Comments on: GOP Proposes Payroll Tax Cut Extension Without Offsets

By: Harrison

Harrison — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 07:36:38 +0000

I’ve been out of it for a while. Payroll tax cut… $40 extra per month and it is taking money away from Social Security and now has become a campaign issue? Obama did a good job roping the GOP in on this one, didn’t he?

By: Obama’s Budget – Raise Taxes And Ask Questions Later » Political Realities

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 13:12:14 +0000

[...] Obviously, I haven’t had time to read the entire plan, but I was cued into part of it by Mike in his comment on yesterday’s post. He started me thinking about the proposed budget and I [...]

By: bill

bill — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 04:01:47 +0000

~first of all it’s not a tax cut; it’s a pay-off to wage earners vis-a-vis short changing social security.

~if mr. mc connell had made that clear to retirees in the fall of 2010 the gop wouldn’t be in this
kerfuffle.

~and certainly the administration understood that risk when they introduced the bill:
“Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010″

~but they did anyway and it passed ’cause our grandparent’s gop is no longer in control.

today, on the house floor, mr. paul begged for a debate over expediting our annual 150b dollar aid
to egypt at a time when their military is holding americans hostage.
his request was over-ruled and the body proceeded to hear proposals to re-name a n.y. post office.

i think we need to ‘step-up’ our honesty factor folks…b

By: LD Jackson

LD Jackson — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 01:56:39 +0000

Amen to that.

By: LD Jackson

LD Jackson — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 01:56:22 +0000

I think we could come up with a new symbol, don’t you?

You are absolutely correct. The Democrats always seem to be one or two steps ahead of the Republicans when it comes to playing strategic politics.

By: LD Jackson

LD Jackson — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 01:45:11 +0000

I understand your point, Mike. However, the problem I have with raising taxes is the history of how that usually works. Theoretically, it would be a good idea to raise the tax rate to allow us to reduce the deficit. In practice, our government has a terrible record of actually doing that. I fear, once the tax rate is increased, no spending cuts would be enacted, the money saved would be used for other purposes, and nothing would be accomplished. If there would be some concrete way of making sure that didn’t happen, then I would consider it. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem to work that way, no matter which political party is in power.

Thanks for taking the time to explain exactly how the Obama tax rate changes would work. I really can’t figure out anyone could think it would be a good idea to raise taxes in such a drastic way. It will lead to no good thing.

By: LD Jackson

LD Jackson — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 01:16:25 +0000

It’s not much of a government, to be sure. To say we need new leadership is a drastic understatement.

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 00:24:14 +0000

Couldn’t agree with you more. I’m a big supporter of massive tax reform, overall lower rates, elimination of special interest tax breaks, and Simpson-Bowles. It’s not perfect but that probably makes it as close to perfect as you can get. Unfortunately that’s not one of the choices today.

By: Jim at Conservatives on Fire

Jim at Conservatives on Fire — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 18:12:04 +0000

Ted said it far better than I could have. The current Republican leadership seems to be no match for the Democrats.

By: Country Thinker

Country Thinker — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 17:37:28 +0000

Unfortunately, raising revenue isn’t a good argument for raising the top marginal rate. We didn’t get any more out of the “rich” whether the top rate was 36%, 39.6%, or 70%. Folks like Warren Buffett pay accountants well to make sure they pay as little as possible.

Simpson-Bowles laid out the best plan for raising more revenue, namely, close the loopholes, and lower the top rate. Until some of the loopholes go away, the money will squirt through them.