Mitt Romney has written an editorial. It should prompt a national discussion. It won't.

[SweetTea]

The point being most people are going to have to sacrifice something in order to get our fiscal house in order.

No, if Democrats get their way, most people wouldn't. It would just be the successful people.

 

[IM2]

Democrats (in power) always insist on higher taxes for the rich when running for office but do nothing about it while in office.

That's because Repubicans are in the Congress too, as well as blue dog Democrat types. Republicans have run the Senate lately, and for somethung like that to happen, it has to pass the Senate.

 

[marvin martian]

You voted for Biden. Sucker

I get that you're ashamed of your support for Joe Biden, when he was so obviously mentally and physically disabled, but you need to own it and move past it.

The fact that you then supported Kamala Harris doesn't help your case, but I guess you are what you are.

 

[SweetTea]

All taxes are detrimental to the economy, but we can’t just keep adding trillions of debt.

There’s very little fraud in social security. Remember when DOGE was telling you guys about all these millions of 120 year olds taking benefits? You guys thought that hook line and sinker. But it wasn’t true. It was never true. It was calmly explained to you why it wasn’t true. You just forgot about it and moved on without ever admitting you believed their garbage.

Adults can’t engage in magical thinking like you.

Right and there is no "significant" voter fraud or Somali fraud scheme in MN. It is amazing how much trust you put in the federal government when it comes to protecting your political ideologies.

 

[IM2]

No, if Democrats get their way, most people wouldn't. It would just be the successful people.

Bullshit. You Republicans have fucked up the nation in the past two presidencies. That trickle down crap your sie hs pushe fr nerly 50 years has created most of the shortfalls. So the last thing we need is to listen to repubicans about matters of money. Your arrogance is amazing given the Fact that your policies generally have always failed. So just how much longer are we going to continue the upward wealth redistribution to give more middle and working class money to people who have all the money they need?

 

[22lcidw]

The debt continues to grow, grow, grow under Republicans........is that our solution?

Say that was true. If the Republicans made nasty cuts, what would you do? Would you cheer them on? We can cut the yearly deficit in some ways. Perfection will not exit though as it does not now.

 

[Billiejeens]

Democrats (in power) always insist on higher taxes for the rich when running for office but do nothing about it while in office.

The Rich
Already pay virtually all the taxes.

Over spending
Outrageous fraud and waste

That's the issue.

 

[IM2]

Right and there is no "significant" voter fraud or Somali fraud scheme in MN. It is amazing how much trust you put in the federal government when it comes to protecting your political ideologies.

You should really not be talking. You defend and support to the level of cult worship a man who has defrauded more money than those Somalis and continues to do so. You have continued supporting a man who tried to steal an election. There is no significant voter fraud, and the fact that you repeat that proven lie goes to show just how far YOU will go in trusting your political ideology.

 

[SweetTea]

So the last thing we need is to listen to repubicans about matters of money.

Yeah, whatever you do, don't listen to successful people in the country. By all means, listen to the ultra-wealthy, who I am sure are just dying to give all their money away, to idealistic children, to academia who have never left the friendly confines of a school system and to the poorest of the poor who are only voting themselves "free" stuff without a thought in the world about how it is going to affect the overall economy.

 

[pknopp]

Say that was true. If the Republicans made nasty cuts, what would you do?

Nasty cuts? I said if I had my say we would cut 10% across the board to start.

Nasty cuts? Cut just benefits for the poor? Yes I would condemn them.

Would you cheer them on? We can cut the yearly deficit in some ways. Perfection will not exit though as it does not now.

We can but we won't.

 

[Marener]

Right and there is no "significant" voter fraud or Somali fraud scheme in MN. It is amazing how much trust you put in the federal government when it comes to protecting your political ideologies.

Instead of coming up with a real solution, you want to rely on magical thinking.

This is why the government is so poorly run.

 

[BackAgain]

Mitt Romney: Tax the Rich, Like Me​

In 2012, political ads suggested that some of my policy proposals, if enacted, would amount to pushing grandma off a cliff. Actually, my proposals were intended to prevent that very thing from happening.

Today, all of us, including our grandmas, truly are headed for a cliff: If, as projected, the Social Security Trust Fund runs out in the 2034 fiscal year, benefits will be cut by about 23 percent. The government will need trillions of dollars to make up the shortfall. When lenders refuse to loan the money unless they are paid much higher interest rates, economic calamity will almost certainly ensue. Alternatively, the government could print more money, inducing hyperinflation that devalues the national debt — along with your savings.

Typically, Democrats insist on higher taxes, and Republicans insist on lower spending. But given the magnitude of our national debt as well as the proximity of the cliff, both are necessary. DOGE took a slash-and-burn approach to budget cutting and failed spectacularly. Europe demonstrates that exorbitant taxes without spending restraint crushes economic vitality and thus speeds how fast the cliff arrives.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/19/opinion/romney-tax-the-rich.html

The title applies to his belief the $176K income cap for social security taxes should be done away with.

I long opposed increasing the income level on which FICA employment taxes are applied (this year, the cap is $176,100). No longer; the consequences of the cliff have changed my mind.

The largest source of additional tax revenues is also probably the most compelling for fairness and social stability. Some call it closing tax code loopholes, but the term “loopholes” grossly understates their scale. “Caverns” or “caves” would be more fitting.

He goes on to say the "step up in basis" capital gains tax treatment for wealthy estates should be amended. Meaning, if you inherit an asset for which the owner would have faced a capital gains tax upon its disposal if the owner did so while still alive, you shouldn't be able to inherit the asset tax free.

