BOO!!! - And Fucking BRAVO !!! - A Shit Of A WaPo Editorial, And One HELL Of A Response... [View all]

[WillyT]

Social Security proposals are wrongheaded
WaPo Editorial Board
11/17/13

<snip>

PRESIDENT OBAMA and the Republicans never have struck a “grand bargain” on spending and taxes. Nor does it appear likely that the current budget bargaining between Democratic and GOP negotiators in Congress, who met inconclusively again on Wednesday, will produce one. They may fail to achieve even a small bargain. Even so, Mr. Obama faces rising pressure from the left flank of his party to defend entitlement programs tooth and nail. That pressure comes although such programs represent the lion’s share of federal expenditure growth in the coming decades. ?

In recent days, those styling themselves “bold progressives” have been rallying support for a bill sponsored by Sen. Tom Harkin (Iowa) and Rep. Linda Sanchez (Calif.), both Democrats, that would increase Social Security benefits. Supporters tout it as courageous pushback against austerity; in fact, it’s a case study in how not to redefine liberalism for the 21st century.

The Harkin-Sanchez proposal would change Social Security benefit formulas to produce an average increase of $60 per month, plus a more generous annual inflation adjustment, than the program uses now. It also would extend the life of the notional trust fund from which benefits are drawn by 16 years. To pay for this, the bill would subject all wage and salary income to the 12.4 percent Social Security payroll tax, as opposed to only drawing from income up to $113,700 as is presently done. For someone earning $200,000 per year, this would mean a tax increase of more than $4,000 per year. For someone earning $1?million, the tax increase would be $58,700.

It’s a massive transfer of income from upper-income Americans to the retired. A tax increase is not, in itself, objectionable. Revenue is necessary to pay the costs of an aging society, and it should be raised progressively. With respect to Social Security specifically, the percentage of wage and salary earnings subject to the tax has shrunk in recent years, and there’s an argument for correcting that.

Yet even the rich have finite resources...

<snip>

More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/social-security-proposals-are-wrongheaded/2013/11/17/38ebb486-4bde-11e3-ac54-aa84301ced81_story.html

The Very 1st Response:

Dryly 41

11/18/2013 8:04 AM PST

On December 7, 1941 the Japanese Empire attacked U.S. naval and air bases at Pearl Harbor. Thereafter sixteen million young men wore the uniform, and, after 3 years and 8 months secured the unconditional surrender of Italy, Germany, and, Japan, Then, except for 405,399, they came home, went to school of the G.I. Bill or got jobs and entered into delayed marriages. The delayed marriages created the "demographic bubble" known as the Baby Boom generation and the children of WW II vets began to turn 65 in 2011.

In 1946 the Gross Federal Debt amounted to 121.7% of GDP. the Truman administration reduced it to 71.4% of GDP; Eisenhower to 55.2%; Kennedy/Johnson to 38.6%; Nixon/Ford to 35.8%; and, Carter to 32.5%.

Then came Ronald Reagan with massive "supply side" tax cuts primarily for the wealthy and budget deficits in each of eight years increasing the Gross Federal Debt from 32.5% to 53.1% of GDP. Bush I had four more years of budget deficits increasing the debt to 66.1%.

Clinton raised taxes, had 4% unemployment, balanced budgets and reduced the debt to 56.4%.

Bush II instituted two rounds of "supply side" tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, had eight more years of deficits and increased the Gross Federal Debt from 56.4% of GDP to 85.1% with a crippled economy.

In 1983 Reagan signed a regressive FICA payroll increase so as to create a surplus in the Social Security Trust Fund which has a $2.6 trillion dollar reserve as of December 2012.

Social Security did not contribute one thin dime to the massive Federal Debt.

This massive Federal Debt was caused by borrowing all these trillions to fund "supply side" tax cuts for the wealthiest citizens most able to pay taxes.

The massive Federal Debt was not for any great national purpose such as the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, WW I, or, WW II. It was for "supply side" tax cuts for the wealthy.

Start with eliminating "supply side" economics and return to traditional Republican tax and fiscal policy.

Do this first.