holiday break, they will have to figure out a way to pay for it for a year.

Are you really that stupid to not believe they are the same.

Schools in need a lesson?

The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been "put into the general fund of the government."

Most likely this myth comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the "unified budget." This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are "on-budget." This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken "off-budget." This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are "on-budget" or "off-budget" is primarily a question of accounting practices--it has no affect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself.


Debunking Some Internet Myths

There is no confusion on my part.

There is not one red dime in the alleged trust fund. It all goes to the general fund by law. Paid from the general fund.

Tell me how a non budget item is now a budget item.

Lets see what type of smarts you have.
 
Are you really that stupid to not believe they are the same.

Schools in need a lesson?

The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been "put into the general fund of the government."

Most likely this myth comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the "unified budget." This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are "on-budget." This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken "off-budget." This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are "on-budget" or "off-budget" is primarily a question of accounting practices--it has no affect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself.


Debunking Some Internet Myths








are you bickering to save face or what?/ Even if you want to insist it's the "general fund" the US is 15 trillion dollars in debt. the demoncraps just increased that debt by decreasing revenue.. I hope you're healthy and can work for a long time. ten thousand baby boomer per day for the next twenty years and we're 15 trillion dollars in debt and they just voted to increase that debt.. go figure it out. oh...... and bend over.

ANYTHING BUT LIBERTY.


Merry Christmas
 
Relax kids, the SS Trust fine is doing just fine...for now. It will need some major fixes to continue, but right now it's doing just hunky dory. Willow doesn't have to worry about her gubmit checks at the moment. She'll still be able to suck off the gubmit teat until 2032.

Social Security Board Of Trustees Announce Social Security Solvent Until 2032

And the current and proposed tax holiday isn't affecting SS either.

The current and proposed FICA tax cuts don’t directly affect the long-term health of Social Security, because the revenue that normally flows direct to the Social Security Trust Fund is being reimbursed out of general revenue.

Would Obama’s payroll tax cut hurt Social Security?
 
Relax kids, the SS Trust fine is doing just fine...for now. It will need some major fixes to continue, but right now it's doing just hunky dory. Willow doesn't have to worry about her gubmit checks at the moment. She'll still be able to suck off the gubmit teat until 2032.

Social Security Board Of Trustees Announce Social Security Solvent Until 2032

And the current and proposed tax holiday isn't affecting SS either.

The current and proposed FICA tax cuts don’t directly affect the long-term health of Social Security, because the revenue that normally flows direct to the Social Security Trust Fund is being reimbursed out of general revenue.

Would Obama’s payroll tax cut hurt Social Security?

bullfuckingshit.
 
The fact is the program is broke — its own trustees estimate that its “trust fund” will run out of money in 2036 — and the “payroll-tax holiday” is only making it broker. That “trust” holds nothing but federal IOUs; the government’s been spending the money for decades.
This wasn’t obvious until last year, when Social Security started paying out more than it took in. Bookkeeping legerdemain can disguise the fact, but even the trustees know the jig is up. Says Republican Charles Blahous, one of the six trustees for Social Security and the even-more-broke Medicare: “This could be the beginning of the end of the idea that [Social Security] is an earned benefit.”
Adds Nancy Altman, the Democrat co-director of a Social Security advocacy group: “To have a Democratic president proposing to undo the dedicated revenue . . . it’s a fundamental change.”
It sure is. But it gets worse. Obama not only wants to extend the 2 percent holiday; he also wants to increase the “tax break,” fully halving the employee’s share to 3.1 percent, all in the name of “tax relief.”
Yet unlinking Social Security from its dedicated funding turns it into a welfare program. After all, the Supreme Court ruled in 1960 that recipients have no inherent right to their Social Security benefits and that Congress can change or rescind them at any time. Imagine what they can do when it’s just another federal giveaway.


Read more: President Obama & the payroll tax—Michael A. Walsh - NYPOST.com
 
The fact is the program is broke — its own trustees estimate that its “trust fund” will run out of money in 2036 — and the “payroll-tax holiday” is only making it broker. That “trust” holds nothing but federal IOUs; the government’s been spending the money for decades.
This wasn’t obvious until last year, when Social Security started paying out more than it took in. Bookkeeping legerdemain can disguise the fact, but even the trustees know the jig is up. Says Republican Charles Blahous, one of the six trustees for Social Security and the even-more-broke Medicare: “This could be the beginning of the end of the idea that [Social Security] is an earned benefit.”
Adds Nancy Altman, the Democrat co-director of a Social Security advocacy group: “To have a Democratic president proposing to undo the dedicated revenue . . . it’s a fundamental change.”
It sure is. But it gets worse. Obama not only wants to extend the 2 percent holiday; he also wants to increase the “tax break,” fully halving the employee’s share to 3.1 percent, all in the name of “tax relief.”
Yet unlinking Social Security from its dedicated funding turns it into a welfare program. After all, the Supreme Court ruled in 1960 that recipients have no inherent right to their Social Security benefits and that Congress can change or rescind them at any time. Imagine what they can do when it’s just another federal giveaway.


Read more: President Obama & the payroll tax—Michael A. Walsh - NYPOST.com

Take a listen.



The Bob Rivers Show with Bob Spike and Joe
 
The fact is the program is broke — its own trustees estimate that its “trust fund” will run out of money in 2036 — and the “payroll-tax holiday” is only making it broker. That “trust” holds nothing but federal IOUs; the government’s been spending the money for decades.
This wasn’t obvious until last year, when Social Security started paying out more than it took in. Bookkeeping legerdemain can disguise the fact, but even the trustees know the jig is up. Says Republican Charles Blahous, one of the six trustees for Social Security and the even-more-broke Medicare: “This could be the beginning of the end of the idea that [Social Security] is an earned benefit.”
Adds Nancy Altman, the Democrat co-director of a Social Security advocacy group: “To have a Democratic president proposing to undo the dedicated revenue . . . it’s a fundamental change.”
It sure is. But it gets worse. Obama not only wants to extend the 2 percent holiday; he also wants to increase the “tax break,” fully halving the employee’s share to 3.1 percent, all in the name of “tax relief.”
Yet unlinking Social Security from its dedicated funding turns it into a welfare program. After all, the Supreme Court ruled in 1960 that recipients have no inherent right to their Social Security benefits and that Congress can change or rescind them at any time. Imagine what they can do when it’s just another federal giveaway.


Read more: President Obama & the payroll tax—Michael A. Walsh - NYPOST.com

The trust fund will not run out of money in 2036, it will simply not be able to pay out 100% of benefits. Social Security has a 2.6 TRILLION dollar surplus and can pay out 100% of benefits for the next 25 years and 81% of benefits beyond that...without any fixes.

Now, Social Security definitely needs some fixes...for example, lifting the payroll cap.

As to paying for the payroll extension for the next year, a small tax on the wealthiest Americans would not hurt them in the slightest. They likely wouldn't even realize it. The rest of us, on the other hand, would be very aware of a $1000 a year cut in what we bring home. (not you of course Willow, just those of us that work for a living)
 

Forum List

Back
Top