The thread is not intended to start a debate on the details of Romney's recommendations. Rather, it is to highlight the impending shortfall in the SS trust requires the nation to have a serious debate over what to do about it. And soon.

So too we need to have a discussion about the debt, during which both higher taxes and lower spending are on the table. There are still more.

Many have said our elected representatives have failed us with the rise of partisanship leading to paralyzing gridlock. The result being critical issues are not being effectively addressed. I say we have failed ourselves by not electing serious and informed officials to represent us. A reflection of "we the people," who spend too much time entertaining ourselves and not enough learning about fact based solutions to problems that will bring this republic down if they are not resolved in an intelligent, thoughtful, forward looking way.

It “should” start a “national discussion,” says bug.

Why? Because it is somehow new information that the social security system is akin to a Ponzi scheme? Because we didn’t already (for many years now) know that the Social Security “trust” fund is destined to have a shortfall?

This has been common knowledge for a long time. And Administrations of both major political parties have always chosen to simply kick the can down the road.

No. We don’t need any more taxation. We have more than enough — already — of that.

And, I’m not sure how we can spend less on social security given that promises were made and people relied on those promises.

As a result, it appears to me that the only rational way to “fix” the social security “system” is to legislate a new plan. All those who have already started collecting it, should be grandfathered in to the old system. Then, the new system should (with plenty of lead-time and public notice) phase out the amounts that are now scheduled for future recipients. Replace it with lowered expectations. Again, in graduated steps.

The end goal for all those who have never yet had a job or made any payments into the “system” ought to be the full elimination of social security. Instead, they should be encouraged to start their own eventual retirement accounts on a non-taxed basis.

The present system is based on projections and assumptions which no longer are supported. Time to admit it and adjust accordingly.

 

[Couchpotato]

Democrats (in power) always insist on higher taxes for the rich when running for office but do nothing about it while in office.

Yeah because they always leave out the fact that the "rich" already pay all the taxes. We don't have a revenue problem we have a spending one. We collect twice what any other country collects in taxes. TWICE. And that's just federal taxes, it doesn't include state and local. If you took 100% of the wealth of all the billionaires in the US it would fund the US government for a year. If you took all the wealth from all the millionaires and billionaires you could fund it for about 5. We cant tax our way out of this mess. In fact I think giving the US government more money will only invite it to spend more.

 

[IM2]

Yeah, whatever you do, don't listen to successful people in the country. By all means, listen to the ultra-wealthy, who I am sure are just dying to give all their money away, to idealistic children, to academia who have never left the friendly confines of a school system and to the poorest of the poor who are only voting themselves "free" stuff without a thought in the world about how it is going to affect the overall economy.

What is a successful person? Someone who has a lot of money? Your idol worship has you talking crazy. That's not success. In your mind, someone like Trump is successful, but Trump inherited his wealth; he did not create it. So we don't need your perception of a successful person. We need to listen to people wh make sense. So understand this, the very rich have een running a game on the rest of us since the start of this nation. You have fallen for the banana in the tailpipe. The rich are the ones voting for the politicians who can give them more free stuff. That is the reality we live in, not your fiction. The government hands out more welfare to the very rich than they ever have to the poor. That is a fact. How much of your money has been given to oil companies after they rake in record profits? You don't know the answer, but here you are talking about a few pennies that people in need want to use in order to get out of a rut. You morons quote Dr. King when you have no rebuttal to your racism, but King called out your attitude almost 60 years ago.

“A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom.”

 

[IM2]

Yeah because they always leave out the fact that the "rich" already pay all the taxes. We don't have a revenue problem we have a spending one. We collect twice what any other country collects in taxes. TWICE. And that's just federal taxes, it doesn't include state and local. If you took 100% of the wealth of all the billionaires in the US it would fund the US government for a year. If you took all the wealth from all the millionaires and billionaires you could fund it for about 5. We cant tax our way out of this mess. In fact I think giving the US government more money will only invite it to spend more.

We do have a revenue problem and a spending problem. Furthermore, the revenue problem is exacerbated by the fact that the rich refuse to pay livable wages, and that creates people who need public assistance. Then there is a matter of spending priorities. We are about to see a one trillion dollar annual military budget, while cutting programs to help people in need. We spend more on the military than the top ten military nations on Earth combined. China doesn't spend one-fifth of the money we do, and they have more land to defend. We could cut our military spending in half, and that would solve a whole lot of problems.

 

[AntonToo]

We do have a revenue problem and a spending problem.

Bingo.

Nobody will do crap about it either because at the end of the day Americans don't care until shit starts hitting the fan and it's too late.

Tax-cuts, spending and growth is simply way more popular than austerity and contraction it causes.

 

[IM2]

Bingo.

Nobody will do crap about it either because at the end of the day Americans don't care until shit starts hitting the fan and it's too late.

Tax-cuts, spending and growth is simply way more popular than austerity and contraction it causes.

We really need to redo our funding priorities. Far too much is spent on the military.

 

[80zephyr]

The debt continues to grow, grow, grow under Republicans........is that our solution?

It will continue to grow under either party. The party that actually cuts spending will lose the next election. The politicians know that.

 

[pknopp]

It will continue to grow under either party. The party that actually cuts spending will lose the next election. The politicians know that.

Are you going to vote against them?

 

[Hafar1014]

We really need to redo our funding priorities. Far too much is spent on the military.

We need to spend more on the military and people can fund their own damn selves